comparison of two photos, C&C

[shutternutter]

hi everyone!
i recently posted two images on 500px which got massively different feedback, even though i feel they are in a way similar: they both show two people talking in public. if anything i would have expected the result to be the other way round.


this one i quite liked but it only got a handful of likes.


with this one i wasn't sure whether i should even upload it, but it was then really well received.

what do you think the reason might be?
i preferred the first because of the obvious emotion the guy on the left shows. the second i didn't like so much because you can't see the lady's face.
i'm guessing it might have to do with the surroundings/background rather than the actual subjects...

[Manfred M]

Max - part of what gets the viewer's attention is the impact that the image has on us.

The first one, being set in the park isn't going to do all that much because of the location. Two people with bicycles talking in the park isn't going to do much for most of us. This is a shot that could be anywhere and needs something more to get the viewer wanting to spend more time looking at it.

The second image borders on being an environmental portrait. The uniform, the water pipe and the bags of charcoal are all elements that make this scene much less ordinary and attract our attention. The setting appears to be a restaurant, which helps tell the story. I think a slightly different framing (eliminating the bollard on the right and the truck on the left) would have made an even more compelling image.

I suspect getting closer to the people in the first one would strengthen it too.


1.





2.

[shutternutter]

ha, interesting! they do look much better cropped, thanks for that

in an ideal world though that wouldve been done by zooming in closer, right?

[Manfred M]

In an ideal world, that would have been done by walking closer to your subjects, rather than zooming.

Most street photographers shoot with a fairly wide angle so that their subjects notice them and often they are looking for eye contact with the subject. These stealth shots can also work, but often not as well as ones where engagement can be demonstrated. Longer focal lengths reduce the amount of background information in the shot while wider ones increase it. It depends on what you want to show in your image.

One of my favourite photographic quotes is from Robert Capa, the famed photojournalist; "If your image isn't good enough, you're not close enough". I think that sums up my thinking on both of your images.

[shutternutter]

okay, interesting... i have always had the approach that i want to capture the moment, not create it. but still, in an ideal world that wouldn't contradict being close

[Manfred M]

okay, interesting... i have always had the approach that i want to capture the moment, not create it. but still, in an ideal world that wouldn't contradict being close

Agreed, so long as the capture works. As I wrote before, there is a place for both approaches and nothing prevents either approach from getting a strong and compelling image. It's easier to shoot in stealth mode, but much more challenging to get a strong image.

[rpcrowe]

Sometimes less is more...



IMO, this closer cropping places emphasis on the two central figures and my eye is not directed away from them by the path leading to the walking couple at top of the frame.

The two subjects and their bikes are also arranged in a triangular fashion with the merging lines of the rule of thirds on each of the men...

I totally agree with Manfred on his simplification of the second image by cropping out the extraneous details, especially from image left...

[Shadowman]

To me they both are story telling images however not every story results in a good read, the first the assumptions we make are probably short and not very dramatic. In the second, while the story is just as short it does have a few different possible scenarios and outcomes.

[billtils]

The first one doesn't work for me. I don't get any real sense of animation in the characters and the litter bin is a distraction in the original and even more so in the tighter crop.

The second is a different story (so to speak) especially in Manfred's crop edit. Nice composition and lots of interest.