Wednesday, May 31, 2006
Carts (02590007)
Comments:
I like all the perspective lines whic lead to the man, he seems to be in an ideal position.
I notice that the carts go beyond the man, he is an interlude.
Did the note say "I've nicked your cart"?
The wall and 'floor create a 3D canvas for the carts.
Lots of eye food without being overcrowded.
I wonder if the white cart is the deluxe model.
This picture makes me want to know more. Or perhaps it is the build-up to a joke (punchline in next frame?)
I'm not convinced about the receding figure.
I like the composition here and the way that the line of the carts led to the figure. The missing cart adds a bit of interest and mystery to the picture.
When I first saw this I thought that it was an easy photo but I find its connecting of old and modern rather subtle. The note is important visually, even if it doesn't bear Rex's message. The picture also conveys the feel of a grey day. This is a disciplined part of town: not only clean but all the carts lined up for Sgt Major's inspection.
John E, regarding a disciplined part of town, on the other side of the wall is a junkyard. I found this bit of discipline comforting in contrast to the chaos on the other side of the wall.
Auspicious, if there's a punchline, it has something to do with the aforementioned junkyard. I couldn't quite make it work, but you might be interested in taking a look at it: http://www.1point4photography.com/images/fourthirds02590002.jpg
I struggled with this picture. I saw the line of carts while walking into a tea shop, and I knew imediately that I wanted to do something with it, but the quarters were cramped and I couldn't see the angle from which to approach it. An hour and an excellent pot of tea later I went back out to work it. This framing required climbing over and getting behind a stack of spent propane cylinders. When I saw the older gentleman strolling by, I felt the composition line up.
On a side note, I've been thinking about purchasing an Olympus E-500. I'm concerned about the change in apsect ratio from 3:2 to 4:3, but I'm also intrigued by it. My girlfriend has pointed out that cropping my pictures down to 4:3 results in a more forceful composition. I'm not sure if this is a good thing as I've always preferred to give my viewers some freedom in approaching the picture. I'd appreciate thoughts on this dillema from the group. To put this in perspective (bad pun), please see the 4:3 crop of the cart photo: http://www.1poin4photography.com/images/fourthirds02590007.jpg
Is not the crop you give in the last link the same as the one posted on Stills? I have an E1 so nearly all my pictures are 4:3 (I rarely crop). To be honest it doesn't worry me what the format is; one gets used to framing that way. As to the E-500, I'm not sure. All the reports are that it is good but if you are concerned about shooting in low light then this first series of Olympus are not good with noise above ISO 400. We are thinking of getting an E-330 for my wife even though the new sensor does not appear to have improved matters hugely in that respect; its big advantage is the tilting LCD viewfinder. The advantage to us is sharing lenses but the price in UK is rather high so we shall sit it out, noting that my camera now costs less than half what I paid. The E1 is incredibly comfortable to use all day, is weatherproof, robust and produces wonderful colour; some people can't wait for the replacement!
Beautiful Tea and mean junk yard dogs (in diminutive). You found a good place to take photos!
As to the E500, it is understood to be an excellent camera (there are several E1 users here), and the Olympus lenses are great (but not necessarily the one which gets bundled with the 500). My feeling is that photographers mostly crop in-camera. We get used to the proportions of the machine in our hand. As I'm a fairly promiscuous camera buyer I have found it important not to try to use two formats on the same occasion.
If you want a quick summary of a lot of camera buying - the quality of the viewfinder is much much more important than its shape.
John, the crop ends up being pretty similar in this case. More similar than I thought at first. Perhaps my eye would readily adapt in camera.
I've kind of given up on AF cameras for low light work; I've found that a rangefinder works a lot better or me. And I prefer the look of something like Neopan 1600 to the look of any high iso digital that I've seen so far. Given all that, I doubt I'd use 800 or 1600 on the E500 all that often.
Colin, I was considering the 14-54 2.8 -3.5 and the 50-200 2.8-35.I played with this setup on an E1 and an E500 in a store the other day, and it seemed to make a very compact package particularly in comparison to some of the other DSLRs. Cheap too. I'll need to take a closer look at the viewfinders, but my initial reaction was that they weren't any worse than the vf's on the other DSLRs I've used.
Sorry for all the gear talk.
The old guy has strolled along and straightened these babies up. He's whistling a merry tune in preparation of the next set. Good use of angle to bring me in. Classic pose of the gentleman and enough after him to carry my mind along with him.
Gear Talk: Have a look through a Pentax DSLR (*istD if you can find one). You should be more than pleased with what you see plus adding some old Pentax glass will give you pleasurable results!
I echo auspicious's observations. The white cart stands out, different, perhaps newer (the spokes certainly look newer) and the story of the carts is of considerable interest. This is an alien view for me and I imagine the uses.
I can imagine the difficulties in deciding upon composition. There’s a lot to get in. The chosen composition seems just about right to me. Including more of what is up the street is probably not necessary, cut. A little space before the first cart to add a beginning and some room, cut. About the carts not the sky; cut.
Post a Comment
I notice that the carts go beyond the man, he is an interlude.
Did the note say "I've nicked your cart"?
The wall and 'floor create a 3D canvas for the carts.
Lots of eye food without being overcrowded.
This picture makes me want to know more. Or perhaps it is the build-up to a joke (punchline in next frame?)
I'm not convinced about the receding figure.
Auspicious, if there's a punchline, it has something to do with the aforementioned junkyard. I couldn't quite make it work, but you might be interested in taking a look at it: http://www.1point4photography.com/images/fourthirds02590002.jpg
I struggled with this picture. I saw the line of carts while walking into a tea shop, and I knew imediately that I wanted to do something with it, but the quarters were cramped and I couldn't see the angle from which to approach it. An hour and an excellent pot of tea later I went back out to work it. This framing required climbing over and getting behind a stack of spent propane cylinders. When I saw the older gentleman strolling by, I felt the composition line up.
On a side note, I've been thinking about purchasing an Olympus E-500. I'm concerned about the change in apsect ratio from 3:2 to 4:3, but I'm also intrigued by it. My girlfriend has pointed out that cropping my pictures down to 4:3 results in a more forceful composition. I'm not sure if this is a good thing as I've always preferred to give my viewers some freedom in approaching the picture. I'd appreciate thoughts on this dillema from the group. To put this in perspective (bad pun), please see the 4:3 crop of the cart photo: http://www.1poin4photography.com/images/fourthirds02590007.jpg
As to the E500, it is understood to be an excellent camera (there are several E1 users here), and the Olympus lenses are great (but not necessarily the one which gets bundled with the 500). My feeling is that photographers mostly crop in-camera. We get used to the proportions of the machine in our hand. As I'm a fairly promiscuous camera buyer I have found it important not to try to use two formats on the same occasion.
If you want a quick summary of a lot of camera buying - the quality of the viewfinder is much much more important than its shape.
I've kind of given up on AF cameras for low light work; I've found that a rangefinder works a lot better or me. And I prefer the look of something like Neopan 1600 to the look of any high iso digital that I've seen so far. Given all that, I doubt I'd use 800 or 1600 on the E500 all that often.
Colin, I was considering the 14-54 2.8 -3.5 and the 50-200 2.8-35.I played with this setup on an E1 and an E500 in a store the other day, and it seemed to make a very compact package particularly in comparison to some of the other DSLRs. Cheap too. I'll need to take a closer look at the viewfinders, but my initial reaction was that they weren't any worse than the vf's on the other DSLRs I've used.
Sorry for all the gear talk.
Gear Talk: Have a look through a Pentax DSLR (*istD if you can find one). You should be more than pleased with what you see plus adding some old Pentax glass will give you pleasurable results!
I can imagine the difficulties in deciding upon composition. There’s a lot to get in. The chosen composition seems just about right to me. Including more of what is up the street is probably not necessary, cut. A little space before the first cart to add a beginning and some room, cut. About the carts not the sky; cut.