Stills

It is good to see images of children enjoying themselves.

Paranoia in the UK makes this type of photography virtually impossible.

This image works well in the series. I like the unorthodox composition.
 

The Flickr series is very descriptive and gives one an insight to an area of life that would not normally be available to a foreigner.

This one still has me wondering. The others are all, more or less, conventional compositions, whilst this one is a different idea (but fits in fine with the others). I first saw it on a poor screen at Schiphol airport, which made me realise the problems you are up against with your monitor. At the time it was hard to make out the background and it felt bitty. Now, I find it more demanding of attention.

I think that it is the use of DOF that causes the doubt. The focus is on the foreground child: is he supposed to be singled out? The answer is probably no but he appears to be selected, separate from the others, and maybe playing with someone in front of him. Is the boy with the toys all alone? The DOF makes him look sensitive to his (apparent) isolation. Yes, a picture of a classroom but I'm not sure that the different elements are reconciled.
 

Auspicious, that helps put in perspective the opposing opinions. Thanks.

Rex, re paranoia, photographing in a classroom would be difficult in the States as well, for much the same reasons. In Korea teachers have pretty high social status, so things are a bit different.

John, this one is indeed not a traditional composition. In fact, this one wasn't really composed at all. I was working on a composition of the child in background, when the class clown popped his head into frame. I shifted focus quickly and took the shot.

Here's the intended composition: http://www.1point4photography.com/images/02890028.jpg

Re the DOF, it's an artifact of the light level in the room, but your reading of it's artistic impact isn't far off what I would have intended had it been a choice.
 

Just seen the series on flickr Matt and agree that this image works better as part of that series rather than on its own. A little untidy chaos is part of life in the classroom I suppose.

As for the series, I particularly enjoyed the one with the boy in the corner and the one with the childs drawing on the desk viewed from above.
 

It was interesting comparing what you posted here with the original intended picture. The one we're commenting on is stronger but would have benefitted compositionally by having the girls' legs roughly where they are in the referred jpeg. Can't have it all!
 

You have many triangles working in this shot - some being much more strongly defined than others. The strongest is made by the two children and whatever is encroaching bottom left (or change this with to the feet middle-top for another triangle). A second triangle is made by the incomplete objects in the top right of the frame and the object one third down and towards the right hand edge. There is also the triagonal empty space. Another big triangle is the two eyes of the boy in the bottom and the viewer. There are others and I'd need to draw on the print to better describe them. Geometrically this works for me - it makes me think. This is what education is meant to teach you..? Isn't it...?
 

I have been pondering Akikana's eulogy to triangles. Is this the use of the triangle as in making a good composition or a deconstruction that aplies templates in hindsight; and, if the latter, does that define the subject matter? To a certain extent I am teasing but whilst geometry is important in terms of overall composition (although other tensions can skew geometric harmony) I am not sure that one is left any the wiser after a triangle excursion.
 

I often find that applying some geometry to my thinking about a photo can help me understand why it works or doesn't work. It's a way of looking that forces you to look closer, kind of like the old copyeditor's trick of reading backwards.