Please post no more than five images a day and respond to as many images as you post. Critics, please be constructive, specific, and nice! Moderated by gahspidy and mtbbrian.
By posting on the Photo Critique forum you agree to post only your own photos, be respectful, and give back as much as you receive. This is a moderated forum and anything abusive or
off-topic will be removed.
They are photos--not verbalizations. The upper one is aboriginals in front of an aboriginal depiction (walking by it). the lower one is would be suburban hip-hoppers in front of a suburban hip hop store (not a contradiction in terms eh?).
No, photos are not verbalizations but they must "say" something to the observer. Have a theme of some sort. I got what the second one is but the first one would be quite hard for anyone to decipher apart from people walking in front of a painted wall in other words....it dont say anyhting at all.
The first one doesn't really work for me... you don't get enough of the mural to know what the mural's subject is and to see a relation to the people walking by, and you don't see any of the faces of the people...
I think the second one you achieved what you intended. It works really well and I love the cross positions of the two people and the sort of mirroring effect (I hope that makes sense).
Thanks Charman and Cara. Those are very worthwhile comments. I didnt mean to sound defensive. I agree, number 2 is far better. I wish I had used a shorter lens on number 1.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
