This photo has been on my mind for a week, and I've been vacillating
about making a comment. It's certainly a nice, sweet memory, photo
(as was noted in another comment), perhaps even ideal for putting in
a family album of snapshots. However, I find it disconcerting that
we don't see what is being photographed by Paul's girlfriend.
Perhaps there's a little of it showing, but a better shot would have
been to pull back just a bit on the zoom so the entire "thing" that
your girlfriend is photographing is also included in the shot.
There's clearly a small bag of something - perhaps nuts or bird seed
- in clear view. What kind of little creature is being fed and
photographed. Including it (or them) would still allow a nice
memory, but you'd also have a better photograph.
Feininger suggests that the more fascinating the subject the less
observant the photographer. He described a session on nude
photography in which students were so focused on the model that they
ignored the background. The pictures included students, light
stands, electric wires, and the instructor, amongst other
distractions. This photo is similar, as perhaps the photographer,
engrossed as he was with his girlfriend, failed to consider
including a little more in the picture.
So, as a personal memory, it's probably "good enough", but as a
photo that tells the whole story, it's a failure.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Grain is the brushstroke of photography." - Man Ray
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
