Shel, I never comment much on peoples' work, but I know you've got broad shoulders and can give and take criticism without getting emotional. I'm also an admirer of your work, especially as it's in a genre where I have little talent.
As for the content of this shot, I find it enigmatic that the narrative is about the drummer, but the other character in the shot is so engaging, and so well captured and rendered, that he 'steals the show'. He's really worth his own photograph. This picture is IMO technically well short of your usual high standard, and it stands out enough in its deficiency for me to make a very rare criticism of another's work. I'm accustomed to seeing documentary and street photography presented with slightly less contrast than other genres, and I suspect that it's more a matter of fashion than necessity, but it's not my place to tell another group of photographers that their preferences are wrong. They're not wrong, just different to my own. I prefer more robust tonality and I'm not afraid of solid black or blank white. What bothers me is muddiness close to the limits, especially when we now have the means to easily optimise problems that we once had to either accept or spend much time/money to correct with advanced darkroom manipulations. But this example has conspicuously weak highlights when you consider that they aren't blown out, just unrealised in the result. The highlights are there for you if you use the tools to recover them. My expectation of Shel Belinkoff is that he'd sweat blood to get the best result before our eyes. (That's a compliment BTW). This shot wasn't ready for our eyes, IMO. regards, Anthony Farr > -----Original Message----- > From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > So, would you care to repeat that a third or fourth time <LOL> > > I'm curious as to why this particular photo has so much interest for you > ... you've little good to say about it, yet you keep coming back to it and > repeating yourself. > > Shel >
