watch your use of superwides. rounded walls and frames that are clearly supposed to be squared off are really horribly distracting. it just isnt a pretty feature, especially if youre doing pj type work.
as for the dodging, the non-dodged top one is fine, imo. no need for more detail or light on his shirt, which doesnt hold any information to help the photo.
It's actually a pseudo-fisheye, but on the digital sensor, it comes off as a highly distorted superwide. I have some decent non-distorting wide-angle lenses, but they aren't compatible with the camera I was using.
I don't view these images as remotely PJ in either intent or in style.
ok well. fisheye, superwide. its semantics. either way, its not a good look for what you were using it for.
this isnt studio work, nor is it fine art photography. you are documenting an event. regardless of whether or not you consider yourself a photojournalist, the work is journalistic in the sense that you are documenting an event. period.
and since you insist it isnt, what would you classify your intent and style to be then?
I suppose it would be Documentary/promotional/editorial. You say PJ, and I think of all the rigid rules which apply to PJ, which must apply to PJ, for it to have any value as journalism. I certainly would not feel obliged to follow such rules.
I have a wide angle too... I THINK there might be a program that flattens them out?!?! I don't know for sure, I could very well be making it up. But, if not, have you heard of one?
I like the distortion. People online just don't know how to be encouraging and supportive. Do what you like, cause if YOU like it, that's all that matters. That's just what I tell myself a lot, haha.
I don't need people's encouragement and support as much as I did before. If people tell me what they think about my work, I'm cool with that, whether it's positive or negative...
Comments 17
as for the dodging, the non-dodged top one is fine, imo. no need for more detail or light on his shirt, which doesnt hold any information to help the photo.
Reply
I don't view these images as remotely PJ in either intent or in style.
Reply
this isnt studio work, nor is it fine art photography. you are documenting an event. regardless of whether or not you consider yourself a photojournalist, the work is journalistic in the sense that you are documenting an event. period.
and since you insist it isnt, what would you classify your intent and style to be then?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment