File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Comments and critique, please.

I can't get Photoshop to save this normally as a JPEG (even though it'll save other files), so I had to use the save for web function to get it down to a reasonable size. So, ad hoc EXIF data: Photograph taken with an old Canon G2 (borrowed, my normal camera got stolen) at f/2.5, 1/10th of a second, ISO 400. Probably (though I'm not sure) with a wide-angle convertor attached.
>> Anonymous
Sigh.

It's the back of peoples heads.This photo tells me that you didn't know the people in the photo and were just snapping a picture as you walked past. You know, the front of someone is infinitely more interesting than the back of them? This is because people have what we photographers call a "Face". A face contains a nose, eyes and a mouth. Everyone's face is different which is why every photo of someone's face will always look unique.

However, the back of someone is about as exciting as a republican party meeting. If this photo was taken from the front, it might be somewhat interesting, instead it just appears to be another cry for comments and criticsm for a photo which isn't really taken at all.

Maybe next time submit a photo that actually means something, and isn't a bunch of strangers you have no relationship with and you might not fail as hard.
>> Anonymous
>>47055
I know the two people in the foreground; the person in the back I met. The guy with the hat I don't know. Though I didn't go, "hey, guys, you know I'm standing right here with a camera, right?" I think they knew I took a photograph of them.

I don't mean to be defensive, but I think it's bad as a whole to second-guess a photographer's actions and motivations at the time he pressed the shutter.

Besides, "needs moar face," essentially, is there any criticism you can offer.
>> Anonymous
>offer.
Sorry, should be "offer?"
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>47055
QFT
>> ac
     File :-(, x)
>>47058
90% of the time, confronted with a picture like this on a board like this (I.e., where someone thought this was a good enough picture to share with people), his guess as to your intentions would be completely correct. The normal case for why someone would take pictures of the backs of someone's head is if they're trying to avoid being seen taking pictures.

On a related note (whee, thread hijacking), I think I'm getting better at taking pictures of the front of people. The other day, I was at a big sports-related gathering outside a hockey arena and I was going around taking pictures of people. I got a lot of shots of people giving me "WTF r u doin'?" looks, but I also got a good deal of people smiling for the camera when they saw me, and a bunch of people who didn't notice, so I ended up pretty good candids. It was a pretty successful evening, all around.

Pic related.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiLens Size80.00 - 200.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.5Owner NameunknownSerial Number0420104373Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:05:10 18:05:55Exposure Time1/320 secF-Numberf/4.5Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/4.5Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length80.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3888Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeAv-PriorityFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessUnknownSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed224Camera Actuations-726335440Color Matrix129
>> elf_man
>>47058
Sure, but it still looks like a random crowd. Think about it in terms of differentiation. There are four people here; three are facing away, one is facing forward. Attention goes to the one facing forward, but she isn't in focus, attention is lost, and that's about it. This photo just doesn't really say anything about the couple. Maybe if the guy with the hat wasn't there, there'd be tension between the girl facing forward and the couple.
>> Anonymous
>>47058

My major problem with the photo was just that there isn't anything going on. Do you honestly regard this as a good photo? I don't even know you and I can say with full confidence that you can do better than this.

You don't need to post a photo just to get comments. The photo is framed well, and I think that if we saw their faces, like i said in my first post, it would be a much better shot. It just comes off as one of those photos that you randomly found and said "this will do".

I need to stop being such a harsh prick though. You see? We're both learning.
>> eku
     File :-(, x)
Does this work without faces?

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot A80Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.5Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2007:05:13 10:16:31RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardExposure Time1/50 secF-Numberf/4.5Lens Aperturef/4.5Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length19.25 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width571Image Height800
>> Anonymous
>>47092
Hell no. She looks like she has no face, which makes you suspect he doesn't eighter, which makes you suspect they're ugly, boring aliens.
>> Anonymous
A sloppy picture with an interesting subject is infinitely better than a well framed well structured photo with a boring subject.
>> Anonymous
>>47076
Yes, I do, for two reasons:

1. The couple's embrace, relative to the rest of the scene. To be honest, I don't think it would've worked from the front, or would have not worked more so. The thing about the photograph is that the couple looks isolated off from the scene around them. The comparatively light-colored back of the man separates off the lovers from the rest of the scene- some guy ordering coffee and a woman messing with a credit card machine.

2. The unintentional correspondence between the shirts of the two women in the photograph; they're the exact same, except one is long sleeve and the other is short.

I don't think it's perfect, by any means- I would've liked to have more of man in the frame, for starters, so he would look less extraneous- but I do think it is good.

But oh well. Art is measured by the impact and reactions it gets, so I guess it wasn’t.