Half naked men, two days in a row? What's happening here...

miklos: I thought it was about time for some more 'gritty realism' but judging by the relative absence) of comments "half naked men, two days in a row" may not have been a popular choice ;-)

I don't think it's the half naked men that are scaring away the commenters. I think it's just that there's little in the image to evoke comment. Without wanting to sound harsh, I don't think these pictures (todays and yesterdays) are in the top 90% of the photos you blog.

I'm sick of seeing rubbish posters up everywhere in Bristol, but this does make me really sit back and wonder where it's going to end. It won't be very long before every surface in town will have some form of ad on it.

I think I prefer yesterday's image, but I find it makes a big difference which skin is used. I generally use the "dark" skin, and the color shot looks best with it, IMO. The monochrome looks better with the "light" or "gray" skin, I think. Can you set your preference when posting? I know you've made recommendations in your comments before, but the immediate impact can be affected by which skin is set when first opening your site.

the monochrome. def the monochrome is better here. goes well with the gritty nature of the shot.

I prefer yesterday's shot because the composition is tighter.
The subject matter is not a problem for me, however, the
beefy guys can add a bit of a "clicheed" flavour to the image.
In yesterday's photo the text takes the centre which to me is
more interesting. The monocrome is nice!!

Daaave wrote:

I don’t think these pictures (todays and yesterdays) are in the top 90% of the photos you blog.

Consequently, Dave, I'm sorry but apparently your genius will not be truly understood until it can be examined in the context of history. ;)

Sorry Dave, don't think this is one of your best. Yesterday's was much better. I think it was the abstract nature of the shot yesterday with the out of focus perifery that did it. It was difficult to place where it might have been taken... obviously a pub or similar but there was enough mystery about it to make it interesting.

With this image the mystery is gone, crisp focus throughout and the location much more obvious allied with (forgive me) a not terribly inspiring subject makes for a mediocre image. I just don't get the "gritty"-ness of it.

Hope you take this as constructive criticism.
Regards,
Adrian

djn1: Do you realize that I've spent about an hour with this comments window open, I've even taken a shower in the meanwhile, came back, deleted about 15 paragraphs, and I still can't word what I have to say nicely. So if you want my opinion, I'll give it to you via email :)

I'll leave one thing in though:

Jerome: Daaave has just as much rights voicing his opinion as you have yours. No need to disrespect him and putting him down for speaking his mind. I don't think anything he said wash harsh, in fact I think it was dead on.

Yesterday's. I'm pretty much with Barb on this one.

If the object was to show someone what you found, then it documents the find, but I don't get your usual sense of composition from this at all. Yesterday's was better for the composition, how the eye was directed, how the senses were challenged, how there was a nostalgic aire or tone.

Sorry, but this one feels sorta "journalistic."

lol, ok, this isn't to everyone's taste then ;-)

What I liked about this one, contrary to Adrian's point about the DoF (and yes, I take all comments as constructive criticism), is that there there's a delineation between the outside (world) and the inside (of the club): the wall, as you go down the steps and enter the club, is sharply focussed, while the top of the stairs and the desk behind the metal-clad doors are both blurred. I guess, for me at least, that I was trying to convey something of the separation between these two worlds, the latter of which I have no experience. And Sharla, yes, with both these shots I was going for a journalistic feel.

miklos: go on then, email me the 'critique' ;-)

Dave, your stylistic departure has gotten my attention. I'm eager to see what's next.

miklos, please explain to me what was disparaging or disrespectful about my comment. You can send it to me via private email to jerome.penningtonNO@SPAMgmail.com (remove "NO" and "SPAM").

I'm torn here. On one had I look at the shot quickly and don't really have a reaction. But then, like a good photograph should (my opinion), I sit and stare at this photo for an abnormal amount of time attempting to recreate the scene in my mind (what would I hear? what else would I see? what is this? etc). I like it in a strange way. I like the "crispness" of yesterday's a bit better, but I've found myself looking at today's shot for much longer.

I am just a casual visitor of your site and have never left a comment before now. I think you are an amazingly gifted photographer, but in my opinion your last really striking photograph was 'down the drain,' posted on December 30. The last one before that was 'yesterday's news' on December 11th, and during most of November you could do no wrong. Lately your photos have either had weak subjects (these last two days), or otherwise it seems you aren't putting in the same time and effort. I was especially disappointed with your pregnancy test post. Knowing your work, I would have expected a much higher caliber photograph for such an occasion, and not a seemingly schlepped-together dual shot.

I don't mean to be entirely negative; I find your work to be masterful and incredibly inspiring. However, I have not enjoyed your site this month nearly as much as in months past. This post may be too general to 'correct' what I perceive to be 'incorrect,' but I just felt compelled to share my unease with what seems to me a falling-off on your part.

Despite this, thank you for all of your wonderful work. Visits to your site are often among the most beautiful of moments in my days.

Best-
Joe

djn1: Actually, Joe Duignan described my thoughts quite well. :)

Jerome: No need.

tough comments... i'm actually like todays picture more. nice light and dof...you can get more information - the stairs down give some sort of mistery feeling and b&w make it even more.thanks

Regarding both the shots: Even though they might not be up to everyones taste or , according to some, your usual posting standards ( I myself find nothing wrong with the pictures at all, if anything its simply something "different"). When I look at both pictures I get the feeling of a seedy, gritty underworld. The lighting & color tone of the image: spot on. Very Film-Noir. I think the steps leading down helps the seperation of both worlds, as you say.

I hope that came across ok and I didn´t ramble :)

Cheers Dave.

There's nothing like a bit of controversy ;-)

Actually, and this is mostly in response to Joe and miklos, I quite like these two shots, and think they both tell a story of sorts.

Anyway, as for Joe's point regarding the quality of the stuff I've put up in December and January compared to November: by my own reckoning there isn't a great deal to choose between these months. I organise all my entries into one of three primary categories - portfolio (for stuff I'm really pleased with), gallery (for stuff that I'm mostly happy with but could be improved) and photoblog (for stuff that didn't quite work out, or just day-to-day type shots) - and there isn't a great deal of difference in the amount of shots in each category in the last three months.

In November I posted one portfolio shot, 18 gallery shots, and 10 photoblog shots. In December it was 1, 21, and 9 respectively, and this month it's been 1, 16, and 6 - much the same ratio fer each month.

As for time and effort: I'm not aware of spending less of either, but it has been a hectic couple of months so that could be a factor.

I guess, for me, as Rob mentions, this is also/primarily(?) a question of taste. For example, Joe, I'm not massively impressed with 'down the drain' - it's ok, but I wouldn't have singled it out for attention, and the same with 'yesterday's news'. They're both shots that I was mostly happy with, but they're by no means my favourites of recent months.

Oops, I tweaked the lid on pandora's box...!

Sorry you feel that way Jerome, as I said, I wasn't trying to be harsh, but perhaps I could have been more constructive. It's the subject matter I think that...er...doesn't do it for me. The technique is quite good as is the post processing, these shots just doesn't jump out at me. Hard to fit a scale to in my mind.

Oh and I'm already weeeeeeeeell aware that djn1 is an excellent photographer (not genius...yet, oops, did I just tweak that lid again?).

;)

joe, miklos: this is just arguing about matters of taste, and as such, quite useless. just look at the recent entries in djn1's portfolio... [djn1: i love a lot of your pictures, but definitely not these!]

sorry, i have to correct my english: "i love a lot of your pictures, but definitely not.." those 3 you considered your favorites lately. so it's just a matter of taste. it should not be overemphasized... :O)

I almost didn't go to work today as I felt I had to find the time to think about Joe's comment and how to comment on it. This is written in my lunch hour. I thnk Joe is partly right and partly wrong.
a) there have been a lot of good pics since Yesterday's News, the Beach Combing series and Carl Steven and Franky stand out for me.
b) the announcement of the happy event was not, for me, taken as moment for artistic expression. It was a "blog" event , which is after all what this site is.
c) In the dead dark days after Christmas I have been going for walks with my camera and taken nothing. I am constanlty amazed that Dave manages to put something up every day. Maybe (as with today's) they're not quite up to the standard that we have seen, but I shouldn't like to take on the commitment and turn myself lose on the world's comments.

~the monochrome works for me...~

You know, I wonder if a higher vantage point might have shown the demarcation between the upper and under worlds a little better and might have prevented the hot spot on the left poster. Maybe even show a motion blur as someone goes down the stairs. I don't know. That being said, I will add that while this is not one of my favorites, the toning is very nice and quite appropriate to the overall feel of the image. I just am not sure you quite got at what you were trying to say. It feels like you're holding out. Nevertheless, it's good to break your style once in a while, good to try new things and go in new directions. The day that you stop shooting for yourself and start shooting to please everyone else is the day that you stop being a photographer and become a hack. But then again, I suspect you know that already ;-)

To respond to peter's point, though I don't want to over-emphasise this ...

In an ideal world the standard of the shots that I put up would be better, but this isn't an ideal world (job, kids, sleepless nights, rain and grey skies, and so on) and sometimes I put up stuff that I'm not entirely pleased with. Now, I could avoid doing this and simply not put stuff up on those days, but I don't want to do that. Amongst other things chromasia is my diary, and I decided to add something daily. If that means that some of the stuff isn't great, then so be it, but chromasia is as much a story of my journey as it is a gallery of wonderful shots. It would be nice if it could always be both, but that just doesn't happen.

And I think this is the case for all the daily blogs. I visit quite a few of them regularly and every once in a while see a shot that I don't think is all that good. Sometimes this is just a matter of taste (as despite my reservations the entry receives a lot of positive comments), and at other times there are only a few comments (possibly indicating that other people weren't too impressed either). But that's how it goes, it simply isn't possible - at least not for me - to produce a great shot everyday.

As I said, I don't want to over-emphasise this point, but it is a factor.

picturegrl: I suspect you're right about the vantage point. One thing I haven't mentioned is that both today's and yesterday's shots were taken from the hip rather than through the viewfinder as I find that while I don't mind shooting people on the streets I always feel as though I'm intruding when I shoot into buildings (clubs, pubs etc). I guess my concern here is probably unfounded but I don't like the idea that somebody might suddenly emerge from the door and be confronted with my camera. So the upshot, in this case, was that I was shooting from a lower position than normal.

And no, I have no intention of turning into a hack ;-)

I feel compelled to leave a comment. I must confess the last couple of images haven't really drawn me. I feel purely through observing the images that you happened upon the the recent two and thought "they'll do". I find the difficulty with the photos being that there is little focal point, too busy and you haven't focused upon an aspect which would be indicative of the scenario. Like taking the essence of soemthing, concentrating it.

I also agree that the pregnancy image was not particulary inspiring and yes, did fall short for such a momentous occasion. I think a paprameter would most definitely be to summaris a moment in but one photo rather than a collage, so to speak.

Negativity I do feel is something that is all too easy to jump onto. Perhaps I'm band wagon jumping here or perhaps others have in fact positively reinforced my own thoughts so I feel that I am somewhat vindicated in posting this. I like the imagination with which you approach your work and I feel that this has lacked somewhat.

If it's any consolation Mike Goldings work has been though a rough patch as well (although his most recent is rather lovely http://www.mgolding.com/) but I haven't posted anything in fear of offending him. I generally find that people will not comment upon soemthing that does little for them rather than critique (his less inspriing images gain less comments, and vice versus). But then, that isn't as constructive as say Daaaave, Miklos and Joe Duignan.

As for your direction I cannot dictate for I am usually like so many others an "in awe" observer.

Hmmm, hope that you can gain something from this.

Oh also I am going to be shadowing a guy as photographers assistant on weekends by the name of Ian Turner. He has done portraits for many famous people. Apparently. I am yet to have the measure of his calibre but every little helps. Anyone heard of him? Email me.

All I was saying is that people should not be afraid to comment negatively. And they are. Every photoblog is like that. You get an overwhelming amount of "great photo" comments and none that say "I don't like this shot" because (in this case), the photographer might say something like "I like this because it tells a story", then people are hesitant to argue that... Every photo tells a story. In this case, there are many ways of getting technical about how bad this is, and why it is bad, and we could just as well turn around and say why it is good. Or how it is good. (Because it tells a story :S ) ..

I might've come off strong initially because I didn't like the fact that the first instance a negative comment came up, someone jumped all over it right away and said something with the essence of "oh leave him alone, this shot is not the usual stuff but it is great nonetheless because we *heart* chromasia" .. And it's easier to get people to defend your work (even if it's not really all that great) if you follow it up with a lengthy technical description, or a description that will leave people feeling sorry for or trying to put themselves in your shoes as they analyze it.

Either way, whatever you're doing, bad or good, it keeps bringing people back, so .. keep up the good work I guess.

Please follow this up in an email if you need, as I won't have a chance to check this site again today. Thanks.

You know what I think is interesting? The fact that the cheesy/trashy covers are framed like artwork. I think it brings a new perspective to this stuff that has so much of a stigma.

Thanks everyone, and if you're interested in pursuing some of these issues I've mentioned a couple of them in tomorrow's entry.

Interesting comments. I'm amazed to see that there's an expectation of a WOW! image each and every single day. What's troublesome and problematic about that notion is simple: who defines WOW! shots? Come on now --- to each his own. Also -- jeez, come on - every day? I think it's WOW! that Dave posts an image EVERY DAY! It's tough ...

Someone said this particular image (and yesterday's) is a departure for Dave. I say, FANTASTIC -- I love departures... I'm not sure this is really a departure for Dave (take a look at some of his EARLY work - study it a bit) -- only Dave can tell us that (maybe he can't - he does have other things on his mind these days!)...

For me - I like seeing something different when I stop by - makes things interesting -- way to go, Dave!