# Mostly B&W



## Watchful (Mar 16, 2016)

Thanks all.


----------



## bribrius (Mar 16, 2016)

i would suggest try a crop but i'm not sure if i see a decent one have to think about it. Looks fun though. Was this for cc? Cute kid if it is yours.


----------



## Wasp1 (Mar 17, 2016)

I have not done this sort of thing yet but have to do it one day as I like it.
I to think if you could have cloned out the lady on the left it would have made a nicer shot.
But overall its is a nice shot and has got me thinking of doing the same soon.


----------



## sleist (Mar 17, 2016)

I don't hate selective coloring when there's a good reason for it.
Not really seeing a good reason here.

Plus, the selective coloring for the cut off person on the left makes no sense and confuses as to why the selective color was used in the first place.


----------



## jcdeboever (Mar 17, 2016)

I really like this image. A beautiful child submerged in wonderful directional light from late day light. She appears to be dancing and is clearly enjoying herself.  She is what is important but at the same time the artist offers volume in a B&W, mundane background which electrified her emotional state. She is well protected by a slight hint of a motherly figure. Well done, excellent emotional level not easily noticed.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## Designer (Mar 18, 2016)

Watchful said:


> Maybe after finding out that is my other daughter, it makes sense to you, if not, at least it makes sense to me, and I am the one I try to please, knowing that you will never please everyone and so you need to know your audience.


I understand the attachment to the photo as it is, but really; if you missed her in the frame, then you probably should just try again.


----------



## sleist (Mar 18, 2016)

Watchful said:


> You didn't see her? She is at the side, just entering. Exactly where I wanted her.
> Just because you don't understand the image, doesn't mean it has no meaning.
> I suggest a more open mind, think outside the box, or in this case, the frame.



When you post a photo in these galleries, it's assumed that you wish to have the photo critiqued.  You may have attachments to this for various reasons, but as a photograph it has some flaws that people are trying to bring to your attention.  You can disregard these suggestions if you wish of course, but I think you would benefit from taking your own advice regarding the open mind.


----------



## snowbear (Mar 18, 2016)

Watchful said:


> You didn't see her? She is at the side, just entering. Exactly where I wanted her.
> Just because you don't understand the image, doesn't mean it has no meaning.
> I suggest a more open mind, think outside the box, or in this case, the frame.


It sounds like your either trying to convince yourself or just making excuses.

The younger one is a cute kid; I can't tell about the other since there's nothing more than an eye and part of an arm.  It's a memory keeping snapshot, but not much else, IMO.


----------



## snowbear (Mar 18, 2016)

Watchful said:


> If you would like, I can explain each element in detail and why it's there and what it conveys or symbolizes. But, like a joke that needs to be explained and is no longer funny, you either get it or don't.
> I will explain if you like though.



No need.  I'm not that interested in the snap for an explanation (re-read the first sentence in my post).


----------



## SCraig (Mar 18, 2016)

Just a thought ... If one has to explain a photograph then the photograph cannot stand on its own merits.


----------



## sleist (Mar 18, 2016)

I'd be interested in hearing your thought process.


----------



## sleist (Mar 18, 2016)

Watchful said:


> Concerning what? Pray tell.
> Opinions? Art? Photography? The human experience? The meaning of life?



About this photo.  The topic of this thread.

You said:



> If you would like, I can explain each element in detail and why it's there and what it conveys or symbolizes



I'm listening.


----------



## Overread (Mar 18, 2016)

Watchful said:


> sleist said:
> 
> 
> > I'd be interested in hearing your thought process.
> ...



Please remember that ALL the galleries are open to critique of ones work. If you do not wish for any critique of your work please use the "Just for Fun" gallery. Otherwise members will take their own free time to try and offer their constructive input into your photography.


----------



## sleist (Mar 18, 2016)

Watchful said:


> sleist said:
> 
> 
> > Watchful said:
> ...



Unnecessary.  The girl is already clearly the subject of the photo.  Selective color should not be used to emphasize the obvious.  It shouldn't be used at all IMHO, but that's my subjectivity showing through.  If you like it - fine.  I don't feel like it was implemented thoughtfully here.  It certainly does not convey the message that "she is alive and the world is still a beautiful place to her".



> In the background, the sign is cropped by the walking person to show only the word 'now' indicating the passing of time and the girls preoccupation in the present. In her mind, "now" is all there is.



I feel like this was an afterthought.  If you say you timed all the elements of this photo before hand then so be it.  Who am I to say otherwise.  I don't buy it.  Furthermore, the selective color makes this aspect of the photo less obvious to the audience.  All anyone looks at is the selectively colored portion.  You have defeated your own vision.   I see this much the same way that the brightest subject in a photo grabs the eye and becomes the most important part of the composition.  If you really feel like this was an important aspect of this composition, then you need to work on your post processing.



> The passersby are indicative of the world in motion, whether the young girl notices it or not.


   OK.  I suppose  can give you that, but if that was a theme you wanted to convey before hand, why not have your daughter stand still while the world moved around her - blurred via long exposure for example?  If this was your vision prior to shooting, I feel it was poorly executed.



> To the left side is her older sister, still present in her world but drawing away as they grow older as all siblings to. The sister is also moving forward, but with more of a goal in mind and a place she wants to get to ahead of her. Her sister is also slightly in front of her as she will always be, being the older of the two.  The sister is also in color as she is the secondary focus of the piece and a main influence in the young girls world.



Nope.  There is simply too little of this person in the frame for anyone to attach *THAT *much importance to it.  You did not even value it enough to do a decent job of coloring.  Half her arm is still grey for Christ sake.  Nope. Nope. Nope.



> If you see it differently, then for you, that is correct, what I explained is what the piece represents to me.
> All that matters is that it touched your life in some way and you are now a different person than you were before stopping by.
> God Bless.



My sense is that you attempted to make the best of a mediocre image via post processing and you missed by  quite a bit.  My opinion.

It's a nice picture of your kids.


----------



## Wasp1 (Mar 19, 2016)

Watchful said:


> Wasp1 said:
> 
> 
> > I have not done this sort of thing yet but have to do it one day as I like it.
> ...


----------



## Watchful (Mar 19, 2016)

Wasp1 said:


> Watchful said:
> 
> 
> > Wasp1 said:
> ...


I'd be happy to take a look for you.


----------



## Trblmkr (Mar 29, 2016)

The link on the OP's post is gone... Can you please not do that, so i can see what the comments were referring to.  Without the original link this thread is useless.


----------



## Watchful (Mar 29, 2016)

Thank you.


----------



## xenskhe (Mar 30, 2016)

sleist said:


> > In the background, the sign is cropped by the walking person to show only the word 'now' indicating the passing of time and the girls preoccupation in the present. In her mind, "now" is all there is.
> 
> 
> 
> I feel like this was an afterthought.  If you say you timed all the elements of this photo before hand then so be it.  Who am I to say otherwise.  I don't buy it.



I didn't see the pictures, but it makes little difference; if a concept or an idea is realised as an afterthought, why do you feel that's invalid?


----------

