“If you keep the ordinary images, you reward yourself in the wrong way” ~ Larry Towell
Four more images that did not make the cut. One of these was almost included and another one was considered but thrown out because the composition resembled another image that was much stronger. The other two were clear Outs. Can you guess which ones were close and which ones weren’t even contenders, and why?
digging these rejects
i’m too shy to guess!
out of curiosity, did you have to do b&w for the workshop? or was it personal preference?
Great question Amanda! On the first day of reviews, I presented the dog images in B&W and the other images in colour. Larry asked me how I decided on one versus the other. For me it is about whether or not colour adds to or takes away from how the image feels and what I would like to convey. The first choice I had to make regardless of the subject was colour or B&W; there was a very clear message not to mix the two for the presentation.
Larry exclusively shoots in B&W film. For him, digital is for video and audio.
ITA about the decision of b&w vs. colour being about whether colour adds or distracts, and that the two shouldn’t be mixed in the context of a series. I figured that b&w is WWLD (:P) but was wondering if he pushed one or the other
Now I’m wondering whether you had to reject otherwise good shots because they didn’t convert to b&w well? or were you always “thinking” or even previewing in b&w? (I forget what you use, but I know on nikon you can shoot raw and preview b&w on the LCD)
The decision to go B&W was totally my decision. Larry left it up to each of us to decide. I did switch my camera to monochrome while photographing so I could see what the image looked like so none of images were rejected because of they did not convert well. Good to point that out…thanks!
I see such humor in these images. I know you were working hard, but it looks like you were having fun too. Were you? I’m guessing Image #1 was a contender. The lines and shadows, the matching strides of human and pet, the “gesture” of the dog’s tail in the air, and — yes — the baggie. It tells me a story.
I’d guess the last one was close (it has that cheeky humour), and maybe the first. I’m not sure what relevance the middle 2 have to dogs though, so I’m gonna guess those we left out.
Am I warm?
I’m at exactly the opposite opinion Charlene holds there, I think that the last one was “too obvious” while the first one just wasn’t strong enough regarding that connection between human and dog. The center two at least give some insight into how dogs impact humans and their habits, so I’d think they were at least considered for inclusion.
I suddenly got what the middle ones were when you said that! Doh!
(clearly, not a pet owner)
I think the (almost) clear in was number 3. It talks about the relationship between pets and their owners, and ticks the box for not being too obvious. (as an aside, are those Canadian poo bags? They’re enormous!)
I think number 1 was the almost, but the composition just wasn’t clean enough (tyre in the corner)
And I think 2 and 4 are probably a bit obvious, although I agree with Charlene about number 4 being funny.
I’d have made the last a contender (great juxtaposition although framing wasn’t quite on the mark) and first was overturned for a better shot (I imagine the perfect shot of this style taken by you lying right on the ground to really get at pooch level). The dog snack shot could also have been almost on target for it’s story about pampered pooches. The third one does nothing for me – perhaps it’s because I am a dog owner and spend too much time on poop patrol.
Great guesses everyone! I will come back after the next post to give you the answers. Let me say this, there are some pretty smart cookies that visit my blog
Now that the Magnum 8 are up, I can come back and let you know more about why these images did not make the cut.
The close contender was #3. It was very close because it has the power of suggestion rather than just telling the viewer about the subject. You have to look more closely to see what it really is and you might have to come back before you figure it out. In the end it was excluded because the images needed to be sequenced together and needed to flow. #2 of the Magnum 8 was put in its place although it might not be as strong an image, all things considered.
#1 was out because as Dorothy mentions in her comment on the next post, #1 was similar in composition and much stronger. The car wheel in the top left of the frame was not an issue; it actually added to the composition.
#2 and #4 were given less than 5 seconds of consideration. Seriously. The composition and framing were not issues but they were too obvious in addition to not fitting into the flow and sequence of the final 8.
the two bootom ones speak to me. Nr 3 because you have to wonder why it is there. Unsure if it still works outside a dog setting. Nr 4 because it makes me smile that there is a dog but you advertise for cats.
Number two is too open for interpretation for me. I don’t understand if this is a dog restaurant or it the biscuts are for people. This could be because i haven’t seen anything similar here
Number one just does not speak to me. I don’t understand what the message is (is there one?)