Traveling Carnival, Wappingers Falls, New York
Copyright, 2001, David Cunningham

-- David Cunningham (dcunningham@attglobal.net), April 11, 2001

Answers

wow, good picture

Smooth tones everywhere. The child looks like a porcelain doll. I like this one.

-- ed (ekang@cse.nd.edu), April 11, 2001.

Wow, another classic normal lens HBC style portrait. The kind of look a boy gives you where you can see the man he'll grow up to be. A thrilling picture. A photographic tone poem. Not to mention a textbook example of the rule of thirds I mentioned in the "Leo" thread. Let me guess, summer evening, Nikon F1.4 at 2.8, 125th.

-- Chris Yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), April 11, 2001.

Chris...

Very close. Summer evening (end of June) around 7:30pm. Nikon N90s with a Nikkor AF-D 85/1.8, f/2.8 @ 1/250s. Delta 400 @ 320.

And thanks for the kind words.

-- David Cunningham (dcunningham@attglobal.net), April 11, 2001.

Great exposure and tones - but the child is transfixed by the camera, which ruins it for me.

-- fw (finneganswake@altavista.net), April 11, 2001.

Another excellent shot! Nothing much more to add, except that I don't agree with fw that the boy's transfixation with the camera detracts from the photograph. I think it is the photograph. If I were printing this (which I am not so this is moot) I would burn down the highlights on the right and the pole that he holds to help draw the viewer to the boy.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), April 11, 2001.

It did look a tad long for 50mm. The print must be something. This stuff always renews my faith in the straightforward...

-- Chris Yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), April 11, 2001.

in addition to the above there is a great economy in the patterns in this picture - basically fluted elements - fabric/pole/horse mane/shirt or the smooth rich mid/dark tones - skin/background/eyes (all 3). i find this makes the picture readily acessible immdeiately but also enjoyable to study.

-- charles curry-hyde (charles@chho.com.au), April 12, 2001.

Beautiful tones, and I like the angles. It seems more static than I expect considering the context.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), April 12, 2001.

I'd like to echo those above who say what a beautiful portrait this is, how the transfixion (sp?) is the image, and how great the tones are. However, I find the image to be a bit unbalanced-- I'm thrown off by how the patterns meet the right edge of the frame, and by how empty the left side seems. I know you wanted to keep the eye of the horse in the picture, but perhaps a tighter crop would strengthen the boy's position in the picture, whereas right now he seems rather diminished by the other strong patterns in the picture. Just food for thought (and kosher for passover, at that!)... --Josh

-- Josh Wand (josh@joshwand.com), April 13, 2001.