CCC Forum

Davidb's account of a judge criticising a small white area in his "Observing 'Camelot'" image to the exclusion of the rest of theshot (see viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1880&start=10#p11200) reminded me of this well known photo by Don McCullin.




First off, this low resolution reproduction on the web really does not do the image any favours whatsoever. You really need to see a print, which is both stunning and haunting. I saw it at the Tate Modern's exhibition of war photography and it eclipsed everything else in the show. For some camera club judges, though? That large highlight to the right of the soldier's head would be too much to resist.

I remember seeing the contact sheet for this particular shot and the amount of dodging and burning involved was quite extensive. The shadow cast by his helmet rendered his eyes in deep shadows, sadly I cannot find an online version of this to prove it!

However, an interesting article covers James Dean's Times Square image of him in the rain and the printing technique involved - https://theliteratelens.com/2012/02/17/ ... -printing/

For consideration.

Having seen an original print, which has greater tonality and has far more impact than the rather anodyne JPEG I found for this post, the bright area behind the soldier was not an issue. It probably helps that it is not in a position where the eye tends to rest. For those brought up in western cultures at least, where we are used to reading from left to right. What you see, and what you remember, is that haunting expression in the subject's face. It is a powerful image and I would not change anything about it.

Doesn't your eye tend to rest on people's faces in portraits? Meaning the white spot is pretty much where you don't want it to be.

I think it IS a distraction but don't think it harms the overall image.

edit - I guess one way of looking at it is this. If I were shooting a portrait of a model acting as a shell shocked soldier I would make sure it was not there. If I was a war photographer on the beach, dodging bullets, I probably wouldn't be too worried about it.