CCC Forum

A while back, I published a post about a well known image by Don McCullin and wondered what a camera club judge would have to say about a rather obvious "fault".

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2400&p=11202&hilit=mccullin#p11202

In that spirit, I offer you another example, this time a famous example from Diane Arbus. There is currently an auction going on for a print, which is from an edition of 75 made in 1972. At the time of writing, there are three bids, the highest being $92,500. The estimate is $100,000 - $130,000 and the reserve has not yet been reached.

https://www.artnet.com/auctions/artists ... l-park-nyc

With the Don McCullin shot, I made it easy and pointed out the obvious "flaw". This time, you will have to work it out for yourself. There are at least three aspects about which a typical judge might see fit to pass comment and a pedant would probably add many more. Clearly, in the world of fine art photography, things that a judge might pick up on do not really matter. They might even add to the image?

I was wondering if the judge would comment on the people being closer to the little boy, to frame the image better, or would he prefer the hand grenade not be in the boys hand.
Wally

walterconquy wrote:I was wondering if the judge would comment on the people being closer to the little boy, to frame the image better, or would he prefer the hand grenade not be in the boys hand.
Wally

An interesting perspective, but not what I was thinking. To my mind, the hand grenade and boy's expression are what give the image its impact.

This is the contact sheet from the film on which the shot was taken. It is always interesting to see the contacts which show how the photographer worked. That is something we do not get in the digital age. The strips of film are in the wrong order and the first image is the one at the bottom in the middle. The second strip is on the right and the printed shot is at top left, which makes it the eigth one in the sequence. In most of the other shots, the boy has a normal expression and the hand grenade does not always feature.

There is someone growing out of the boy's head and a long stick poking into his arm on the left of the image.
Tina

No sorry it's not a stick, I think it's part of the edge of the path.
Tina

Tina wrote:There is someone growing out of the boy's head and a long stick poking into his arm on the left of the image.
Tina

Yes, the confusing background is one of the things I was thinking of. The lad apparently has an entire tree growing out of his right shoulder, which could account for his pained expression.

How did you find the contact sheet, Mike.
You are right it is always interesting to see which ones were relegated.
wally

highlights at the edge of the frame, black-clothed person is a contrast point that drags the eye away, person growing out of his head, a tree out of his shoulder, not enough room near his toes. A really nitpicky one might say the branches at top right.

In other words all things that are utterly irrelevant

davidc wrote:highlights at the edge of the frame, black-clothed person is a contrast point that drags the eye away, person growing out of his head, a tree out of his shoulder, not enough room near his toes. A really nitpicky one might say the branches at top right.

Yes, that's pretty much it. I would also add the detritus around the boy's feet. There are more than a few a few judges who would want to see all that Photoshopped away to tidy up the scene. After all, who wants reality intruding into their photography?*

davidc wrote:In other words all things that are utterly irrelevant

Which is one of the things I dislike about camera club images. The judges are intent on taking us in a particular direction to the exclusion of others. Want a high mark? This is the way you will shoot.

* Typed with all the irony I can muster.