per mr. spirer's request within the post below. my first attempt, i hope this works, or someone out there can make an autolink.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=205038

there are five photos scanned at once to save time (lunch time).

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 09, 2002

Answers

Steve´s picture

-- Eric Kragtwijk (e.kragtwijk@hccnet.nl), May 09, 2002.

i guess i didn't do it correctly.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=748934

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 09, 2002.

The top left picture has some nice human animation which seems to be missing in the other shots, although the women in the background of the top right shot start to get some emotion going, too.

Back during the Apollo moon landings, the first astronaut out of the lunar lander would scoop up a quick little 'contingency sample' of moon dust - just so NASA would have SOMETHING to show for the trip in case things went sour on them and they had to "get out of Dodge" before finishing their planned mission.

I feel like these shots are 'contingency samples' - the first available pictures of a situation, with decent composition and technique, but no real magic yet. I feel like you need to hang around and shoot a little deeper once you get onto subjects like these, so that the folks quit staring at the camera and start living their lives again.

The shot with the red parasol has real potential, but the folks are just a little - boring - in this exposure. Same for the kids along the path.

BTW, I shoot 'contingency pictures' all the time - I try to get SOMETHING on film, and then hang around to see if something better happens.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), May 09, 2002.

very nice photos...unlike those blurry, out-of-focus crap that i've seen lately...

-- Dexter Legaspi (dalegaspi@hotmail.com), May 09, 2002.

I would agree with Andy's comments. The problem I see with these photos is that they show no insight or understanding of the culture and come across as detached and somewhat touristy. For this kind of photography, I would highly recommend getting a local guide who can take you beyond the surface and put you into a more intimate situation with the people.

Compositionally, these seem unbalanced, particularly because of the anemic skies in several of them. Graphically, they aren't strong enough given the lack of intimacy. They may be what Andy calls "contingency shots", and that means digging a lot deeper.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), May 09, 2002.

What I see is an exploration of very human origin, that shows me, how much alike we all really are. Bravo Steve.

-- Glenn Travis (leicaddict@hotmail.com), May 09, 2002.

thanks for the critique,

i found it nec. to post for the first time from mr. spirer's post.

these are well off the beaten track as i had rented a moped. i spent most of my time w/the local people - these were from after much time w/these people. i avoided the org. tours like the plague. in burma and cambodia i stook out like a sore thumb - does anyone see more than a couple of tourists in the shots and way in the background? they are semi-candid (still natural and not posed or staged) photo's.

did i copy anyone; does the post card photo resemble any other post card photo? i have much more stored away.

two of the shots were made w/swc, guess which ones - from your monitor i know.

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 09, 2002.

mr. spirer,

i have a problem w/the sky.

in these shots, the sky was overeposed bec. the subject(s) were in the shade. negative film is supposed to handle the lattitude. but in my other shots elsewhere/everywhere the sky turns out blank white. i use a polarizer and it helps w/the sky, but wouldn't help w/these shots. i see what you are talking about, but i don't know how to fix it.

how do i get non-white interesting skies even if the sky is not the subject, when the main subject is in the shade, or covered bridge.

could it be the walmart processing.

help please.

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 09, 2002.

some backgound:

the older ladies are holding marlboro lights just givin to them. show me another decisive moment photo.

the baby was given a corn on the cob sold nearby. they pick off every kernal one by one until gone - this photo it's almost gone.

the kids on the path had only caught one small fish - in the hand of the subject - and were moving to the next hole. see the homemade net/trap on the ground.

these are far from touist photo's, these are people trying to survive in war torn countries!

beautiful people was my impression, well worth a visit to re-evaluate our priorities. gift for the soul.

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 09, 2002.

how do i get non-white interesting skies even if the sky is not the subject, when the main subject is in the shade, or covered bridge.

Well this is a fundamental problem. You have a contrast range that will be difficult to reproduce and the sky will wash out. The best way to deal with it is to avoid the sky. I don't have Rob Appleby's photos in front of me, but I recall that he often excludes the sky. Custom processing and/or Photoshop can help, but the best way to deal with it is to get the sky out of the photo. Or shoot at a different time of day.

could it be the walmart processing.

This begs the question of why someone would spend the money on gear and get cheapo processing. A handmade print (color or black and white) from an Olympus Stylus will probably look better than a Walmart print from any camera.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), May 09, 2002.

mr. spirer,

i don't have much of a choice, being a traveler and the convenience makes the "walmart" type proceccing a necessity, but i hope the neg's are fine.

as for the gear, i need it to be as compact as possible given 9/11.

thankk you for your comment.

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 09, 2002.