My latest reportage: Murmansk region (Russian Arctic) - Page 2

shadowfox · 03-30-2012

Andrea,

I don't know what's with these RFF members being grumpy

I like it! Part II is better than Part I because there are more people smiling. You shoot Murmansk the way you like it, you process it the way you like it. You are being authentic. Forget those who think you're not.

Here's my suggestion, just edit out a couple from Part I.

Other than that, I like the colors, I like the vignetting, and no, I don't think Murmansk is bleak by looking at your photo, people are people everywhere, there are bleak people in Paris or New York too.

raid · 03-30-2012

The stories that are written are most interesting to me. I am still reviewing the photos.

kanzlr · 03-30-2012

I do like your series and I have to admit that it takes at least some commitment to just go there and do it.

The post processing to me is ok, and the selection of shots does convey an atmosphere. I have no clue if it is an authentic one, but at least it seems to communicate with the viewer. The size of the series is fine in a documentary sense. Of course you could show the 10 you like most, and link to more for those interested, but to me it was fine, amount wise.

Thanks for showing. What focal length you used most?

Andrea Taurisano · 03-30-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by kanzlr

Thanks for showing. What focal length you used most?

Yeah, maybe i should have said something about that. I used 24mm almost all the time. When I didn't, I used a cron 50.

Peter Wijninga · 03-30-2012

Quote:

I suppose the series reflects your situation in Murmansk at that time: on the outside and I equally suppose you'd have to live there for a good while to find and capture the city's humanity

I like the new treatment much better but my original concern as expressed in the quote above, that you are scratching at the surface, remains. Cheers, Peter

Andrea Taurisano · 03-30-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Wijninga

I like the new treatment much better but my original concern as expressed in the quote above, that you are scratching at the surface, remains. Cheers, Peter

Well I can confirm your suspect. I had to live in Norway for a few years before I felt that my photos from here were digging deeper than the surface, that is tourist shot. Having been in Murmansk for 3 days only, and only once for 2 days before in Russia, I don't see how I could really capture the core of a town / country.. Can you?

No matter how much you read before, wouldn't your picture always reflect what you think the place is like, or what you want to focus on, especially having limited time to shoot? :-)

David_Manning · 03-30-2012

I think it's great that you got to travel someplace pretty exotic with the equipment you like and had a great experience. I think the question I have for you is...do YOU like your reportage photos?

At the end of the day, that's really what matters. I also want to say that it is pretty brave to post your hard work and ask everyone to critique it.

My own opinion? I'd love to have the opportunity to travel to Murmansk with my gear of choice and wander around and explore. I don't care what anyone would think of the photos...it would be a document of my memories.

Bravo.

BobYIL · 03-30-2012

Are we not in a constant pursue for the better? At least to learn? Why do we visit such forums? Do they not contribute to our development?

"I'd love to hear feedback from you, as I value the experience this blog is full of." Now I do not need to inquire what the OP was feeling for his reportage after those slight modifications...

Appropriate feedbacks, most of the time, function like a mirror held for us..

Jamie Pillers · 03-30-2012

Wojtek,
If you instead look at each photo as a stand-alone story, and contemplate what is going on with that person or that place or the people that live in that building or work in that factory, then each image remains powerful... no matter how many are offered!

If we only needed one picture of a starving child in Africa, where would Selgado be today? Or Evans? Or Levitt? Or...(pick the name of any great street/journalist photographer of the past.

Andrea Taurisano · 03-30-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by David_Manning

I think the question I have for you is...do YOU like your reportage photos?

At the end of the day, that's really what matters. I also want to say that it is pretty brave to post your hard work and ask everyone to critique it.

Thank you David. My answer to your question is YES, in fact I am pretty satisfied with the photo series I got from this trip. I do think I have scratched the surface, but the surface of several aspects of the city. I didn't think I could stay there 3 days and come home having captured the core of a half a million inhabitant city, or the core of a country. Expecting that would be absurd. The very good comments I'm getting from people I got to know there, are worth more than anything else, with all due respect to forumers here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobYIL

Are we not in a constant pursue for the better? At least to learn? Why do we visit such forums? Do they not contribute to our development?

"I'd love to hear feedback from you, as I value the experience this blog is full of." Now I do not need to inquire what the OP was feeling for his reportage after those slight modifications...

Appropriate feedbacks, most of the time, function like a mirror held for us..

I do value any feedback from you all. However, I was mainly interested in receiving comments on the content of my work, more than the purely aesthetic choice of vignetting and color treatment. Slaughtering a piece of work based on that only, without saying a word on the content, the strenght or lack thereof of the pictures, the compostion, doesn't show great critical capabilities, to put it mildly..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamie Pillers

Wojtek,
If you instead look at each photo as a stand-alone story, and contemplate what is going on with that person or that place or the people that live in that building or work in that factory, then each image remains powerful... no matter how many are offered!

If we only needed one picture of a starving child in Africa, where would Selgado be today? Or Evans? Or Levitt? Or...(pick the name of any great street/journalist photographer of the past.

Exactly. Of course I'd never submit 100 photos to a paper or a travel magazine, but this is my personal blog, a way of sharing my experiences and thoughts, and space is gratis. What's wrong with making a point (e.g. the well functioning bus service) using 6 photos, provided they are all decent? The text touches several aspects of the city, and I chose to use several shots for each of these "themes". Good that several people appreciate that. My thought is that you'd better be Salgado if you want to make all your points with ONE shot.. ;-)

mynikonf2 · 03-30-2012

Part II is a totally different experience, diversity = interest. Left me wanting Part III.
Oh, when I used the word Bleak to describe Part I, it was not meant in a negative way. If I had, had no reaction to your
images, then I might have said something like, 'I did not like your photo-shop technique or this one needs more cropping.' But because
your work did give me a sense that this place had been dropped into the middle of nowhere, a place I called Bleak for lack of a
better word, I see Part I as a success followed by an even better Part II.

seakayaker1 · 03-30-2012

Andrea, thanks for posting the journal and beautiful photographs. I appreciate seeing areas of the world that, most likely, I will never have the opportunity to see in person. Enjoyed your story and photographs that followed in both part I & II!

From reading through the comments, it appears that I missed an earlier version of the blog. I jumped right to your blog from the original post and glad I did since reading some of the comments may have discouraged me and I would have missed out on an interesting journey.

Keep up the good work and look forward to your next journal entry.

Thanks, Dan

newsgrunt · 03-30-2012

Definitely need to edit tighter. Much tighter. Too many repetitive photos. Also wasn't feeling the toning in the second set (HDR?).

Many of the photos feel too much like snapshots without much thought about composition. Shoot less, compose more. You had some nice images but they got lost amongst the rest that were less worthy.

Have someone help with a tighter edit and narrow it down by at least half imo. For an idea of what works, see what Donald Weber has done in that part of the world.

Being there physically is one part of the equation, the other is feeling connected to the place, understanding the mood if you will.

Andrea Taurisano · 03-30-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by karlori

I was in Murmansk twice, once as a tourist and once on a cargo ship... I must say the pictures do not really transmit the feeling I had when I was there.
Lose the vignette and/or the processing, the city is a bit more cheerful than that

.

Other than that, a nice trip through memory lane. Thanks for that ! I'd love to go there around "Summer" once.

Each and every one of us who visit a new place brings back home their very own impressions, which will largely vary depending on time of the year, duration of the stay, what we did, whom we were there with and so on. I am actually getting very positive comments from people from Murmansk who are seeing the photos, so someone at least sees their city in my series.

RFluhver · 03-31-2012

Sorry, I didn't like it either. Some of the images look strange, like almost HDRry or something. Also, when I think about this part of the world I'm always thinking rough and tough. But except for the surroundings, it seems that Murmansk is not mich different to anywhere else.

Andrea Taurisano · 03-31-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by RFluhver

Sorry, I didn't like it either. Some of the images look strange, like almost HDRry or something. Also, when I think about this part of the world I'm always thinking rough and tough. But except for the surroundings, it seems that Murmansk is not mich different to anywhere else.

Fine that you don't like it, no problem. But yours is still one of the most interesting comments so far, in fact you hit the nail on the head: yes, when one thinks about this part of the world one's often thinking rough and tough. Murmansk has indeed rough surroundings, particularly badly maintened buildings and public space - which would have shown even better if I had posted even more photos (one ugly block may mean little, but hundreds or thousands..) - and relatively poor people compared to west European countries. However, you'll find that Murmansk is not that different to anywhere else: you find the poor and the rich, the old people feeding pigeons on a bench and the young people surfing on the net while drinking a Mojito, the decadent and the trendy.. You may have meant your feedback as a negative one, but to me it isn't.

jarski · 03-31-2012

only saw whats online now and PP seems ok to me. dont think its big issue mention a camera in first sentences, when posting material to camera forum. agree that theres a bit repetition. I'd enjoy individual photos more if there was something besides plain image, e.g one sentence of location or little more additional info, anything.

I'd love visit Murmansk as well. Russians are careful not to tamper old Soviet feel of some of their cities. time still seems frozen to Brezhnev-era, 1970's. thanks for sharing.

rxmd · 03-31-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea Taurisano

However, I was mainly interested in receiving comments on the content of my work, more than the purely aesthetic choice of vignetting and color treatment. Slaughtering a piece of work based on that only, without saying a word on the content, the strenght or lack thereof of the pictures, the compostion, doesn't show great critical capabilities, to put it mildly.

Well I still don't really like it. It's better with the editing now, and it's a good travel album, don't get me wrong. But for a reportage or for something about which you want people to exercise their critical capabilities the selection of motifs still seems strange - concrete blocks, a few heritage buildings, post-industrial landmarks, and if someone appears happy it's either a pretty young girl or an immigrant.

It's like going to New York for a day and shooting a few skyscrapers, Wall Street, Grand Central Terminal, a few blonde girls and some street sellers in Chinatown. As a result you get a travel album, but not a reportage. I guess what I miss is the interaction with people, the point where you have an insight into their lives, the feeling that there's more going on than a tourist looking at odd architecture, pretty girls and exotic people from Asia.

I realize that this might be difficult to do in just three days and if you don't have a common language, and so maybe it's just a matter my own taste. But I think there's a difference between a "reportage", which should have a bit of interaction and depth and some kind of underlying question that goes beyond "Look at where I've been", and a personal travel album.

raid · 03-31-2012

Regardless whether some comments are viewed as harsh, the OP will benefit from honest critique here. I learn from such comments when I go over someone else's thread and also when I happen to have travelled and I dare post about it. Often its mostly "get closer", which isca good reminder.

BobYIL · 03-31-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea Taurisano

I do value any feedback from you all. However, I was mainly interested in receiving comments on the content of my work, more than the purely aesthetic choice of vignetting and color treatment. Slaughtering a piece of work based on that only, without saying a word on the content, the strenght or lack thereof of the pictures, the compostion, doesn't show great critical capabilities, to put it mildly..

This was addressed to me (BobYIL). Whereas I have stated right at the beginning:

"...layout, comments and prose all are interesting. The subjects for photos too... I liked them." and also "Once again a nice picture story but needing rework IMHO to become more interesting."

I have also expressed appreciation following your "retouches"..

To suggest a few tips to make them look more interesting = "Slaughtering a piece of work.. to put it mildly..."?

Sorry for providing feedback. You can easily undo anything there based on my suggestions if you do not feel comfortable with. After all, it's your reportage.

Andrea Taurisano · 03-31-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobYIL

This was addressed to me (BobYIL). Whereas I have stated right at the beginning:

"...layout, comments and prose all are interesting. The subjects for photos too... I liked them." and also "Once again a nice picture story but needing rework IMHO to become more interesting."

I have also expressed appreciation following your "retouches"..

To suggest a few tips to make them look more interesting = "Slaughtering a piece of work.. to put it mildly..."?

Sorry for providing feedback. You can easily undo anything there based on my suggestions if you do not feel comfortable with. After all, it's your reportage.

No Bob, in fact not adressed particularly to you. It was meant generally to the IMO exaggerated focus that MANY have put on the postprocessing, especially the vignetting, while providing little comment on subject, content, mood, composition, and so on. If I hadn't appreciated (and at least partly agreed with) your and other forumers' suggestion to reduce the vignetting, you can be damn sure I would not have reduced it. As you see.. ;-)

mdarnton · 03-31-2012

Andrea, what follows are very general comments about doing documentary photos, not your pictures individually as single shots:

A couple of people have said some things I would have said, but let me put it together as I see it: The solution to clutter is not vignetting, it's to move closer and eliminate clutter from the photo, entirely.

As I look at the thumbs, there are very few photos shot from closer than about 15 feet. The general rule for a photo story is that you need establishing shots (distance), mid-range shots making specific points, and close-ups for texture. Your pictures are almost all establishing shots, and there are no close-ups at all, so though we get the big picture over and over, we get very little from an intimate and personal perspective, as one of the local people would be seeing things--essentially you have remained a tourist, unable to focus on the details of daily life. There are a few mid-range shots at the end, but they're basically the same. Each photo needs to be necessary, and there can be a few that don't work on their own, but usually they should be able to stand as individuals.

Also, a "story" usually has some sort of underlying point that the photos make, and it's good for the photographer to keep that in mind so the collection of pictures doesn't get too diffuse.

It takes a lot of discipline to keep varying one's viewpoint, and when I was working on a newspaper, I had to constantly keep asking myself if I had done that. The other two things I had to force myself to do, which you should be keeping in mind, was to always mix verticals in with horizontals, ideally getting every different situation in both formats (you might change your mind when you see the photos as to which you prefer, so it's good to have both types), and always to crop my photos so tightly that no editor could ever take something away without ruining the picture.

I learned that last one after watching my "atmospheric" four-column pix consistently turn into two- or three-column photos in the paper, after the editor's scissors hit them. There are better ways to create atmosphere than adding empty, value-free space. Basically, if you can still cut something off of a picture, you aren't finished composing it yet.

These are very basic points of documentary photography, and if they aren't there, one hasn't even started to work. I see these failings in a lot of people who casually call themselves documentary photographers but who remain, essentially, amateurs and unemployable. I am reading a book of interviews with all of the photographers who ever worked for LIFE magazine, and one of them comments very early in the book that there are plenty of good photographers, but very few who can actually tell a story

(Ahem: unlike the self-published or can't-get-work documentarians here, I actually got paid to do documentary photography full-time for seven years, and won a handful of prizes that I didn't apply for, for it. Just thought I'd say that. :-)

Schlapp · 03-31-2012

Well I love the work and the writing. Looking forward to seeing more.

Andrea Taurisano · 03-31-2012

This is very good food for thoughts, mdarnton. I and probably others, since you formulated it so well, will think about that.

But I just want to add that almost all those photos were shot through a 24 mm lens, and from a distance that's much closer than 15 feet. In fact, most photos of people, both the ones where the subject was talking to me and the ones from hip level, were taken at about 3 - 5 feet. By choice (I had a 50 mm with me too). And some "empty" space around a subject shot through a wide lens, possibly filled with strong vignetting to draw attention to the subject, seems to be a pretty common practice in press this side of the sea (see examples below, all taken from today's papers). But believe me, I do see your points.

Example 1

Example 2

Example 3

mdarnton · 03-31-2012

When I worked, I often used only a Leica with a 28mm on it, and an Olympus with 50mm macro, or sometimes replaced the Leica with another OM1 with a 21mm. It forced me into shooting two very different viewpoints, plus the ability to easily do very close shots quickly.

I think it's essential to do something to force yourself to approach things in ways you would not naturally do.

The nice thing about being a legitimate news photographer was that it gave me permission to move right in tight on things. . . something that might have been difficult for you to make yourself to do in that place in your situation. Now that I don't do it for a living, I rarely move out of my own comfort zone, and so my pictures are much less varied than they were when I was working, then.