Candid portraits
- Thread starter Crapking
- Start date
N
NotABunny
Guest
Crapking said:
"ProphotoRGB" is the problem. If you'll export it in sRGB, it will display properly in Chrome as well. However, since that requires the browser to be started with a specific command line parameter, the people who don't do that will still not see it color managed (sure, they'll see properly on an sRGB display, but not on a aRGB one).
Upvote
0
T
Tijn
Guest
First one was unexpected, second one was candid. 350D body, 18-55 kit lens. (Still saving for 60D and some real lenses, thats why I came here 
)
I'd used a larger aperture if was more aware of the small apertures I was shooting with it at the time. Still, I like how these came out.
)I'd used a larger aperture if was more aware of the small apertures I was shooting with it at the time. Still, I like how these came out.
Attachments
Upvote
0
On another note... Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't candid supposed to be without the subjects knowledge? There are some good pics in this thread, but I seriously doubt some of them are "candid", especially the ones where the subjects are looking intently at the camera.
Upvote
0
Wrathwilde said:
I could be wrong about this, but my understanding of a candid photo is one that is captured in a moment, without being posed. I don't feel that just because the subject of the photo noticed and looked just before the picture was taken its not a candid shot.
I can't speak for any pictures but mine, but in the case of my photo I had just taken my family to a park to go for a winter walk along the river. My son had gotten out of the truck and was wandering around while my wife and I got our equipment out. I took out my camera to check my settings and focused on the only subject nearby (my son) as he was wandering towards the trail. My wife called him told him to wait causing him to turn just as I took the picture. If you think that's not candid, fine. But I think it is.
Upvote
0
Beautor said:
I guess it's open to debate about what constitutes a candid photograph. My dictionary defines it as "(a photograph of a person) taken informally, esp. without the subject's knowledge." So I suppose there might be some overlap. But I tend to take the view that once the subject has awareness of / reacted to the camera then it's no longer candid. Don't know how I'd classify the photo of your son, he may have turned at the sound of your wife's voice, but his eyes locked onto the camera, not above it, or to the side as would be expected if he was looking at the person who was to calling him, demonstrating an awareness of the camera. Grey area is Grey.
Upvote
0
Wrathwilde said:
Ah, well I appologize. If my picture offends you, I'll happily remove it for you. It was never my intention to offend anyone, I just wanted to share. My understanding of a candid photo was slightly different, and who am I to argue with Webster?
Upvote
0
I didn't say it offended me, I thought I was implying that your photo fell into a grey area based on your description of the event. The dictionary didn't state that only pictures taken without the subjects knowledge qualified as candid, but that it related especially to pictures where that was the case. Hence the "grey area is grey" comment.Beautor said:
Sorry if I'm being too pedantic, I tend to treat words as having fairly strict meanings instead of fluid ones.
My love for words and meanings gets me into trouble fairly often.
Cheers,
Wrathwilde
Upvote
0
