Any pic's make you say OMG!

Hugh_C

Andrew33 wrote: »

Beautiful but NOT an OMG pic! missing the point of this thread completely.

Andrew, it's more an OMG for me than much of the other suggestions in this thread. I think you should read about objectivity/subjectivity.

Neasha

majiktripp wrote: »

The night before the burial of her husband's body, Katherine Cathey refused to leave the casket, asking to sleep next to his body for the last time. The Marines made a bed for her, tucking in the sheets below the flag. Before she fell asleep, she opened her laptop computer and played songs that reminded her of "Cat," and one of the Marines asked if she wanted them to continue standing watch as she slept. "I think it would be kind of nice if you kept doing it," she said. "I think that's what he would have wanted.


Blatantly copied & pasted from Photos That Changed the world thread over in After Hours. Definitely a few OMG photo's posted in that thread.

Why does this make you say OMG.

majiktripp

Neasha wrote: »

Why does this make you say OMG.

Doesn't really shock me too much to be honest, was more a point of the other thread containing further, definitely more shocking photographs, which I didn't feel were quite right to post in this "OMG thread".

melekalikimaka

Neasha wrote: »

Why does this make you say OMG.

It was the most striking image I have seen on this thread, the article with it is very strong

Thecageyone

eas wrote: »

story > http://alt.tnt.tv/specials/moi/photo_boston.html

I was thinking 'shopped' before reading the story. I think that's definitely the most 'OMG' image in here.

sineadw

Something similar

Darren Liddle, a city trader, committed suicide by leaping from the 19th floor of the HILTON Hotel, Park Lane, London. An inquest into his death heard that he was driven to suicide by the pressures of work. Photograph by Leon McGowran, September 2007

Thecageyone

The blood on the window from his hand :eek: He obviously punched the window first?

I always find pictures like that disturbing, the last moments of a person's life, the horror on their faces.

sineadw

Actually, there were a series of portraits from one of the labour camps in Cambodia I saw once - images of people just before they were executed. There was one in that I still remember, even though I only saw it on the screen for maybe 3 seconds. I must see if I can find it.

Freddie59

melekalikimaka wrote: »

It was the most striking image I have seen on this thread, the article with it is very strong

Agree 100%. The sheer sadness emanating from it is powerful. Poor woman.:(

superflyninja

hmmm I hope to see some striking images that are not death related! There is an image I would post if i could remember the photographer's name. though it is NSFW. It was of a woman in BW with light coming in the slats of a blind on a door or window i think. Its quite a famous shot. anybody know it?

joeKel73

From today/yesterday's news...

questioner

melekalikimaka wrote: »

It was the most striking image I have seen on this thread, the article with it is very strong

agreed, its an incredible image - very moving. I dont know what it is about the image, to me there's a sense of dignity about her, its more than that though. The marine in the background, the illumination from the screen its a heartbreaking picture. It not shock photography which comprises a large amount of the PTSTW thread, its the impact on ordinary life of events beyond our control and how someone is left to pick up the pieces whilst everyone else forgets.

jpb1974

dazftw wrote: »

Most recently. In a photographic way

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nfl-fan/4507589276/

Just spotted this - cheers dazftw!

kelly1

This is a stunning photo:

magicbastarder

i was in london seven years ago, and there were big poster sized ads with this picture up all over the tube - incredibly striking when blow up to that size.

thefly

Chorcai

Care to explain that one ?

thefly

Chorcai wrote: »

Care to explain that one ?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055962491&page=2

elven

I know people are getting hacked off that this thread is taking a turn into discussing film vs digital and there's less OMG pics so scroll past this if you are.

Otherwise...

This is very true. Photography is becoming more easily available to anyone who wants to try it, and with technically astute people nowadays its also very easy for them to create something with a "wow" "cool" look. You don't need to be very smart to get good at digital photography. It's just too easy!

Depends on your interpretation of 'good'. If it's just that tacky wow, cool thing, it's not actually good, and therefore you have no point. If you think that's a problem, your problem is obviously seeing past those for the actual good stuff.

If you really want to see the "art" of capturing an image you really need to go back to film photography. Go back to when little johnny didn't have a 5000000 GB Xtreme 6 million memory card to make as many mistakes as he likes. He had his little box brownie back in the 1900's and he had to actually put a lot of effort in if he wanted something out of it.

Effort going in does not automatically mean quality coming out. Some people can be predisposed to working with particular tools and therefore someone who is crap with digital may be great with film, and vice versa. This does not grant inherent quality to those results obtained with what you consider to be the medium with the most constraints.

Not saying digital is bad its just Iv'e found a photograph produced from film will be nearly always better than a digital photograph. In a photographic way that is.l

Define 'better', please.

What are the circumstances of the exceptions to your 'nearly always' rule?

There's more thought that goes into it with film before any shot is taken. You have whatever 12, 24 or 36 shots to get it right. Compared to digital which is a lot more.

Tell that to Garry Winogrand.

If I'm using a 5d with a 2gb card and shooting raw, giving me 60 pictures, tell me how i'm going to think about that less than someone with two 36exp rolls of film?

elven

sineadw wrote: »

Actually, there were a series of portraits from one of the labour camps in Cambodia I saw once - images of people just before they were executed. There was one in that I still remember, even though I only saw it on the screen for maybe 3 seconds. I must see if I can find it.

Do you think it's the photography of the situation that struck you, or just the situation itself?

magicbastarder

elven wrote: »

If I'm using a 5d with a 2gb card and shooting raw, giving me 60 pictures, tell me how i'm going to think about that less than someone with two 36exp rolls of film?

at the risk of adding to the 'film vs. digital' debate, the difference is that you can theoretically take as many shots as the battery allows and still not fill the card, because you can delete when using digital.

the_monkey

magicbastarder wrote: »

i was in london seven years ago, and there were big poster sized ads with this picture up all over the tube - incredibly striking when blow up to that size.

This crap won a prize ??

magicbastarder

i think it was commended more so than won a prize.

sineadw

magicbastarder wrote: »

i was in london seven years ago, and there were big poster sized ads with this picture up all over the tube - incredibly striking when blow up to that size.

Does anyone know who did the Barnardos poster with the kid that's been up for ages? Or is it ISPCC? Portrait shot of a boy. I do a double take whenever I see it..

sineadw

elven wrote: »

Do you think it's the photography of the situation that struck you, or just the situation itself?

Not sure TBH. I haven't been able to find any reference to them. It was a freaky image though. Just the one in particular.

sineadw

the_monkey wrote: »

This crap won a prize ??

Why is it crap? (honest question..)

the_monkey

sineadw wrote: »

Why is it crap? (honest question..)

Well, it isn't from a photographers point of view - I just don't like it ...:o


Surely there were better portraits to beat that one ?

sineadw

the_monkey wrote: »

Well, it isn't from a photographers point of view - I just don't like it ...:o

Fair enough!

Promac

I'd agree there - the portrait isn't particularly amazing. The model is striking and the colour treatment enhances that but the portrait itself isn't much to talk about.

Having said that - it is a departure from the standard black background and too many wrinkles shot that people seem to go for too much.

magicbastarder

i have the book from the exhibition, and it's the cover image - probably one of those that loses impact at small scale; it's quite striking at A4 size, and amazing at five-foot-tall poster size.