In pictures: Gordon Brown's last moments inside No 10

Paddysnapper said:
No! If as a pro you couldn't do better than that you should hang your boots up, I'm positive I could have got them a lot tidier with a P&S:lol:
Click to expand...

correct me if I'm wrong but I can't actually find a thread you've started where you've shown any of your shots?
 
grum said:
So when someone misses a complete sitter you've never said 'I could have done better then that'?



Why not?
Click to expand...

Nope because i know im **** at football and can't hit a cows arse with a banjo.

And unless Gordon brown has a hidden talent as a leading Photojournalist (and therefore is actually good at something) i still say its not a valid comparison
 
grum said:
So when someone misses a complete sitter you've never said 'I could have done better then that'?

Why not?
Click to expand...

I might have mumbled it under my breathe, or joked about it with my mates (who all know my footballing talent is zero). However that is entirely different from someone seriously stating that they could do better, in writing, on an internet forum.. without any :D:p:lol:;):naughty: after it!

I go to see loads of local bands play.. I often hear a note out, but I don't complain.. I'd give my left leg to even be able to think about playing as good as they do!
 
Can I just say that I'm not now (and have never been) a photojournalist, but I don't think I could have made a better job of it.
 
Rovers_Andy said:
And unless Gordon brown has a hidden talent as a leading Photojournalist (and therefore is actually good at something) i still say its not a valid comparison
Click to expand...

Huh? :shrug:

You say no-one can comment on the photos unless they've done pro photo gigs themselves - my point is that people comment on things all the time that they haven't themselves done professionally. Are you not allowed to say you don't like a certain band unless you've made an album yourself? Can you not say a TV programme is a bit weak unless you yourself have previously made a better one. Etc etc - it's a silly argument.
 
purpleclouds said:
There is a fox thread over in the nature section awaiting your witty comments ;)
Click to expand...

I did release one from a snare a while back, honest, I did............:D

I like reading threads like this, it helps put things in perspective..........:)
 
fracster said:
I did release one from a snare a while back, honest, I did............:D

I like reading threads like this, it helps put things in perspective..........:)
Click to expand...

I do like re-reading them in the morning once I've had a sleep.. for the same reason :lol:
 
Rovers_Andy said:
Was that as bait for the buzzards :D
Click to expand...

No, it was alive just.The snare hadn`t been checked for days and though i`m no fox lover,I don`t like cruelty,so I let her go............:help:
 
jamesb84 said:
:cuckoo: Quite...I've never heard such a bunch of twaddle...

Martin was trying to convey moods and moments...not works of art.

There's no way on earth that he would've been allowed to set up lighting etc. so he's done what he could.

As for the comment about the Nick Clegg behind the scenes ones...the polling day ones are from Dan Chung who is one of the most respected photographers in the country...and again would have been dealing with limited equipment and limited conditions.

At the end of the day, these guys have done a job of documenting the process...if you all could do better, then why don't you next time? Follow your favoured local candidate around and do the same thing. Would love to see the results.
Click to expand...

I know, I was with Dan on 2 of the four occasions that I photographed Clegg during this election. I didn't say they were rubbish - I said Argles were better.

Dan is an excellent photographer but is definitely more skilled with his video work now than his earlier photography work, IMO.
 
1. I think all this 'I could have done better talk is pathetic'.
2. I thought you weren't allowed to discuss a picture when the the photographer wasn't here to respond/defend themselves?
3. So much rubbish from people who have never produced work like this.
4. I still think they are great shots - telling a story - and worth a 1,000 words each!
 
He looks like George Bush in some of them. Sure he isn't a clone gone wrong?
 
I see this thread has gone to the dogs again...
 
Shall we throw some political balance into the scene then.....we live in interesting times indeed, not only do we have one mans last day, we have 2 others first days....and on flickr for crying out loud! :eek: :lol:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/number10gov/sets/72157624046715990/



and for the record, I doubt I could get some of the shots shown already under that kind of pressure and as they look pretty well exposed, someone obviously did, perhaps we should just accept them for the record that they are. After all, recording moments is what all photographers are about isn't it. Wish my standards, ability and contacts were such that I got such a chance as any of these.
 
I believe that these shots should be viewed as a series of images, rather than 'one off shots' and in my opinion they work very well as a story board of the events ......
 
Sectionate said:
good to see his is like most dads round the country and has his kids pictures bluetacked to the wall...

And I also wish my ceilings at home were double my height!

Pics don't do much for me either...
Click to expand...

Wait til you have to change a lightbulb. ;)

When you're stretching on your tiptoes, torch in mouth in the pitch dark, on a swiveling office chair, on a soft bed, trying to screw in a new lightbulb it's not quite as fun...:lol:

trencheel303 said:
I absolutely love the decor and style in there - buildings like that fascinate me.

Photographically the pictures are quite average though - some aren't even level.
Click to expand...

Me too, I've only ever seen inside in a couple of photos and it always amazes me how big it is inside, like a real life TARDIS.
 
Yv said:
Shall we throw some political balance into the scene then.....we live in interesting times indeed, not only do we have one mans last day, we have 2 others first days....and on flickr for crying out loud! :eek: :lol:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/number10gov/sets/72157624046715990/



and for the record, I doubt I could get some of the shots shown already under that kind of pressure and as they look pretty well exposed, someone obviously did, perhaps we should just accept them for the record that they are. After all, recording moments is what all photographers are about isn't it. Wish my standards, ability and contacts were such that I got such a chance as any of these.
Click to expand...

Personally those shots look a damn sight better than the ones in the OP, however they look a lot more staged as well, along with not holding as much emotion.
 
grum said:
Well you like to offer your unfriendly criticism of other people's pics, do you ever post any of your own?
Click to expand...
Please find a link as to where you imagine I have made any criticism about 'other peoples pics', let alone any that is 'unfriendly'.

However - since I only take pictures with film cameras (other than snaps with my phone for eBay sales and the like) I don't have a scanner that works on my new Mac and am not in the slightest bit bothered that I don't 'post' any of them anyway as I take photographs for my own pleasure - not yours. Okay?

This does not stop me, or others, questioning the critics. Moaning that an image isn't 'level' while ignoring it's subject suggests to me that the critic is missing the point. By a mile.
 
Just to put things in perspective a bit....
There has been a lack of really really good election photographs for the past few elections because everything (or nearly everything) is staged managed by PR and election officials, making sure the leaders are shown at their best.
The last election campaign was one of the most boring I've seen, apart from the bigot comment there were very few decent stories and picture opportunities. One picture can do a lot of damage to the election campaign, who remembers the picture of Hague kissing a baby in 2001 (same hair!)

It could also be that the papers have sacked most of their best photographers and they are now busy shooting PR...

The picture in the palace is perfect, what more can you do? Correctly exposed, in focus and out to the picture desks within minutes. The Queen isn't going to pose for you so you have to get the shot with eyes open and nice expressions, not something I would look forward to doing....
 
Voyager said:
They have been published.
Click to expand...

and thank goodness they have. :)

Those who say they could do better with a P&S I'm afraid are simply highlighting their own lack of knowledge (IMHO) There are some tricky exposures in there made harder by using a wide angle (exactly how would you meter for a backlit subject on your P&S and how do you get the flash to illuminate evenly shooting that wide again?) Oh and don't forget to make sure the flash does not reflect in the windows while you are there. :)

There are some exceptionally skillful shots in there with, as AWP pointed out, some very subtle fill flash. The technical aptitude in this case oversides the aesthetic. The aesthetic is simply what is in front of that lens and the photographer has no control over that. Thankfully he is in control of whatever camera he's using and has demonstrated that very well indeed.

As a record of an important moment in history, well, he was there, we weren't!
 
Let's be honest here, they are ok shots and they do document the scene.

My main beef with them is the lens choice. If you don't have time to fanny around changing gear, at least put something on with a bigger range that might have allowed for a few more interesting close ups of Gordy's big head amongst more general wideons to capture the scene.

Also, I hate being ultra picky (but I will be seeing as that's the way this thread is going:)) but if it was me I would have at least straightened the verticals on some of the shots after, as for those types of wider simple shot it's a bit off putting. That's assuming he had time/opportunity to pp, if not then fair enough...
 
AliB said:
and thank goodness they have. :)

Those who say they could do better with a P&S I'm afraid are simply highlighting their own lack of knowledge (IMHO) There are some tricky exposures in there made harder by using a wide angle (exactly how would you meter for a backlit subject on your P&S and how do you get the flash to illuminate evenly shooting that wide again?) Oh and don't forget to make sure the flash does not reflect in the windows while you are there. :)

There are some exceptionally skillful shots in there with, as AWP pointed out, some very subtle fill flash. The technical aptitude in this case oversides the aesthetic. The aesthetic is simply what is in front of that lens and the photographer has no control over that. Thankfully he is in control of whatever camera he's using and has demonstrated that very well indeed.

As a record of an important moment in history, well, he was there, we weren't!
Click to expand...

Exactly, and don't forget the dark lord Mandleson sucks all the light from his surroundings.. ;) I bet it all just happened and he grabbed the shots, then got them to the paper/agency. There's no nice time delay these days for newspapers with news channels running 24 hours a day.


Anyone see the papers this morning. Most lead with the garden conference picture of Cameron and Clegg, but it's interestign to see the different aspects of the shots, some with heads in the picture, different angles etc.
 
Dangleman said:
I would have at least straightened the verticals on some of the shots after, as for those types of wider simple shot it's a bit off putting. That's assuming he had time/opportunity to pp, if not then fair enough...
Click to expand...
I don't think they would - Newspaper types are a bit careful about publishing altered images as news.

It is not the same as magazine/editorial images.
 
I'm surprised the vertical haven't been straightened. Don't know many togs who don't do minor pp. Unless sent on a phojo immediately. He may have just not noticed in the rush i guess. As for lens maybe he wasnt allowed flash so just had a 24L or similar
 
Every picture that was taken there has far greater value. Bear in mind not everyone can be privileged to witness the history.
 
DDP said:
If these shots weren't taken in Downing Street and didn't feature any important people I think we'd all be saying they're a bit poo.

They all seem a bit weak to me.
Click to expand...

I think that is probably a fair summary.

If you can divorce the occasion from the output, these are snapshots with no artistic merit - but then that isn't the point of these shots. I don't think they should be "critiqued" in that sense.
 
Voyager said:
And what do you think of these?
Click to expand...

At these 3 of those are fairly incompetent due to use of wide angle on non-wide angle friendly subjects, or people cropped at the shoulders or poor positioning from the photographer.

There are only of interest because of the people involved.

Most are good. But there really are some shockers in there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top