Ramadan Pictures

Nice to see some positive images of the Muslim faith for a change :)

No33 was my favorite :thumbs:

Steve
 
Photography don't get much better - some absolutely sensational shots there.
 
Moving to TP as there are no pictures in the thread for the sharing section.

Thanks for bumping the thread though. I enjoyed looking through those images.
 
MashaAllah, these are absolutely fantastic images.
Never crossed my mind to try to capture moments during Ramadaan, and now looking at all these stunning images the seeds have been sown. So many times we come across moments worthy of capture but just fail to realise it.
The #36 for me was heart warming and touched my soul. Its the look in the little girl's face and the expression of her eyes looking towards her left far away and the plate of food in front of her. Her face and the state of her clothings clearly depicts the poverty she endures and what almost brought tears to my eyes is the thought that perhaps she doesn't know what hope is.

Thank you for posting the link
 
Fantastic pics thanks for sharing. The only pics i got in Ramadan were of my 1 year old twins all dressed up on Eid :)
 
Boston.com's whole picture section is incredible, i spent the good part of an hour the other day just going through each set. Amazing
 
I thought they were great, linked this elsewhere and someone come back with...

I'm curious - why do you think those are good shots? Some of them, yes, but the editor who selected them should have his glasses replaced.

I mean, apart from the cultural insensitivity of photographing people at their most holy ceremonies of a religion which prohibits making images...

(1) is a decent portrait, but nothing special - perhaps a little more space below the guy's hands?

(2) is not even a decent sunset; apart from anything else it's two light in what should be silhouette.

(3) is reasonable, but if the subject is the shadow, that's what ought to be in focus

(4) appears to have been artificially softened - perhaps in photoshop or similar. There's no reason why that couldn't be pin-sharp from front to back. That's assuming that you consider the distortions caused by the wide angle lens acceptable, of course. The sharpness zone is completely uncharacteristic of any lens known.

(5) the area to which the eye is naturally drawn is out of focus. Presumably an autofocus on the camera has decided the first burger is the place to look at, not where the hands and tools are all pointing.

(6) Another focus on the wrong thing; the lamp behind the fellow is in focus, not the chap himself.

(7) Clichéd but acceptable.

(8) Lovely portrait, though once again the autofocus has chosen the lamp and not the child's face. And what's with the colour correction? Has the photographer not heard of filters?

(9) A bit flat and low contrast, but otherwise acceptable. If I must.

(10) Excellent. Finally someone is using depth of focus to concentrate the viewer's gaze in the right place.

Should I go on? (11) through (27) - nothing special; snaps. No apparent attempt at composition, and the focus point is all over the place. Though (18) at least brought his tripod, shame about the composition - that tower from the mosque comes out pin sharp and rather disturbs from the sensation of motion about the Kaballah.

(28) has the best chance yet. The framing could have been changed to move the boy to the right, but other than that, there's little wrong with it.

(29) Could have been a cracker - good colour, good exposure, but once again the focus is in the wrong place. It's about an inch further forward than it should be...

(36) isn't bad, though the picture is underexposed.

(39) has another classic autofocus mistake - why isn't the hand in focus?

(40) has no excuse - it's not even level. It's also underexposed.

(45) is a much better silhouette - excellent.


Obviously definition of good photos differs from person to person, but these suffer from fundamental errors and most are down to the camera deciding things that the photographer should be deciding.

As you point out upthread, turn off the automation and do some thinking for yourself. If (generic) you don't have an image in mind before you push that button, everything good that you get is accidental, serendipitous.

If on the other hand, you do know what you want to photograph, if you know what the image will look like to the viewer when you've finished it; if you know where the focal plane is going to be and what the darkest and lightest part of the image will be - then you're on your way to being a photographer.

All a modern camera does is take decisions away from you. One interesting result of that: long observation suggests that most amateur photographers can produce about two good photos a day. Doesn't matter whether it's electric, 35mm, 70mm, or 5*4 plate - two photos. Difference is that the smaller and easier the format, the more crap pictures get taken. The two 5*4 shots are probably the only two images taken - because you have to think about every step of the way with that kind of camera.



Hmmm thoughts? Valid points of over critica, especially on the technical side?

Would like to hear from pro's ideally, as obv as an amatuer I'd be very happy with most of those shots.
 
Interesting looking at the critique above and the pictures.

Seems like an example of someone seeing only the technical aspects of the picture and not seeing the content. I've been guilty of doing that myself in the past. If you look for problems sometimes that is all you see.

I looked at these as an interesting view into something I know very little about. I saw some faults when I viewed them but I was too busy looking at the content to dwell on them.
 
shabba said:
I thought they were great, linked this elsewhere and someone come back with...

I'm curious - why do you think those are good shots? Some of them, yes, but the editor who selected them should have his glasses replaced.

I mean, apart from the cultural insensitivity of photographing people at their most holy ceremonies of a religion which prohibits making images...




Hmmm thoughts? Valid points of over critica, especially on the technical side?

Would like to hear from pro's ideally, as obv as an amatuer I'd be very happy with most of those shots.
Click to expand...

Goodness me, this seems to have been written by someone who really cannot look at an image and just say.. nice, without going through all the technical details and angles and having to criticise something. Did you link it asking specifically for C&C or you just put it up there for people to view and appreciate it?

I didn't even bother to comb through all the details but just the beginning of it was enough to put me off reading. Why on earth does he or she think the photographer suffers from cultural insensitivity? :thinking: So strange.

I would rather just look at the images and admire them if they really attract me. Why go on combing and looking for technical flaws? Is something not good if it has technical flaws but appeals to the senses?
 
Last edited:
shabba said:
I thought they were great, linked this elsewhere and someone come back with...

I'm curious - why do you think those are good shots? Some of them, yes, but the editor who selected them should have his glasses replaced.


.... Edit. removed the rest. excuse me, just making it tidy.
Click to expand...

:thumbs:


Phew! I thought I was gonna be the only one.

2, 3, 6, 7(kinda), 10, 11, 12, 15, 18, 19, 22, 23, 25, 26 29 ad 44 do nothing for me and are not great shots just poor photos of stuff.

A few belters in their like 33 but over all Im quite disappointed
 
Interesting debate.
My opinion is I guess supported by the fact I live in deep East London and views like those in the photos I've numbered (give a miss-look or miss I’ve the point or idea on one or two maybe) I’ve seen a hundred times a day, especially during Ram ...they are not new or different or original to me.

Amin. I can't help but think both the photographer and the [FONT=&quot]editor[/FONT] of the list suffers from cultural insensitivity myself lol. ;)
 
Last edited:
Forbiddenbiker said:
Amin. I can't help but think both the photographer and the [FONT=&quot]editor[/FONT] of the list suffers from cultural insensitivity myself lol. ;)
Click to expand...

You mean the photographers, right? :), those were taken by various photographers..

Well, may be I need to get my sensitivity scale checked because as much as I attempt to look from various angles I still fail to notice were the cultural insensitivy lies within the realms of those photos ;)

I go to mosques and really wouldn't mind a tog aiming the camera at me, gosh that would be my five minutes of fame anyway :lol:
 
I thought it was a bit harsh, I like others just enjoyed the images.

I do find myself getting hung up on technical things though, with my own images and those of others. Cropping off bits of peoples heads drives me mad etc.

Just thought I'd see what others thoughts were, appreciate the replies. For me I want to say an image is about the image it captures, as long as its half decent on the tech side then that is good enough.
 
shabba said:
I thought they were great, linked this elsewhere and someone come back with...

I'm curious - why do you think those are good shots? Some of them, yes, but the editor who selected them should have his glasses replaced.

<snip stuff about focus, etc.>
Click to expand...

Reminds me of Mario's Bike on Flickr

[an oldie but a goodie :)]
 
zulupentax said:
You mean the photographers, right? :), those were taken by various photographers..

Well, may be I need to get my sensitivity scale checked because as much as I attempt to look from various angles I still fail to notice were the cultural insensitivy lies within the realms of those photos ;)

I go to mosques and really wouldn't mind a tog aiming the camera at me, gosh that would be my five minutes of fame anyway :lol:
Click to expand...


Yes ... :D

I&#8217;m intending it to cover the naive beginner look of many of the shots, I don&#8217;t bother looking at the technical much myself, Shots can be technically rubbish but still hold to be an excellent photograph. Although I agree with much of the technical issues that shabba has pointed out, but quickly going through them initially I just thought they are many poor shots

It&#8217;s the amateur point of view, take the second shot for example, its some bloke awkwardly pointing a finger with a pretty sky in the background &#8230;So What! ..I can pop out this evening and take that shot, it tells me nothing about Ramadan, it is just self indulgent and meaningless. (Nice otherwise.)

Many of the shots fall into this cat for me and that&#8217;s why I could call the makers of this article insensitive to what really happening ..there in some sort of naive trance if they think that&#8217;s a good representation of the event. More like a representation of there own awakening if you get me, maybe, not, I&#8217;m pondering it. .
 
Interesting that someone would go to that level of technical critique when you think about the context of the shots (made by photojournalists/AP togs), as well as where and by who it has been put together and published and for what reason.

What I take from the images is the story that the picture tells (along with the caption) and I think in general that story is well captured and very emotive.

And I don't say that just for this set but for the numerous other sets on Boston.com's 'big picture' section which I recommend people take a look at...unless of course you're just looking for technical analysis.
 
Last edited:
Forbiddenbiker said:
take the second shot for example, its some bloke awkwardly pointing a finger with a pretty sky in the background …So What! ..I can pop out this evening and take that shot, it tells me nothing about Ramadan, it is just self indulgent and meaningless. (Nice otherwise.)
Click to expand...

I quite like that shot, and strange enough to me it meant something.

And for me I couldn't pop out this evening and take that shot.
But may be that's the difference then, each one's perspective of interpreting things do differ, and also one's ability to emulate the shot might also weigh in in the differences how one looks at a shot. Unless it is a bad crop my technical views tend to take second plane to visual beauty. And again, as we all know beauty is a very relative term ;)
 
zulupentax said:
I quite like that shot, and strange enough to me it meant something.

And for me I couldn't pop out this evening and take that shot.
But may be that's the difference then, each one's perspective of interpreting things do differ, and also one's ability to emulate the shot might also weigh in in the differences how one looks at a shot. Unless it is a bad crop my technical views tend to take second plane to visual beauty. And again, as we all know beauty is a very relative term ;)
Click to expand...


Yes I agree to some degree, I&#8217;m not suggesting that its not a pretty shot.
I&#8217;m saying its not photographic journalism because it doesn't 'say' anything new....
Implying your own meaning to it in context with the web article and words written below the photo is one thing but shouldn't a good photograph speak for itself?

Like 33 does. ...without the boy looking that photo would have little impact compared. With him we can all see its story and its humour, no words are necessary.

Yeas sure its about perspectives, but inevitably good photo journalism is about story telling with just the photos contents.
 
Forbiddenbiker said:
I’m saying its not photographic journalism because it doesn't 'say' anything new....
Implying your own meaning to it in context with the web article and words written below the photo is one thing but shouldn't a good photograph speak for itself?

Like 33 does. ...without the boy looking that photo would have little impact compared. With him we can all see its story and its humour, no words are necessary.

Yeas sure its about perspectives, but inevitably good photo journalism is about story telling with just the photos contents.
Click to expand...

But what's isnt new to you will be new to someone else, its all relative. Practically everything in the world has been photographed, its just now being re-photographed and put to a new audience.

I disagree about the pictures speaking for themselves. I have just got back from Visa Pour L'Image where I viewed some of the best current photojournalism in my opinion. But 90% of the photographers had to have some sort of short essay with them, after all are we supposed to guess the place, circumstance, history? You wouldnt expect just one photograph to turn up in the newspaper with nothing beside it would you? :)

Photojournalism these days in my opinion is more than having a camera, you need to be able to write with your photographs. Most of the photographers I met had degrees in literature and social anthropology than photography, which is why I am now taking more writing based classes outside my current photography degree :bang:
 
Forbiddenbiker said:
Yeas sure its about perspectives, but inevitably good photo journalism is about story telling with just the photos contents.
Click to expand...

Adam, we will be all night here debating this :), and I have a grin on my face here while I comment on this again, need to finish processing my glass pics but this debate just draws me in :).

Each individual's perspective is based upon their own experiences, their past, or the way they are conditioned to look at something and interpret it, consequently what that image conveys to me is or could be something totally different from what it conveys to you, and in this particular instance it really does. You really picked up a great example here about the #2 image. For me it has a different significance.

Not sure exactly about photo journalism though, that I will stil have to think about it :).
We are talking about images that one sees and goes wow! but it would be very naive of us if we thought that there wouldn't be some who would go like Hmm! what is it all about this simple image? :)
 
Vic said:
But what's isnt new to you will be new to someone else, its all relative. Practically everything in the world has been photographed, its just now being re-photographed and put to a new audience.
Click to expand...

No sure, I was intending to emphasize the word say in that sentence rather than the word new. :suspect: ;)

Vic said:
I disagree about the pictures speaking for themselves. I have just got back from Visa Pour L'Image where I viewed some of the best current photojournalism in my opinion. But 90% of the photographers had to have some sort of short essay with them, after all are we supposed to guess the place, circumstance, history? You wouldnt expect just one photograph to turn up in the newspaper with nothing beside it would you? :)
Click to expand...


Yes we are supposed to guess. Its called context.

lol, I’m not sure why you put that video up, for me it contained a few stills of some quality photojournalism as you said... each one speaking for themselves which you disagreed with initially and then agreed with in the paragraph below. :thinking:



Vic said:
Photojournalism these days in my opinion is more than having a camera, you need to be able to write with your photographs. Most of the photographers I met had degrees in literature and social anthropology than photography, which is why I am now taking more writing based classes outside my current photography degree :bang:
Click to expand...
 
zulupentax said:
Adam, we will be all night here debating this :), and I have a grin on my face here while I comment on this again, need to finish processing my glass pics but this debate just draws me in :).

Each individual's perspective is based upon their own experiences, their past, or the way they are conditioned to look at something and interpret it, consequently what that image conveys to me is or could be something totally different from what it conveys to you, and in this particular instance it really does. You really picked up a great example here about the #2 image. For me it has a different significance.

Not sure exactly about photo journalism though, that I will stil have to think about it :).
We are talking about images that one sees and goes wow! but it would be very naive of us if we thought that there wouldn't be some who would go like Hmm! what is it all about this simple image? :)
Click to expand...

You started it. ... i was just saying what I didn't like... :p

Good points ...next time then. :D

Vic's link has some good examples for me ...I also love Flickers most interesing street, not everyones cuppa. ... here
 
So your saying that we have to guess photojournalism images!? Oh dear what a misinformed world we would live in if we did ;)

So if you have an image of a boy emaciated your supposed to guess the country, the cicrumstances behind it? I would love to find any photojournalist who would agree with you. You NEED words with images in photojournalism, it isnt conceptual art where the viewer decides, the photojournalist is informing the viewer.

FYI the link was just for info on the festival :)
 
Last edited:
I&#8217;m not saying you need to no, that comment was a bit sweeping, I&#8217;m saying it good photo journalism to get the message accross without words.

Anyway...you've already contradicted yourself in the previous paragraph without response? ... you are getting that these words are just my opinions aren't you? ..cos you seem to be taking offence to them. ;)
 
Last edited:
Forbiddenbiker said:
cos you seem to be taking offence to them. ;)
Click to expand...

I prefer passionate ;)

I’m not saying you need to no, that comment was a bit sweeping, I’m saying it good photo journalism to get the message accross without words.
Click to expand...

I do agree with you 100% in the sense that the picture should always be 100 times more powerful than the words. It should speak for itself in that way but your comment was a bit sweeping so thats what I was referring to.

I think the thing about the boston globe pictures is that they are the editors choice and not a reflection of the photographers story. I would imagine the photographer would have built a solid project that tells a story in their own way but then any editor could pull out their weakest one to tell their own story.

I also love Flickers most interesing street, not everyones cuppa. ... here
Click to expand...

Great link :thumbs: Streephers is also good.
 
I loved the whole lot.

I'm trying to arrange a timelapse in a mosque either (whitechapel or regents park) on a friday. I'm planning to set up 2 cameras, one at ground level and one up top. The one up top will be manned by me and will have a very slow pan of the mosque. I am hoping to capture all the prayer times from Fajr (early morning) to Isha (late evening).

Should be an interesting result :)
 
hsuffyan said:
I loved the whole lot.

I'm trying to arrange a timelapse in a mosque either (whitechapel or regents park) on a friday. I'm planning to set up 2 cameras, one at ground level and one up top. The one up top will be manned by me and will have a very slow pan of the mosque. I am hoping to capture all the prayer times from Fajr (early morning) to Isha (late evening).

Should be an interesting result :)
Click to expand...
Last time I dropped by just to take few shots from outside the main building, in the compound the security guard stopped me and told me that I needed to go upstairs and obtain authorisation as I was using a DSLR. This was at the Regents Park mosque. Even though I was right out at the compound near the gates he demanded that I stopped.
Went upstairs and spoke to the lady and she said I had to fill a form etc and then it would be allowed. And if it was for commercial purposes then there would be a fee, otherwise it was ok.
So don't forget to go to the office and get all the required forms filled etc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top