[–] 2 points 4 months ago

The infrared look gives the landscape a strange, almost lunar calm. The white trees become the real subject, sitting between that heavy black sky and the wide, flattened field. What I like most is the scale: the sky wants to dominate everything, but the small line of trees holds its ground. A quiet image, but not polite. Thankfully.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    The repetition of the corrugated roof really carries the image. It almost crushes the wooden doors, which makes the whole scene feel heavier than a simple façade study. I like that it stays quiet: grey, worn, frontal, almost stubborn. The dark gap above the doors is the small break that keeps it from becoming just texture.

  • source
  • [–] [S] 2 points 4 months ago

    Thanks so much for taking the time to watch the video and comment on my work.

    That day was really just an erratic photo walk with my dog. There was no planned route, and everything I came across was completely accidental. A bit like going hunting, but in a much more pacifist way.

    As for getting close to people, I do feel comfortable shooting like that, although it’s certainly not the only kind of photography that interests me. So far, people haven’t taken it badly. In fact, I haven’t had a single moment where someone stopped me and asked for an explanation.

    You’re right that using a compact, discreet camera definitely helps. But I also work in a similar way with my Leica M10 Monochrom, as long as I’m using small lenses, usually 21mm, 28mm or 35mm.

    Anyway, I really appreciate the time you’ve spent looking at my work.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    Sharing this as a field note rather than a tutorial.

    One walk, a lot of weak frames, hard light, bad corners, and the few photographs that survived the edit.

    The part I’m interested in is not the heroic idea of “getting the shot”, but the dull, useful work before it: walking, missing, looking again, and cutting most of it away.

    Video: https://youtu.be/v-AXCoQT0eA

     

    Sharing this as a field note rather than a tutorial.

    One walk, a lot of weak frames, hard light, bad corners, and the few photographs that survived the edit.

    The part I’m interested in is not the heroic idea of “getting the shot”, but the dull, useful work before it: walking, missing, looking again, and cutting most of it away.

    Video: https://youtu.be/v-AXCoQT0eA

     

    Shot as a street portrait, but what interests me here is the imbalance: the face is close, dark, almost carved into the frame, while the city behind him is blown into white noise.

    It feels less like a portrait “of” someone and more like a small collision between a person and the street apparatus around him.

    I keep coming back to the hand at the jacket. Tiny gesture, large weather.

     

    I wrote a short Behind the Frame piece on Diez horas con Cristina García Rodero, the La Fábrica conversation book from the Archivo de Creadores series.

    What interests me is not only the subject matter, though her world of rituals, processions, masks, saints, crowds, animals and fatigue is already dense enough. It is the method: returning, waiting, staying inside discomfort until the scene stops behaving like a clean symbol.

    For street and documentary photographers, I think that is the useful part. Not copying Rodero’s look. That would probably produce loud, hollow photographs. The harder lesson is attention as pressure: looking until the first explanation breaks.

    https://streetsoul.me/2026/05/20/diez-horas-con-cristina-garcia-rodero-staying-until-the-image-changes/

    [–] [S] 2 points 5 months ago

    Thanks for taking the time to crop it. The portrait crop is cleaner, but I think it loses some of the pressure between the guide, the painting and the audience. The second crop gets closer to what I was trying to test: the guide sitting inside the crowd rather than being isolated from it.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] [S] 2 points 5 months ago

    Thanks, this is really useful. I was thinking of it less as a portrait and more as a street/museum scene where the guide, the painting and the audience all compete a bit. Your point about the crowd framing the guide without taking over is close to what I was hoping for. The flatter angle may be the real limitation here.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    A street procession caught in the moment it becomes aware of itself.

    There is the ritual: robes, candles, order. There is the photographer at the edge, turning it into spectacle. And there is the man in the foreground, looking back with exactly the amount of suspicion the scene deserves.

    Shot with Ricoh GR IV Monochrome.

     

    I’m interested in how much visual blockage a photograph can carry before it stops feeling layered and starts feeling cluttered.

    Here the foreground heads are dark and heavy, but they also place the viewer inside the crowd rather than outside the scene.

    The black and white edit flattens the museum space a little, which may help connect the painted figures, the guide, and the visitors.

    Would you crop or lift the foreground, or does the weight at the bottom make the image work?

     

    A museum guide was speaking in front of a formal group portrait while the visitors slowly became another group portrait around him.

    What caught me was the strange hierarchy: painted faces, listening faces, blocked faces, and one living figure trying to hold the room together.

    I kept the blacks heavy because I wanted the foreground to feel like a barrier, not just an audience.

    Does the crowd in the foreground make the frame stronger, or does it close the image too much?

    [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    The black and white does not decorate the scene; it roughens it. The food truck becomes a fluorescent wound in the night, a strip of light cutting through a street that offers no comfort.

    The figures are half-lost, the blacks nearly blocked, the information damaged. That damage is useful. This is not a clean night scene; it is glare, hunger, waiting, pavement, and a small transaction under bad light.

    Color would make it more specific. Black and white makes it harder, flatter, more brutal. Less food truck, more urban residue.

  • source
  • view more: next ›