The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Prague - Couples at night [Nocti pics]

vieri

Well-known member
- On Charles Bridge (1)


- On Charles Bridge (2)


- On Kampa Island (1)


- On Kampa Island (2)


Leica MP, Noctilux @ f1 (or thereabouts), Fuji Neopan 1600 @ 1600, 510-Pyro. C&C as always are very welcome.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Vieri Great shots of Prague at night. I was there last october for a week and was shooting in the same locations. But....my Noctilux and Summiluxes were both having a vacation in Solms. If you are still there or maybe going back a couple of other spots, About 1/4 mile from the bridge you will find a major train stop ..which is always interesting at night..especially so if it rains. The bridge is also good at day break ..you will meet several other photographers each morning as its the "signiture" image of Prague. Makes me want to go back this fall! Roger
 

HansAlbert

New member
Technical perfection aside, I stumble over an inconsistency in the first pic. We see a couple looking at something – the picturesque old town – that is for us out of focus. We cannot see distinctly what they conjointly admire in their state of increased sensibility, and therefore we cannot visually share their experience. This is a salient break with the tradition of images where the external viewer quasi is invited by the viewers inside the image to share the revelation of the depicted beauty. Is there a deeper meaning for this break or is it just the either–or of noctilux? Confer the couple in the second pic in this respect. They are concerned with each other, with the exchange of endearments, not with turning their attention to something else. In this case the focusing appears consistent and particularly harmonious with the position in the light of the lantern. Or is the first pic to be read ironically in the sense that the couple in love are only apparently looking at something beyond themselves or that amorous glances see the outer world only out of focus?
 

vieri

Well-known member
Vieri,
Lovely series. I particularly like on Charles Bridge 2.
Thank you Terry, glad you enjoyed :D

Nice series indeed! I like Kampa Island 1 :)
Thanks Jack, much appreciated :D

Me too Jack . Like that open space
I agree; excellent series. I also like the use of space. DR
Thank you guys, I also like to have room in my pics sometimes - I find myself (and maybe I also find it a general tendency) sometimes getting too close, and I feel this detracts a bit from telling the whole story. Glad you enjoyed :D

Wonderful photographs...

Do you have a project in mind or are these singles?

Todd
Todd, thanks for your comment - this is actually an ongoing project, I still haven't set an ending date to it though but there will be an exhibit (and maybe a book too). Thanks again!

Bravo Vieri!
Thank you!!

Very inspiring.
Thank you Cindy, I am flattered :eek:

Technical perfection aside, I stumble over an inconsistency in the first pic. We see a couple looking at something – the picturesque old town – that is for us out of focus. We cannot see distinctly what they conjointly admire in their state of increased sensibility, and therefore we cannot visually share their experience. This is a salient break with the tradition of images where the external viewer quasi is invited by the viewers inside the image to share the revelation of the depicted beauty. Is there a deeper meaning for this break or is it just the either–or of noctilux? Confer the couple in the second pic in this respect. They are concerned with each other, with the exchange of endearments, not with turning their attention to something else. In this case the focusing appears consistent and particularly harmonious with the position in the light of the lantern. Or is the first pic to be read ironically in the sense that the couple in love are only apparently looking at something beyond themselves or that amorous glances see the outer world only out of focus?
Hans, well spotted, and well analyzed as always. To me, the important part is their hugging and looking away, rather than the object of their looking; is our looking at them looking, rather than discovering what they are looking at. I do see your point, though I not necessarily find it a discrepancy or an inconsistency... Thanks again for looking and criticizing, much appreciated :D
 
Top