The first day contained general information about composition with samples of work from Bresson, Eugene Smith and from Robert's work in Moldova. We had a mission of making pictures in the nearby Military Museum, select five best and discuss them afterwards, which I did as follows:
1.
This wasn't actually intended to be part of the five selected pictures — I've just mistaken the numbers. Robert said that the lowest part beneath the wheel contains no information and a continuation of the diagonal of the vehicle (on the top) would be much more informative. Fair enough.
Why would I delete this picture directly from my camera? It says nothing, the boy is blurry because of movement + too slow shutter speed, stupid details popping in and out — like the gun from mother's behind for example.
2.
Robert said: "Focus..." meaning that the image is blurred. It's because of motion + slow shutter speed.He also said that this is a better one with a strong part being the line of the wheel . I've selected it from a dozen of similar pictures. The blur is unacceptably strong. On the small camera screen it looked sharper. From a news photography editor's perspective it's a fail, of course.
3.
This one was passed fastly. My opinion is that I failed to show the inside of the vehicle (the curve line is the wheel of a military vehicle) thus making 80% of picture's area completely useless. A crop would save it from a composition point of view. The soldier's look is interesting, but more information is needed to give it a meaning. Fail.
4.
Everybody laughed.
5.
Robert said "This one is good. It catched the Henry Cartier Bresson moment". It was an encouraging exaggeration.
