Carnevale 2009 third Sunday

[Orio]

5D with Distagon 1.4/35
50D with Sonnar 2.8/135 (except for last photo which is Planar 1.4/85)

http://www.oriofoto.net/temp/carn2009c/index.html

Enjoy and thanks for viewing
-

[poilu]

impressive series! great Carnevale!
the 135:2.8 rock on the 50D

[Mal1905]

Oh wow, there are some really gorgeous shots here Orio - and it's not all down to the wonderful glass either

[trifox]

wow! -- I have togo there!!!

Amazing //

Two lenses only ?? That's a superb !!

tf

[LucisPictor]

Again, so many good shots.

But this one is outstanding: http://www.oriofoto.net/temp/carn2009c/slides/c2009c_25_50D_IMG_4831.html

And this one is a masterpiece: http://www.oriofoto.net/temp/carn2009c/slides/c2009c_15_50D_IMG_4820.html

WOW!

[patrickh]

Orio
You never cease to amaze - that is a stunning series. One can easily imagine being there and you really capture the "smell" of the event. I agree with Carsten on favourites. But all are magnificent.


patrickh

[Schnauzer]

Wow!! What a nice series. Very enjoyable.

Is the Nun really a Nun or dressed as a Nun?

[Katastrofo]

Yes, stunning series indeed! The one pic that leaps out from all others on
the page is 27, but I also like 31, 54 (for content, lol) and 55, simply
excellent work, Orio!

Also, agree with Carsten about 15, truly marvelous shot!

[Orio]

Thank you everyone!
This might have been the last from this year, because the weather forecast for Sunday is not good

It is always very interesting for me to learn which pictures you prefer from a series of many. This helps me to see my work from a perspective that is different from mine. This is also the reason why I always indicate my preferences about the pictures of other people, thinking they might be interested the same.

Sometimes it happens that my preferred ones are also yours, but more often, it happens differently. In this case for instance, many seem to have a preference for the photos with the masks. Understandeably, because they are beautiful pieces of craftsman work. From my personal point of view, I am only partially happy with them. I feel they are OK, but I would have liked them to be more than that (more personal, more unseen). Unfortunately I did not have the time to experiment on them - you can not stop a parade to search for the best shooting angle or light. So they are captured as snaps, but I feel they would deserve to be photographed as still life - if you know what I mean.

On the other side, the pictures that I personally prefer were not mentioned, like the first two pictures, which I think are an incredibly lucky situation, because you have this allegorical character in the middle, and on the left, you have an old woman, and on the right, a grotesque mask which looks nearly identical in the features to the old woman, and they are doing exactly the same pose, in the first one they are posing as profile, in the second picture they are posing in front, and they are the two faces of the one reality, the old age, with the real on the one side and the grotesque on the other, and the tragic touch is that the real face looks possibly even more grotesque than the mask. Which makes for a very bitter reflection about the aging, placed in the funniest context of the carnival - this is a contrast that I really love.
Another picture that I like is the third one: the running man is not a mask, in the morning there was a marathon (real marathon, 42 dot something kilometers) which started from my hometown and ended in Busseto. The person is a late runner, who arrived when the carnival was already started. So a masqueraded guy started to run along with him, making him look in turn like if it was a masked character himself. That was really strange and also somehow cruel and even a bit crude looking I think - but that's life, we don't always have to show the bright side of things, don't we?

Finally another picture that I like is #12 - this shows something that I see very often with the majorettes and I always find fascinating, that is, girls that are not really pretty as we mean that, but they want to be majorettes anyway, they don't care and do their best in spite of the fact that they are inevitably compared with other girls that are really beautiful - with no other merit than being what mother nature gave them. I really admire the girls like picture #12 because they don't accept that and want to work hard on their skills, and are not afraid to take part to the parade where, they are also exposed to possible negative comments by some idiot people (although 99,9% of the people who take part to the carnival, are all very kind, there is always the possibility of some idiot now and then).
Thinking about it, with the majorettes most of the time I notice that those who are really beautiful, seem to be shy about that, while those that are not, seem to find more courage also in the performance - by looking at the thousands faces of a carnival, there is always some human histories to be read between the lines. This is what I find so fascinating about this event. I will miss it a lot until next year.

@ Ron: the nun is a fake, everyone in the carnival becomes someone else - and in doing that, in playing a role, they can take outside a part of themselves that they have to hide during the normal life. This does not always happen, but when it does, it is really interesting to watch.

@ Bill: I was also very interested in the content of #54 Unfortunately, the poor girl from Manaus (it was a band of dancers and drummers coming from Manaus, in the Amazones) was always surrounded by a swarm of leecherous photograpers and overexcited spectators, which made the task of photographing her almost impossible: this is the only one photo that I could grab of her, and of another similarly "equipped" dancer, I could not take even one!

-

[Katastrofo]

Orio, are all these excellent photos going into some publication, book?

[LucisPictor]

[Orio]

[Carlsson]

Hi Orio, I see great pictures and since I have managed my first carnevale here in portugal, I know how difficult it is to capture what you like and to bring the atmosphere to the audience. To fight "against" the crowd and egoistic "professional" photographers with their 1meter L-lenses.
You did a very very good job on this.

[Orio]

[Carlsson]

Ok, then I got it right.

Yes I agree, but in my opinion you already did that in a lot of your pictures.
Since sunday I know how difficult it is. To see the image you are looking for, to focus it manual, the procession is moving without a rest, there are people in your shooting line and you are restricted to a position, pushed by people behind you

I know what you mean, most of my pictures I liked were not mentioned as favourites by my friends. When the hear carnavale they have already some pictures in mind, looking for colors and skin.

[Orio]

[Carlsson]

I agree, this I would call our main advantage, we don't need to take pictures for a wide audience, to sell it to the newspapers.
You can seek for the personal emotions, happy and tragic moments.

#34 for example is an inspiring image to me, you are absolutely right, her floppy rabbit ears (in contrast to the upright others) , her teeth and her sad look. But it takes time to see all the details, to combine them, I can "dive" into the image. Then I ask myself, why is she sad or perhaps bored, everyone is smiling, she's not, so why? Where is she with her mind? A big contrast to expected carneval pictures.

You saw it, pictured it, during the processing time you've learned to love it, for the details, message, contrast. Perhaps this is why our favourites are not the audience favourites.

I would bet that average joe (newspaper audience) will pass the complete gallery in 30 seconds. Not able to see what you had in mind when you took the image, not able to see the contrast. Not to mention the publisher who would have discarded the image, because it does not match the "carnevale", containing too much contrast. But fortunately you don't have to sell it and you can delevop your own style and vision of carnevale.

And perhaps I wrote too much

[Orio]

I don't think you write too much, only time when one writes too much is when he writes stupid things, which is not your case.

I think you are right when you write about the privilege of being able to photograph for yourself instead of for a job. Only a few very lucky ones can photograph what they like without restrictions and have their work published. In most cases, published photographers receive assignments and a task and that is what they have to deliver, with more or less margins of freedom but rarely with complete freedom.

Photographing following your instinct and culture has not only the advantage of freedom, but also the other advantage that you can work faster because you don't have to rationalize about things. I shoot very instinctively, and if I get to obtain photos like #1 and #2 is because my mind is naturally on that wavelenght (meaning I perceive these visual associations instinctively), I don't have to "construct" such I photograph, I just see it and take it (when it's there, of course).
This is what constitutes my vision and might be completely innatural for another person, who would have to think about it, construct the image rationally, and in most cases, miss the moment.

This is why I am a believer in instinctual photography - everyone of us has an instictual vision, that comes from his history, culture, education - it speaks of us. And that is what makes us personal, and different from all others.
Rationally contructed images, instead, speak more of a concept that might come from history, art currents, philosophy, or whatever, but indirectly. Which tends to make the images look impersonal (regardless of their technical qualities).

Of course this does not mean that every image that is taken instinctually, must be conserved. A critical examination phase must come afterwards, that leads to a selection. First the instinct, then the reason. Gauguin said that about the art of painting in the end of 19th century, i think it is a very true and valid assessment also for photography.

This is what I do, except for a few cases (for instance, the "ambience shots", where I photograph the spaces in order to allow the viewers to build an idea of the space the actions take place in to), my shooting happens on the instinctual level. It's only afterwards when I come back to the shots, that I evaluate the degree of success of each photos, what to keep and what to delete, how to frame, et c.
I choose this approach because it allows to keep being true to myself instead of planning my work based on expectations, or other people's aesthetical canons, et c.

-

[Orio]

[Orio]