Your "subject" will always be in front of your lens irrespective of where you are.
You can however shoot the "behind" of your "subject" but only if your "subject" has a "behind"
Some "subjects" don't have "behinds" such as for instance trees although it's perfectly possible to hide "behind" a tree.
I donno, Fred... You have raised a mildly interesting semantic point, but it's splitting hairs IMO. If I'm photographing racing yachts, for example, I might shoot from alongside, from in front, or from behind; showing the profile, the bow-on view, and the stern view, respectively. You get the idea. So....
I donno, Fred... You have raised a mildly interesting semantic point, but it's splitting hairs IMO. If I'm photographing racing yachts, for example, I might shoot from alongside, from in front, or from behind; showing the profile, the bow-on view, and the stern view, respectively. You get the idea. So....
Sure but even then the profile, the stern or whatever is still in front of your lens. Even if you shoot from above the subject is still in front of your lens.
But i didn't want to be a pain in the arse with this thread ;)
Sure but even then the profile, the stern or whatever is still in front of your lens. Even if you shoot from above the subject is still in front of your lens.
But i didn't want to be a pain in the arse with this thread ;)
Yah Yah Yah, but if I'm BEHIND a school bus on the highway, the bus is still in FRONT of me, now isn't it? You're getting your frames of reference all in a twist :-)
Sure but even then the profile, the stern or whatever is still in front of your lens. Even if you shoot from above the subject is still in front of your lens.
But i didn't want to be a pain in the arse with this thread ;)
Yah Yah Yah, but if I'm BEHIND a school bus on the highway, the bus is still in FRONT of me, now isn't it? You're getting your frames of reference all in a twist :-)
Yes the bus is still in front of you ...exactly what I was saying. A bus is one of those subjects that has a behind or rather a rear.
Fred, look at it this way. You pick "A Subject", you stand behind said subject. You then shoot your subject's behind. Now, whilst your subject's behind does in fact become "The Subject" of your photograph, you still shot "A Subject" from behind.
Sure but even then the profile, the stern or whatever is still in front of your lens.
Unless you frame your subject in a mirror, anything and everything will be in front of your lens.
The challenge is in reference to the subject, not the photographer. You are to shoot from behind your subject, as referenced by the subject, not you.
If you insist on having yourself as your frame of referrence I guess you can contrive to shoot your own behind, but I suspect it would not be well-received by the voters ... :-(
Fred, look at it this way. You pick "A Subject", you stand behind said subject. You then shoot your subject's behind. Now, whilst your subject's behind does in fact become "The Subject" of your photograph, you still shot "A Subject" from behind.
Yes and that's exactly the difference, you shot a subject from behind,(of course the subject must have a behind in the first place) but you did not "shoot from behind your subject" which is what the challenge asks you to do.
Fred, look at it this way. You pick "A Subject", you stand behind said subject. You then shoot your subject's behind. Now, whilst your subject's behind does in fact become "The Subject" of your photograph, you still shot "A Subject" from behind.
Yes and that's exactly the difference, you shot a subject from behind, but you did not "shoot from behind your subject" which is what the challenge asks you to do.
This reminds me of conversations I have with my 3 year old grandchild. ;P
Fred, look at it this way. You pick "A Subject", you stand behind said subject. You then shoot your subject's behind. Now, whilst your subject's behind does in fact become "The Subject" of your photograph, you still shot "A Subject" from behind.
Yes and that's exactly the difference, you shot a subject from behind, but you did not "shoot from behind your subject" which is what the challenge asks you to do.
This reminds me of conversations I have with my 3 year old grandchild. ;P
In any case...You are all getting far too serious... I started this thread as a bit of a joke really and was hoping this would result in some witty and light hearted banter...alas...sigh...never mind.
In any case...You are all getting far too serious... I started this thread as a bit of a joke really and was hoping this would result in some witty and light hearted banter...alas...sigh...never mind.
Oh yes! I'm playing straight man to your joke Fred. I actually DO understand. And, Kelli, I was famous for this sort of tortured conversation when I was a kid. Drove my poor Dad batty, I did.
In any case...You are all getting far too serious... I started this thread as a bit of a joke really and was hoping this would result in some witty and light hearted banter...alas...sigh...never mind.
Oh yes! I'm playing straight man to your joke Fred. I actually DO understand. And, Kelli, I was famous for this sort of tortured conversation when I was a kid. Drove my poor Dad batty, I did.
Hell I still torture people with it...please tell me how you got "cured" :)
In any case...You are all getting far too serious... I started this thread as a bit of a joke really and was hoping this would result in some witty and light hearted banter...alas...sigh...never mind.
Oh yes! I'm playing straight man to your joke Fred. I actually DO understand. And, Kelli, I was famous for this sort of tortured conversation when I was a kid. Drove my poor Dad batty, I did.
Fred, I don't think anyone was being seriouly serious. At least I wasn't. Well, the conversations with the 3 year old are true though. And yes, she is super intelligent. ;D
In any case...You are all getting far too serious... I started this thread as a bit of a joke really and was hoping this would result in some witty and light hearted banter...alas...sigh...never mind.
Oh yes! I'm playing straight man to your joke Fred. I actually DO understand. And, Kelli, I was famous for this sort of tortured conversation when I was a kid. Drove my poor Dad batty, I did.
Fred, I don't think anyone was being seriouly serious. At least I wasn't. Well, the conversations with the 3 year old are true though. And yes, she is super intelligent. ;D
In any case...You are all getting far too serious... I started this thread as a bit of a joke really and was hoping this would result in some witty and light hearted banter...alas...sigh...never mind.
Ah, Fred, perhaps you must get wholeheartedly behind your witty and lighthearted project to make it zing.
On the other hand, this thread has already given me my quota of giggles for the day.
