I was just recently commissioned for a campaign and shot about 1000 images to capture final image for this well known sports company. In the end, it came down to the two images above. As is usually the case, the final image is tough to choose, with lots of factors under consideration, lots of stakeholders picking their favorite. There was much debate.
I’ve posted stuff like this before and was really excited by the resulting discussion, so I figured I’d throw it out there again… WHICH IS BETTER, A or B?
Vote in the comments. Love to know ‘why’ if you care to explain your thoughts. 600 px wide versions of each image after the jump…hit [‘continue reading’ below]. After you all weigh in, I’ll tell you which one was used and why.
This is PHOTO A, below.
THIS is PHOTO B, below.
B. I dig the atmosphere the lens flare brings to the story.
A, flare in B is distracting, and takes away from composition, a combination of the two may have worked best, if flare was at left section of picture and as such masked car mirror that juts into frame
B. The flare of the sun allows the graphic designers to play.
Both are awesome for different reasons. The only person’s opinion that really counts ithough, s the photographer.
I vote B
Initially I liked picture A but I find myself looking down the street, for other runners or interesting things.
I don’t like the flare in picture B but I do like the warmth this nuclear blast gives the photo. It looks warm and makes me feel like going for a run. It also draws my eye to the models face, lead leg and shoe.
As a final thought, in neither photo does it look to me like she is actually running. She has so much air in her stride and no pony-tail whip (assuming she has one) that I think she was hopping on the spot. I’d be interesting to know if you had her hop on the spot, bound 20 meters or actually run.