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 has my vote.
Photo ‘A’ is my preference… Maybe because the composition seems cleaner. The post in the middle breaks it up and divides the scene well…. Plus I reckon the flare is just a little too much. I don’t like deconstructing images too much. So its fair to say I just prefer photo ‘A’ better too.
I like photo A better for the runner is not blown out by the sun. It is clearer. Not sure what the advantages of photo B would be. But I am a novice.
A. I find the flare in B too distracting. It’s almost like the flare is the story.
A. I find the flare in B too distracting. It’s almost like the flare is the story.
From a Client perspective I would say A – more energised image, fresher, less romantic, more real. B looks like she’s being hurled forward by some sort of nuclear blast. She also looks tired. You can’t make out any detail in her clothing/shoes. Location also looks too exotic – this should be every woman, running at her own pace, in her own life. Normal but a better version of normal.
However, the decision was probably B.
….. B
A is my vote, Picture B looks like the runner will be vaporized 3 milliseconds later from the thermonuclear blast behind her. You as the photographer may be gone in 4 milliseconds
A. Too much flare.
I can’t believe there was much debate over this. Unless the sports company is selling a mist that follows you when you run, the obvious choice is A. When I saw B all I thought was that photo was either way over exposed or photoshopped really poorly. That is one huge circle of confusion.
I have to say Photo A, simply because the flare, although artistic, takes away from the theme ‘Runner’. Photo A is a safe choice, clearly obvious. Also the runner’s stride in Photo B seems off and Photo A shows the runner smiling which would definitely be a good selling point for the client.
Is it possible to mix both?
In A, I like the clean image, but I’m not a fan of what it seems like the athlete looking at the camera (though I do like her smile; kind of like, “I’m running my ass off, and it feels great”)
BUT (the inevitable but)…
This is a photo for a sports company, and I imagine they wouldn’t want to necessarily have the model giving so much attention to the camera. The image should be about her, and her alone — not her interacting with the audience (of course, this might depend on the context of the ad; I’m guessing here). While the flare in B is distracting, I’m a big fan of how her head is slightly tilted back while she drives her body forward.
So, if you could combine the cleanliness of A (and perhaps the positioning of her back leg, too) with the pose of B, then I think you’d have your winner (then again, you guys are damn good in post… you could swing it
)
VOTE FOR PEDRO…errr i mean…
I VOTE B – everyone has stated the obvious about A, but their is so much focus on the runner in B vs. A. Even with the Sun Flare. Plus her shadow in B is much more pronounced vs. A which blends in with the shadows of her surroundings which makes her part of them not separate from them. Plus the whole premise is the “jump” right? She doesn’t look like she is jumping in A vs. B where you captured a jump.
peace n bacon grease
I believe that photo A does a better job of selling the apparal, and if that’s what the client is after, then I’d go with A. Photo B might catch the eye more, but with photo A, you still get the “sunset, running at dusk” look and looks cleaner.
I will start off by saying both pictures are interesting and are better than I could do myself. I personally like photo B better. In photo A the woman’s face does stand out. The strong diagonal line and the brightness behind her dark hair makes her face pop. Although I do not like the overall composition of the photo.The lamp post feels too close to the center. The composition leads my eyes to rest on the lamp post and the picture feels more busy than it needs to be. In photo B the flare is a bit distracting, and in the middle, but it draws my eye more to the runner than lamp post does. The flare picture is visually more simple, which I think is a good thing. The photo chosen probably also depended on your target market. Is this ad about women’s athletic wear or a sports drink? If they are selling clothing, the clothes in photo A are easier to see and the women is smiling so that is a plus. If the ad was for a sports drink or the like, they might be selling the concept of running and I see more of that in photo B. Runner’s supposedly get an endorphin high while they are exercising and that feeling/concept is more evident in photo B. She seems like she is bounding along in an glowing zoned out state of mind. So just as someone else mentioned, the flare becomes a very important part of the concept. In photo B the runner is partially obscured which I think psychologically allows the viewer to place themselves in the photo more easily. That is why silhouettes and cartoons are sometimes used in advertisements. In photo A everything to the left (her right) of the runner is just kinda boring. It is not interesting enough to make the picture any better, but not simple enough to force your eye to to focus on the runner. I personally like photo B better. Despite my round shape (and being a male), there was a time when I was an avid runner and this picture reminds me of the state of mind when I was running. I would put my headphones on, run and “zen” out. So which is the better picture probably came down to who was paying the bills and the message they were trying to get across. Or the decision could have even been determined by which photo worked better in the graphic designer layout, I am curious to know which was chosen. Cheers!
Photo A for sure. Was looking at what made A so appealing and the flare in B means you lose all those things which make A so great.
B represents a style that speaks to certain time period… Today.
I expect a hip (guessing) company would lean towards B.
A
Photo A, purely for the fact that flare is getting to be a bit too cliché now-a-days. A has just enough.
First I was to choice A but I think it’s true that it’s really cliché. So I agree to B but the flare is a but huge in the picture.
I think A is a bit better, the sunlight in B absorbs a little bit too much interest… Very nice shots by the way!
I prefer B because the larger lens flare pushes my eye to the runner. Drives what I believe is the point of the photo.
I prefer A. The flare is too much in B, imho. It obscures so much that it’s less clear what the subject really is. Maybe it’s just the flare.
Definitely A
I vote “A” it may be a bit on the boring side but in “B” the fact that she is half in and half out of the glowing orb or light bothers me – if it was behind her more I could get behind the photo more
A for sure. I swear I’ve seen A in a magazine. With B you can’t fully appreciate her fit features and running form. Flare is overwhelming…
I prefer A. I really don’t like the nuclear explosion going through the runner. Unless that’s what she is doing – running away from it. Its too distracting.
I like the model’s face better in B, but I can’t get past the huge flare. A it is.
I like A better because it’s in more focus and the sun is the perfect glow behind the model. B has too much sun and it takes away from the beautiful photo!
I like A better, so that means that B was probably the likely one chosen lol
How is b even an option? Lens flare is so damned distracting I didn’t notice ththe runner
Agreed, even looking past the flare, the composition, balance, color, facial expression, lack of mergers and subject isolation is better in A. Might need to clean up that white bumper though.
A.
B looks kind of unnatural. Not a flare and direct sun would be to the top of the image as well. Or at least that’s what I think it would
Definitely A for me
Definitely A. The flare in B is too distracting, and looks a bit fake.
I like the tone on the cars on picture B better, but the flare is just to big, it distracts your attention to much. So overall I would go for A.
To me it´s Photo A. The flare in B is to much for me.
Greetz
Daniel
A if your a photographer
B if your a Hipster with a Lomo or any other toy camera
Best reply yet, you win.
I choose A. Better detail on the runner.
B has my vote. Though choice.
B has mine!
A, because the flare that looks like it’s kicking off her feet is perfect.
I prefer A,
I like B , but the flare is to distracting for me.
I’m going with Pic A. The flare in Pic B is just a bit too much, and sort of distracting.
Photo A if it is just for the picture. If there will be ad copy over the image then B.
B
A. I think the light takes away too much from the rest of the photo in B.
A – for essentially the same reason that Dianne states. I also like the expression on the runners face better in A.
Version A … B is over the top … too much of the sun effect
Letter A, here!
A has my vote!
Definitely A. It has an awesome flare without killing the subject.
A is my pick
A is my choice. You can see the product.
I much prefer A.
A. The flare is too cliche and too distracting.
I love A because you can see her better…the colors are amazing!
I think picture A is better
A:
I think A is better as the runner is more visible and she looks happier . Let’s face it – the runner is pretty attractive, and covering her up with that light bloom is covering up a lot of the reason that many people (dudes) are going to stop and take a second look at this photo.
I vote A, the cars are a bit distracting but in B the flare totally takes away from the runner.
A – the flare in B is too much, it actually looks kind of fake.
A without a doubt
I say Photo A. I like her smile more in A as well.
A is better, the flare in B is just too much. X
A, absolutely.
it’s a solid photograph, somewhat commercial and edgy without looking too generic.
B looks like part of a Flickr group, plus the model’s face doesn’t look as confident.
B. It looks more like an artistic sports ad…also that sunburst in the background makes it look like she’s running/flying at lightening speed w/those tennis shoes on.
I’d say A. Too much flare in B, the facial expression isn’t quite there, and the positioning of her right leg is a bit odd, her foot looks like it’s a bit twisted. Minor details aside from the glaringly obvious flare, but for me the facial expression is the real killer on B; she doesn’t seem to be enjoying her jog.
A, absolutely.
The flare in B is just too distracting. In A it is artistic, stylistic… in B it is a punch in the face.
agreed that flare is getting over-used and not used so that it is subtle. i would say A because it has just enough of a flare and her face is more visible (also her expression is better in A)
Depends on what is it used for. B has a lot of “white space” for text. If I had my druthers I’d take the girl from A (better smile) and the sun flare from B.
Chase,
Firstly nice shot.
I prefer A. Makes me think of going for a run after work in summer (something I enjoy)
As for B. Remember when you were a kid and you rubbed your eyes really hard and you’d get that spot in the middle of your eye? That’s the odd feeling when I look at B. Not to be harsh, just honest. My laptop is not calibrated so it might be different in print
I vote for A. The lens flare in B is just not doing it for me.
Prefer A myself, i like B, but the flare is to much in my opinion.
I vote A. I really like the sun burst in B but I think it pulls focus from the runner.
A has my vote. The flare in B is too much, while the one in A is just enough and right above her head, so it draws your eye up to her face. She has a better facial expression in photo A rather than B as well.
I like Picture A. It’s clearer and neater. Unless you want to put some copy in the lens flare part of Picture B
In my opinion A is better. Its more ‘normal’ I think the flare in B is a little too much.
A for me, I think the exposure compensation between highlight, mid tone and shadow areas is really well balanced.
A
Definitely A for me ! Woman looks more into the camera, i can feel immediate connecting as a viewer. Flare is also less pronounced. Don’t mind flare in general but in B it is too much & covering most of the woman’s body in the run. Also in B the expression of her face is not so flattering
Merge A & B. The flare in B is a bit too much in my opinion, it takes some of the focus away from the runner.
if its a sporting GOODS company and you want to see the clothes, A. although the leg in the top one looks a little stubby. if it’s the cover of a catalog and they want something that catches the eye, the sun in B definitely does that. i also like that she’s not looking at the camera in B. i’m going B.
photo A. In this photo the viewer is able to fully see the runner’s stride and action of running.
the A!
Photo A.
I feel there’s too much lens flare in B, so much so that I don’t focus on the runner.
A for me. The flare in B dominates just too much. Of course, that’s a subjective preference just looking at the two shots – we don’t know the intended usage (and that could change the choice).
B gives the impression that she’s really dedicated by running early in the AM, but the flare is just too big.I vote A
Face looks more pleasing in A. Too much glare in B
A for me.
B looks like a nuclear bomb went off in the middle.
A. B has potential but looks blown out.
Photo A gets my vote.
The flare takes to much focus, but i like the warm colortone.
Admire your work!
// @eivbra
They both have great qualities about them…. A – great light in the face, and clear scenery… B – feels like she’s bursting out of the sunlight, and there are those awesome crisp shadows from her feet…
I would almost like to see something that’s right in between these two images, it might be perfect. At the end of the day though, what is most unique will stand out more…I’m going to vote B
Photo A you can relate to because you can see her expression, but Photo B would work well for ad copy etc.
Top pick is A.
I love both of them.
It all depends on how the image is used.
Photo A is really nice, but not much place to put a lot of text over it.
Photo B gives a much more ‘morning look’ as the sun seems lower.
Can’t wait to see others comments on that one !
thanks for sharing this process.
I prefer A. The flair is swallowing her too much in B.
I prefer B – in A, my attention falls where the perspective drive my eyes- down the row of cars along the curb. In B, that depth is obscured, and the runner is where my eyes settle. Because this is for a sports company, I’d go with B for that reason. The flare does seem a bit much but it helps push the eye to the whole point of the picture.
My guess is B because for some reason i keep thinking the company’s logo will end up going where the flare is. Both pics are sweet, as i’ll bet the other 998 pics were, but in the end i guess it all depends on what the sports company was looking for.
Picture A – Enough flare and it maintains clarity, not into the fact that some of the runner disappears in B.
I love b – someone above had it right on – it pushes your eye over to the main focus, the runner.
i vote “A” as the better photo. The exposure is great on the runner and the backlighting is not too overpowering. Photo “B” distracts too much from the runner and completely overpowers the image.
I think A is better, the fact that the flare of picture B destroys a lot of the details of the runner.
A, cropped tighter
(B is too trendy)
Photo A gets my vote. Just for the reason that in photo B the sun flare takes away what is going on. You wondering are you missing something that’s hiding in the sun and it takes away and washed out the detail. IMHO.
love a, love how she got the natural highlights…. A gets my vote.
Photo A is better! 2 much flare in B…
A has my vote, the flare in B is too distracting
B.
the model (runner) is less engaged making the image more ‘fly on the wall’-ish. Where in A. she seems more aware of camera. I like the light (flare) in B also but it is just a bit too strong and my eye keeps going back to it rather than around the image. If if were just a bit less dominant but still present. but still I like B. better.
Thanks for sharing.
TBH as they currently stand I’m not THAT keen on either.
I like A up to the kerb, but the cars are too distracting / too in focus.
The glare in B is just too much for this shot/situation. I think it would work if she was on a beach or in a sunny park.
Mi Voto es Por la Fotografia “A” creo que es una fotografia mas limpia y el sol no afecta a la foto.
Saludos desde Mexico.
Definitely A…
The flare in Photo B is just way too distracting..
As a photo standing on its own, I would go with A.
However, as a graphic designer, I think I would go with B. The flare would allow for the integration of design elements/text/logos nicely. You could of course use A in an ad campaign easily, but B lends itself more towards interesting design compositions.
I am a big fan of A, although I am not sure what is growing out of her head. I think A is all about the runner and her expression is energetic, excited, passionate etc. The depth in A achieved by the lighting gives a more realistic feel and pushes her to the foreground! I am no Chase Jarvis but that is my argument for A! Holler.
A. She is smiling a little bit more and you can really concentrate on the theme of going for a run on a beautiful day.
A
you’re right Chase tough choice, both have merit for different reasons. I like A for a more product oriented/lifestyle shot. But, like B for the more artistic action feel, almost as if she is coming out of some sort of time/space portal. Sure the final choice came down to what purpose the AD was interesting in using it for.
100% Shot A, b looks too fake and a lens flare that big only ever works with film photos, however wish photo a had a bit of blue sky!
I prefer A. B has to much flair. It looks like she is being gobbled up by a dimensional portal to me.
I have an alternative suggestion, crop the cars out of A then I would prefer A over B because the flare is just not in a good location and takes away from the runner, it makes one think the sun is the subject. I do however like how the flare distracts your eyes from the cars. Photo A, cropped, final answer
B. The flare is a tad too much for me, but I suppose ‘they’ can use it to put type on in an ad. Also, in A everything gets equal attention, which is distractive.
To me, it all depends on whether the focus is on the model and the clothing (in which case it’s A) or if it’s on the shoe (in which case it’s B)…
Considering it on purely technical merits, though, I’ve got to go with A.
I would say “A”
I think “B” has a tad too much flare in the center
Photo A
I prefer A. In photo B she kinda gets lost in that huge ball of sun flare.
I like A more than B, the flare in B is a little bit over the top…
A. In my humble opinion, B kind of looks like she’s getting launched into the air by some explosion behind her.
Much prefer A – The flare on B almost looks like condensation/ mist on the lens it’s so over the top. A alludes to that early morning feeling, and allows the product to take centre stage (Well…to the right!).
As the pictures stand I prefer B. The extra light is a nice touch and shows us a pice of life that we don’t see often, which makes for a nice sentimental connection.
With B, I concentrate on the flare too much. It’s like a pulsating, hammering magnet on my senses. I want to squint, with that photo, and really don’t notice the runner.
Photo A is really nice, and we get a good look at the runner–her pleasant expression, her elevation, and there is just a touch of artistic flare from the sun.
Personally, I like A better, but it’s hard to say, not knowing the intended message of your client.
A, because it has just the right amount of flare/backlight. In B, it just becomes too much and too distracting…
I vote for A, i really feel that i understand better the concept, because the B i feel lost with the light.
I like A better… I believe the flare is too strong in B.. diluting the visual interest.
I like the lighting effect in photo B, and would choose that one if the girl less washed out. It makes a good artistic photo.
I feel that photo A is the stronger photo for a sports campaign. Nice work.
I vote A because I think the flare is a little too distracting to the picture. Nice shot though!
A, we need to see all of those legs
A
I like B better, although the flare really is way too big.
A simply because the flare in B blocks to much of the model. Also, because the you can see the back of the car and the end of the bush there is a lot less depth making the image seem flat. In A you can follow the depth of the shot which leads my eye to the runner.
B!!
It depends on the images purpose. As just an image, A is better. It has better contrast, my eyes go directly to the subject, gorgeous lens flairs, great facial expression.
In B, the lens flair gives the image a huge center weight and is very distracting. My eyes are immediately pulled to the center of the flair, then they drift to the highlights on the sidewalk, then to the deep contrast between the highlights and the shadow of the subject, from there it goes to the shoe. If this is for a shoe company, B might suit their needs better.
A tells a story of a dedicated athlete while B seems too have lots of distractions but brings the viewer to a product.
B – The flare is better than the big-ass ugly light pole. The light pole shot looks static in comparison. The strong sun flare adds more of a positive emotional appeal also.
Photo A. The runner looks like she is enjoying herself more. She looks stressed in B.
I like A better. The photo is interesting enough with just a hint of flare I find I’m searching for the details in B that are lost by the flare. It’s not a photo that needs to be over processed just to make it interesting
A my vote
I’d say B for the simple reason that it held my attention for a lot longer than A
B. In A the model is looking at the camera and it just doesn’t flow well. In B the sunlight almost seems to be chasing her and adds some layers to the conveyed message.
Photo A is better, unless your are presenting a photo that is about flares. Photo B, that photo is about the flare. Photo A is about the runner.
like the color of street tile on B but ill vote for A
A
A without a doubt. B looks like a perfectly centered circle of light. Maybe if B was cropped differently so the flare wasn’t centered.
I really like both, but A gets my vote. I think if you could have cross-pollenated those two shots, it would have been fantastic. I love the blue sky, vignetting, and contrast of B. But I like the runner, mid-tones, and sun flare of A.
I guess if A could’ve had just a little bit more of the hazy flare of B, but also with the contrast/vignetting of B, it would have been a perfect shot.
Just my opinion though
My preference is A
I’m going with Photo A. I think the glare in B is too much and I like the expression in photo A better.
I prefer A. The flare on B is too much.
Voting for A.
There seems to be a better smile on the runner in A. She looks like she’s enjoying what she is doing. Although the bumper on the white car looks a bit gnarley. The brightness of the sun placed above the bushes seem to be more realistic and the flare adds a nice touch.
In B, the sun seems to be coming from behind the runner. It almost looks like she’s burning rubber and there is a smoke trail behind her. “Eat my dust!”
Photo A for sure. The lighting on the face is so much better, and golden hour flare is overused and annoying.
A.
even though there is lens flare at the bottom, B, looks as if the light was added later… or the light post is exploding.
The image A, is much clear for commercial purposes may work in many ways. Just check the white vehicle (crashed bomper).
Success!
I’d go with A if those were the only choices, but an intermediate would probably be my main choice.
Depending on what you’re using it for. A for me as I see the runner. B if you are selling a blast of light. Wasn’t it Jeremy Cowart on Creative Live that said enough of the light flares already (might be wrong on that).
Here face looks more neutral in color on top yet her legs are golden. Face is morning gold on the bottom. Guessing top is flashed with light restrained to her top half and bottom is reflected light? Smaller aperture on bottom?
I prefer A. I like the sun flare but in B I feel it is over powering the runner.
I prefer photo A, the flare in B is too much.
I am all for sun-flair but in this case I have to go with “A”.
{Amy}
A
A 4 me! But, B… if you have to put a tagline in the middle!
I like A better(B is too overexposed for my taste), but I guess for the Ad, B might be the right choice if you are going for the “thrown by the ball of light” effect.. or the tagline of the shoes has something to do with how light they are..
Chase: Tough choice but I would go for B. My immediate impression of both photos is something along the lines of “dedicated amateur athlete, up really early to train”. Photo A gives that impression but I think Photo B says it with more impact.
Of course if it’s late afternoon, and not early morning, then my impression doesn’t hold ; )
For advertising purposes I vote for “A.” “B” would look great in a gallery dedicated to runners. “A” makes me want to run! Now that’s advertisement.
A gets my vote
It depends on how it will be used, so neither is better. If it is for an ad, it might get screened out and cropped or selected beyond recognition. How many times did she run down that sidewalk?
A definately.. =P
heres why!!..
Flare in A is interesting, subtle and still gives the vibe of summer time running.
As states before in B it looks like shes running away from a nuclear explosion!
the Flare in B kinda looks like you have fog on your lens, the flare isnt even that nice to look at on B.
Althou the runners pose on B is slightly better, in A i think it would have been better if the rear leg was slightly more visible, and it kinda looks like shes cut off at the knee.. but hard to get a slightly more side shot when your trying to capture the side of the cars as well..
I also like the definition of the leaves in the bushes in A over B
And overall i prefer the crispness of the image, its sharper, bolder, more powerful. B is a bit more bland, doesnt really inspire me to go running..
hope that helps brother!!. would love it if you cruised past my photography page
http://www.facebook.com/jasonlawphotography
PS Its summer time in Queenstown!!.
Peace out
J
A for sure, the flare in B is wayyy tooo big and distracting. You can barely see half the runner. In A, she is lit perfectly with just a bit of flare washing out some of the pole and another part taking up the negative space under her leg. Its there but it isn’t the focal point. The huge centered flare in B screams look at me, I’m blowing this image! go with A, please.
I really like Photo B if there was slightly bit less flare.
Photo A is a nice photo but for some reason photo B grabs me.
A – hands down, IMO.
I prefer A.
Photo A is what I’d use. Cleaner, simpler and still tells the story, even if the composition of the elements is slightly compromised. The runner looks more natural in this shot.
I suppose B ‘could’ work for a advert layout as it has nice space (sun flare bleaching) for type.
But for me, A
A.. dunno whats this for but B is a bit distracting.. My eyes were blinded by the God like rays.
I like the runner’s face/position in A, but can’t get past the pole in the center of the frame. The cropped version of A looks better. The flare in B is overpowering, but the negative space it creates might be useful in an ad and it does eliminate the pole. I think I’m leaning toward B. It has a bit more of an ‘inspirational’ feel.
A, the flare is what most memorable thing about B, A is a well balanced compositon
From a pure photography sense A is the obvious answer(clearer, vivid, proper exposure) however my personal opinion is photo B due to its uniqueness I love how the sun rays came through and the shadow on the sidewalk stands out to draw your attention to the fact the runner is in the air during this shot.
Love it
Michael
I say A. Glare is too much for B. If it’s for commercial purpose, I think A is better.
A
AAA
A A
The pose looks more natural.
I like the eye contact.
I think she likes me.
“A” has my vote not so busy and allows my eye to gravitate to the subject which is what I think the client would want… Plus lens flare is a out dated shot anymore it seems. Not to mention the rule of thirds would take the lens flare and more. JMO still nice competition
I would choose A. B’s lens flare could of been controlled in away that would of been beneficial to the aesthetic look of the image but B simply does not pull it off.
A for me!
B is getting cliche, and is’t way to much in the centre.
it is very distracking and looks quitte fake
A. Im going to call it now that B was taken on an iphone
Also, her facial expression looks awkward in B, like she is not in shape and straining
A, I can’t even understand why you offered b, b looks like a malfunction in the camera, overexpose all over the place, you can’t see anything.
B.
I know the flare is too much. I know it can be distracting, but I like it because it really does look like a nuclear explosion and the runner looks as if she is being propelled by, either it, or her shoes or whateverelse she is wearing that needs selling.
Flare doesn’t have to be perceived as distracting or something unskillful hipsters like. One could choose to see it as attention-grabbing and therefore good for advertising purposes.
Sorry.
Definitely A.
A.. can’t stand B, don’t even know how it’s an option.
The truth is neither shots are that great. Shot B just looks like a mistake, and – at first glance – shot A looks like the runner just has half her leg missing. If it were me, I wouldn’t use either image as they are both pretty pedestrian.
Neither but if i had to choose, A is Better because the flare is just to much and make the photo look like something was wrong with the camera lens. The cars on the left in my opinion are distracting and serve no purpose. The image should be cropped or re-shot with the edge of the side walk being at the left most part of the frame.
i will go with A
They are both good for two different ways of advertising.
I think that if this is a product shot of something she is wearing A is the better choice as it has a bit more sex-apeal and B has to much sun flair for that purpose
“B” on the other hand is more dreamy and plays with emotions and dreams.
So come to think of it if its a product for women, I think B might be the better choice.
A, love the grittiness and definition in the photo. Theres enough of a flare to keep things interesting with a change in color, texture and tones. Also, the trash on the street is not as distracting in this image, its just cleaner. The only thing I don’t like about A, is the part just left of the lamp post at the top of the image, theres some weird flare/blur going on there and its a little distracting.
The flare in B is too distracting in my opinion. However, if text is going to be used on the image, I think B will provide a better surface to work on.
B, because she doesn’t like in the camera and the shadow in front of her looks really great.
*look not like
B
When the flare is reduced a little, B would be very nice as the pavement and her shadow are great…
A! In B there is just too much of a flare. It is way too distracting
for me”A”not to much distracted with flare
A!
A! I am all about some solar flare but in B it just looks fake.
photo A! Less flare, crisp image with warm colors really sets it apart from the overdone B.
In A my eye goes to the cars, I like B because the flare puts more emphasis on the runner than on the cars, however, I think the flare is a bit to strong…maybe tone it down a bit?
Personally, I like A. But where will the copy go?
Copy fits better in B… and it’s more dramatic.
“A” – if only b/c this is a product shoot and you can see the product(s) more clearly in “A”. I’m also personally a bigger fan of sharper images.
Just my 2 cents! Love these posts Chase!
Cheers, Jim
B. It’s cleaner.
Defo prefer b – lights draws my attention to the runner and it’s like she running out of the light.
I like photo B.
Which is better? Both tells a different story so better is definitely subjective in this case. Photo A seems more staged and has a cleaner look for a product. Sort of like the fast food product shots that draws you in but you never really know what yours will be like, except that it won’t be like that picture in the window
Photo B… Whew, now that’s the SHIT (can I say that here?)!!! It’s edgy, raw and unscripted. It’s more of what an action shot or editorial shot should look like. You don’t just notice a product; you also notice what it does and how it is to be used. B is definitely the winner. Anyone who disagree must face the wrath!!!
A!
Its cool with flares, but distracting. And simply because the runner looks better in A.
Keep up the good work
/jocke
A gets my vote
B Sir, it leaves some room for the imagination.
While I love the look of flare in my images, in the case of shot B it’s a bit much, so my initial reaction is to choose A in terms of the image alone. That said though, I’d be curious to know how shot B would be treated in terms of any copy and logos that might be introduced to make the final ad. Depending on your clients needs, maybe B would suit them better?
I prefer A, flaring in B is too heavy in my opinion… Her expression is also better…
A for sure, B the sunburst takes the attention away from the subject too much imo
I like A because the expression on the runner looks more fun and less haggard. In fact, that “panting” look in B combined with the flare do make it look like she is running from a crisis or something.
Add to that the backlighting of her hair in A and I like this one better. B does have a great dark shadow of the runner on the sidewalk and a tempering of the cluttering shadows from the bushes, but that does not make up from the elements in A that I wish were in B.
I love B. It gives me a feeling of bursting into a run.
“B” gets my vote for two reasons. The first is that I’m unsure about the angle of the runner’s leg in “A”, and the second is that the sunburst glare in “B” suggests a sense of euphoria.
I think “B” will be the final choice, I don’t think it is necessary to actually see the clothes/shoes etc. It is more down to feeling. “Out of the Sun, Golden Girl” For the Sports company there are too many distractions on the left, either way I would still crop out most of the cars on the left or soften them down a bit.
But Heck, What do I know. ;>))
PS, I prefer photo A personally
Hi Chase,
I like the colors and the mood of A.
How about moving the lensflare to the left and kind of cover the car with the flare?
greetings
Nico
A, no doubt. In shot B the flare takes over the whole image. A shot between the two would have been ideal but A has the most potential to get there in post.
Photo B, for sure. because my eye goes to the light post and stays there. love, love, love photo A.
opps! i meant i love photo B! : P
A is better overall. Like at least one other commenter, I like that the model is looking beyond the frame in B instead of almost into the camera in A. But the the garish flare in B ruins it for me.
A all the way. Less distracting; the runner looks more athletic; more context. B has way too much glare; I agree with the hipster/cliche comments. I would only chose B if there was a need by the art department to have a space for text or logo smack in the middle. A is a great shot.
I prefer A but I suspect that B was chosen because it provides space for the clients message.
I vote A because she’s looking at the camera and smiling. Not sure runners actually do that, but it’s nice and idealistic for an ad campaign.
B- The flare adds some atmosphere while it forces the viewer to squint a little in order to make out some of the other details in the image, almost as if the viewer were out for a run in the morning where the sun them self.
I prefer the image B is warmer, better represents the strength and power of race as well as the fatigue of the model’s face. The flare in the middle looks like a drop of sweat that emerges from the image.
I enjoy A , she is lit up wonderfully but I have issues with the the light post. I like how B hides the post but the light on her fades too much for me. The negative space on B from the flare could be great for Ad’s.
Cheers
I vote A which means it’s probably B!
I prefer clarity, colour and model’s happier expression.
Flare in B bit too OTT for me
I’d say ‘B’.
The sun-flare detracts from the fact that she forgot to put on her shorts and is only wearing underwear.
Also makes the photo look more surreal and “not like everyday boring stuff”
Depends on context, but I like A more.
A is better, I can see the legs better
.
Looks like I’m not the only one who likes A better. lol
I like that the runner is looking at the camera just a little in A….gives a feeling of connecting with the runner. I also like that the flare isn’t so pronounced…there’s still a very warm feel to it, but it’s not overpowering. You can still see all the details of the picture.
Short answer A
Long answer –
It totally depends on the brief, reasons for the shot, client expextations, art direction, etc. There could be many good reasons for choosing B.
Without any of those considerations, just looking at the asthetic qualities of each image, image B’s flare is probably too centre-weighted and garish to be the popular choice – a different crop could fix it.
Image A would then most likely please most people, by default, even though the lamp post becomes quite dominant. The amount of flare is just enough to be interesting without taking over from the subject.
Chase – wanna share the client brief?
And obviously the client’s final choice?
All depends on where the ‘sports company’ want to place their type and logo…..
As an ad B.
As a good picture A.
A
I prefer the A. It looks better clean composition.
Greetings from Juarez Mexico Chase!
Vote for B. While A, is much crisper and cleaner- which at first glance makes it more appealing to look at, shot B is much more interesting and inspiring. Shot B makes me want to look again, and figure out what is going on.
Well done!
A
B is too much…a shot that was between A and B would be ideal though
I vote A
A is a better photo. B is a happy accident.
B pops more visually but lacks the versatility for use with text.
A. The flare and vignette in B is too distracting. A is cleaner and has a better feeling to it.
Having seen larger versions I’d say that photo A is better. Why? Well, B seems to follow the overly popular and overdone flickr-look. It’s not that it looks bad, I’ve simply seen too much of those. Besides, I like the running women and the spot takes my attention away from her, so again point for A. On the other hand everything depends on the future purpose that the photo will serve.
Cheers,
Adrian
I like B –
The leading lines in A are great but take me away from the runner… the flare in B gives just enough to break up that lead – and keeps me on the runner.
Being how this is an outdoor company, I would go with whatever photo keeps the interest on the outdoor sports subject.
A for me.
I do like B but it doesn’t grab me as much as A
Really depends what the message that goes with the picture is going to be- and what kind of sportswear the company is selling. Guess it must be shoes as the clothes really looks old style!? If shoes I would go for B as it’s a picture you remember and a better face of the girl (.. and the clothes are not that dominant.)
Definitely A – B has too much flare.
it depends on what it is for….i personally am drawn to B but I believe A would sell a product better.
It depends on the design that will go around it.
A few have said this, but, if the image is going to be stand alone I think A is my choice. But if text is going to overlaid on the image then B for sure. The text should be the focus. But, without any real context of what you or the client is looking for it’s not really an easy choice.
I vote “B”, because it’s different.
Art is all about thinking differently, and I choose B cause it’s
something I never seen before, and I love the girls expression
it looks natural.
The “A” photo looks like any other photo I’ve seen. And she’s looking
towards the camera which to me feels fake.
A. The flare in the 2nd image is too distracting IMO
A looks like a beautiful summer morning jog.
B looks like a hott sweaty midday run in the heat.
But if youre putting text in it, the text would fit perfectly in the middle of B.
I prefer B. The intense flare gives a sense of magic that’s missing in A.
I think it really depends on the layout and where the text will be placed. I like both, though I do think the flare in the second one goes beyond flare and almost looks like there is something on the camera lens. However, that could make sense in a certain layout.
When in doubt ALWAYS go with more flare! It also leaves great space for copy
If the client is going to use text in the blown out part, B is better and renders the photo as purely supportive of the text. And vice-versa for A. If the client is going to use the photo as stand-alone then A is better.
It really depends on what the client needs it for – B has much better negative space (or copy space) while A focuses more on the model in her environment. So hard to choose a fav…
I prefer A as a photograph, the glare in B really overwhelms the shot. But as others have noted, I don’t know what your clients are going to use the shot *for*: I could see them going with B because of ready-made space for text within that glare, or A if they’re trying to call some attention to, say, whatever product the runner is wearing.
But, ignoring client constraints and judging solely as which one I’d prefer, A it is.
A
I like that type of effect in B, but it’s just too much here. Tone it down quite a bit, and it might be okay.
B.
looks like some source …or power behind her…
Definitely A. I see what you were aiming for in B, but it doesn’t quite work.
I have to pick B! Although the flare is a little overwhelming and a little distracting, it makes the image look like the weather is the kind of weather you want to go for a run in. At least B makes me want to got for a run more then A does. So I think B would sell more product for your client.
I’d be curious to see the brief to help me choose… But if I go only with my knowledge and gut feeling, I’d go with A for the following reasons: I’m a huge fan of flares and contre-jour shots, however, the flare of B is a bit too strong to my taste and takes away a bit from the main focus of the shot. I also like the attitude and expression of the model better in A, she is smiling, strong and really sharp and would probably appeal more to a client that wants, in the end, to see (and sell) more of his product. I love the mood and colors of the A shot better too in general. Awesome shot… As usual!
I love A. The Sun in B is right in the center, it breaks the composition of the photo.
Definitely A.
I go for A, because it looks more natural but still unusual and arty.
Definitely A. If the model had the same expression in B as in A then B would have a better feel.
I like A
Tough call in that I really like what’s happening with the sidewalk in B, but overall I think A works better. Both the vignette and the flare look way too forced in B.
B has my vote simply because you can see the toe of her right shoe. In photo A you cannot, which looks odd to me.
I prefer photo A. The flare in photo B is neat, but kind of “takes over” the photo… it’s quite large and distracting.
Photo A is great!
should be right in between. The “sun” in B seems kinda overblown …oh and i would shift the light to the left. to rather hide the cars and reveal more of the model. sorry for pretentious tipps =)
A but not for the flare but for the better expression on her face.
Although A is “the” photo, for me B has way more power. It tells more than A.
A. Because B has too much flare, unless that is where the text is going.
I dislike the post in the center of A, but I still prefer it over B.
Unless you want a nice clean spot with room for copy, in which case B will work much better.
Definitely ‘A’. B is overwhelming and looks fake.
I like A!
I like A better, but if text is to be used, then B will add that space……
Choosing A. B is more distracting and the runner’s expression in A is better
I would go with A.
In my point of view, flare on the second photo draws away attention from the runner…
Personally, and for the art value, photo B. But for a commercial campaign definitely photo A, hands down, for the clarity and straight forwardness.
I like A best.
B is too distracting with the sun spot right in the middle. Although I do like the way the shadows fall behind the runner in B better.
I prefer A. I see where you’re going with B but I find the glare/flare a bit too distracting. Photo A maintains that sunkissed look and has a touch of flare without it being distracting.
B. FTW
A!
B is too much…
I think B is great.
I prefer B… like she’s running out of the light
Too much flare in B therefore I vote for A.
i’ll go for A. i think in B you’re distracted from all the other details in the photo.
A for me. Same issues as mentioned above re too much flare.
I prefer A. I think there is too much flare in B and therefore ruins the photo a little.
A – like others have mentioned the flare seems a bit to much in B – though the flare in B helps to distract from the light pole that also seems distracting.
B.
if the photo was about the person A. would win hands down, but B. leaves a lot to the imagination and the over abundance of light gives a feeling of intensity.
I started off liking A, because the runner is perfect, expression, stride, etc. But then that pole started bothering me and then I started liking B, but for different reasons.
B is more abstract and doesn’t focus specifically on the runner. In the end, B wins for me. Yeah, image B with the runner from image A dropped in.
So, image C is the winner *smirk*
hands down B. love the flare and it forces my eye to the runner, de-emphasizes the cars in the photo and the fact that the street light is so dead center. without the flare, my eye goes straight to the center streelight.
At first glance, I prefer A
option B
glare is getting cliche but for this type of an ad… it seems to be a bolt of excitement and energy making her run faster, leap higher… it screams, “I want to be the girl wearing those shoes… wearing that outfit… listening to that music…. getting that fit!”
B ! Love the flare of energy bursting behind
I would choose a midle way if there was one but for me I say B
Oh, also: I prefer the way her foot breaks the light/shadow line in picture A.
Picture B almost looks like she’s standing on the edge of the light (except that her own shadow makes it clear she’s in the air)
Definately A for me. i like the subtler flaring. and the way the deeper shadows on the ground frame out the runner.
My vote is A. flare is over the top.
A wins. but I want to see where B would take you if you kept at it, because I think it would have been a better shot.
The problem I have with B, and why it lost, is that the runner needs just a bit more definition on her right side, and because she gets lost a bit the cars start taking over. Otherwise I like it more – more atmosphere, more interesting shadow on the ground / clearer definition of the runners “flight”. Crop it to just the right 2/3of the image an it wins for sure.
Just seems like the subject got lost somewhere as they appear here.
A is better. Too much flare on B.
I vote for photo A.
A
Makes more sense to me.
I like B the best. It gives a sensation of speed that A lacks.
A for me, the flare in B is too distracting and over powers the rim light and separation of the runner in A. Though I prefer the cleaner shadows on the ground in B.
I like A. Looking at B, makes feel like i have some vision illness.
Photo A is a typical “sports” related photo… I think B has more drama and action in it, shown with the shadows at her feet and the explosive sun … so I would probably go with Photo B
I loved the (B) photo! the huge flare makes that photo pops out of the frame into my eyes!!
the (A) is kinda boring… and there is something coming out of her left ear….
None of them.
Do you really like the street lamp and the cars in the composition?
I mean they’re not equal in weight, it absolutely distractme from the girl, the street lamp in the middle divide the composition, maybe not the best place in that block for a photoshoot.
My two cents.
A is better. B has too much sun glare. It blocks too much of the jogger and makes the image ambiguous to the product.
I prefer A if it is cropped. In the larger image my eye is drawn to the bottom left quadrant of the photo and becomes a distraction from the runner.
A, flare goes a bit too far in B IMO
I think A is better. The runner looks confident and happy and in b she looks out of breath like she is really pushing. A the exposure is bang on and while there is some creative flare and nice back lighting it is not overdone.
I’d go for Photo B because its looks more natural. I mean when its a sunny day, you expect to see a lot of sunlight. Photo A looks a bit more staged, smile is commercial and she’s looking in the camera. Its not what you typically see when someone is jogging. In Photo B however, there’s a radiance of determination in her face and she’s looking away from the camera. Also,by covering the product with sunlight, it created a sense mystery and curiosity which is really attractive. I believe that when you’re trying to sell something, you have to portray it the context where the product is supposed to be used=)
A is the better overall photograph.
Definitely A! Beautiful shot! composition, colours, lighting… I loved everything about that…
Picture B, no no…the flare is way too much!
My vote is for B
The flare looks more intentional than in A. Also it give to my imagination more to think. I will the power of the runner. She is running very strong, like the like is been generated by her. And there are more possibilities..
finlands vote goes to B
My vote is for A. The flare in A is subtle and adds to the image to include the arc lens flare towards the bottom. In B my eye is instantly drawn to the monster flare in the middle of the image which not only pulls me away from the runner/scene but covers her/it up. I also like the aesthetics of A, the color looks good, the feel is there while in B that is diluted.
I am drawn to B. The ground in front of the runner, including the runner’s shadow, is cleaner. This draws my eyes to the shoes and what lies ahead… Let your imagination take it from there.
A. On B it just takes up too much of the subject….unless this is an advert for sunscreen!
I’d be curious to see what the type treatments will be. B could ultimately be more effective for the campaign, but as-is, I prefer A.
if i am against the odds i will choose B but definitely A is better.
What do you want it for?
A to me is a “good standard picture” if its about the girl, this is much better
B to me could have a better story attached. Looks likeshe is running out from the glowing object.
First: Even though in A the runner looks in the camera, the intention of running is not get to the camera or get distracted by it but running somewhere. This is where B leaves me pondering where she might be running to.
Second: Even though not looking at us to get our attention the way of fuzziness in the image gets me to pay more attention to her than to the rest surrounding her – not the trees, not the car, not the fence, not the carseat which is way too sharp in image A.
Third: The sky in the background. In Picture A its just plain white-yellowish. In B it has a nice blue color.
Fourth: In B she is like leaping out of the light which also explains the really hard shadow of her on the ground.
=> So I actually like B more than A.
Picture “A” ! Picture B is to burned out for my taste!
Well I can’t really say because I don’t know if the creative is finished?
Know what I mean?
A as a photograph is probably the better choice?
However, and it’s a big HOWEVER, I see option B to have great graphic design potential. You can see a bit of it due to the “B” option from the VS graphic. Overlaying typography where the massive flare exists looks hot.
So I start to believe we don’t have all the information for the creative work.
I can see reasons for both but I don’t know enough to say one is “better” than the other at this point.
A!!!
B looks so fake and looks like a photo shopped blob is in the middle.
My vote goes to photo A.
In my opinion flare of the A photo is well controlled and still transmit its fresh. In the B photo flare is too much and becomes more “important” than the shot. Only one thing like more in the B case, the shadow of the girl, as a nice detail.
The shadow seems to be just the same in both pictures.
Deffinitly a
A is a beautiful photograph.
B wins for me — love the runner’s expression which to me conveys everything in at first glance. The slight shift in angle creates a better vanishing point (off-center). The blown out flare adds a tone of drama and draws attention away from the light post which seems a little too centered up in A. B just has more “there” there.
A gets my vote…and I’ll tell you why.
I am a photojournalist and in my line of work you have to be able to relate to the subject. In a good sports photograph typically the rule is two faces and a ball. If you have two faces and a ball and then the viewer can relate.
In “B” photographically and artistically completely understand the flair – I have used flair in the same sense as this also in my images. I just feel that in an image such as this the viewer can relate to the image as somebody running in the morning in regard to just seeing a (good) picture.
-Jack
A : so sick brotha!
I prefer A, only because the highlight in B is so big, you lose the runner. If that highlight was toned down, I’d pick B.
“B” it’s my favorite, why? arguments are overrated.
A for sure. B is just killing the whole person’s image. A has a unique blend of good glare, angle & you can see the persons figure and action.
Impossible. The great thing about B is the flare which is also the distracting thing. I’d paint in a little of the flare from B into A. You’d get the great mood and feel of B, but without the distraction of a giant blob of light. I think many viewers just wouldn’t be able to get past the blob flare. I like the blobby light, but it spills over to the left too much.
If I lived in a world without photoshop, it would be B.
i like a
I gravitate toward B. The lens flare in A seems accidental whereas the treatment in B is more deliberate and purposeful. Aside from the model having a more purposeful expression on her face in B also.
B
A
I B would look better if the flare was more to the left.
I like elements of both but neither is “best” imho. I prefer the leg shadow on the sidewalk in B but the facial expression in A. I really like her height off the sidewalk. If I had to vote for one straight up, it would be A.
So, how many takes for this shot? I assume A was near the beginning, since she is smiling.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
As is, I’m choosing A. Not really digging the flare in B.
This being a commercial, it undoubtedly should be A.
There will be more people who do not understand B or simply look at it as an artsy photo and won’t even remember the product. The face is too dark and the expression is worse in B which makes it harder to relate to the person.
The only porblem with A is that it lacks tonality in the sky.
I do not think that you should even consider B as an advertisement.
(looking at them as simply photos I still think A is better, B in my opinion is a bit overdone and the theme overused. also tonality in the face is disturbing. either make it a silhouette or expose it more.)
Its has to be B for me, I’m guessing the product is the trainers that she is wearing. There is more detail in them in B, the flare actually removes the distracting lamp post and again sends the eye towards the product. The image is a bit different from your average sports shot so will make the ad campaign stand out.
Oh, and I like it more too
While I like photo A as a photo, I could see the potential of photo B for design purposes. The flare is a nice backdrop for typography. The flare is a bit strong and maybe even over the top, but I could see its usage with type.
A – I usually like when it´s a bit too much, but i feel that B in this case is a bit tooo much,. in a perfect world a combination of the both would be awsome=)
Neither.
The sky in photo A is completely washed out. The contrast is much to strong and the “GOD rays” pull you out of the composition. There is way too much going on, it’s dificult to stick to one subject and because of the subjects proximity to the other visual elements, there is no distinction as to what the image is trying to convey.
The flare in B is way to large, but it increases the amount of midtone amount across the rest of an overly saturated image.This image has the same amount of visual elements, but appears to be lacking in subject matter because it’s lost in the sunny haze.
If I had a choice the most visually stimulating image would have to be photo B. The flare is a circle that appears in the center of the frame. Although it is completely blown out of the park, it unifies all the subject matter in the composition because it appears to cover most of it. While photo A is definately more clear, it doesn’t appeal nearly as much because it’s very clear, and at the same time very flat.
I enjoy the Chase Jarvis photos immensly, but where this one is concerened it’s kind of a lose-lose.
I think choice A look the best
I have to go with A, too much flare for me in B
Photo A looks like the subject is actually running where as in photo B she looks a bit like a soon to be victim of an alien abduction. She’s hovering while in the beam of an intensely bright light.
I am going to say B. The reason, if it is a sports company, photo B gives me the feel of an elite athlete. Like she is running on air. In a word, Jordanesque.
Photo A definitely gets my vote as well. I like how sharp and detailed it is vs the overdone flare. It has its place but in this case I definitely think the increased detail is far better.
I would actually have gone for something in between. A needs a little more something and the flare in B looks like a fake mushy UFO. You wanted opinion. That’s mine.
I would have to say that if they were both a part of one image I would pick C.
I think for this challenge your main client is a sports company, I would like my product to show in the image as much as it can. So as a consumer I would choose A because of the esthetics. I think that B would be a nice exposure if the client were to be in the arts and or wanted a piece to showcase light/photography. In addition, I love the face in A but the body position in B. I love the flare in both, maybe A with a little of B enough to still see the runner.
What is the demographic? I guess that would be the ultimate question. All in all these are beautiful images. I would choose A because of the client side of things. And not to forget that with A you can always place the flare in PS where as in B, the over exposure would not be fixable. Those are my thoughts.
If photo B’s feature was shifted to the left (starting from the lamppost) it would be stellar.
Because it’s not, I vote A
B gets my vote simply because it ‘stole’ my attention … caveat: IMHO, it has the potential to be cleaner/have even more impact if the light didn’t overlap with the runner’s body. At least, not as much as it does now or if it stopped at her back, as if it’s a source of energy being absorbed (OK, starting to sound corny) … I say this, of course, not knowing what emotional response the image is trying to invoke.
This is fun. Thanks
Vote for B, but there is little bit too much sunlight in the middle. Maybe 20-30% less sunlight be better solution.
They say different things to me, Chase. A says, “I’m taking a leisurely jog around Greenlake.” B says, “I just ran to Greenlake from, say, Wisconsin. Partly because of her expression, and partly it’s an emotional response to the flare (I think).
B, makes you think. A is just a normal picture.
For me it has to be a mixture of both.
Don’t choose one…
The shadows on the pavement are better on the 2nd one. The flare adds nicely to that, but it’s too strong and obscures too many nice elements of A.
Something in-between is needed, take strong points of both.
If the “well known sports company” just happens to be Lululemon, then it has to be “A”. The model’s expression in shot “A” exudes what Lululemon is all about. In “B” the model looks too strained and not really having a good time.
I like A better. A bit of flare, but no too much. Subject gets lost in the flare in B for me.
Hey Chase,
My pick is A. The lens flare is just enough, I like the halo effect… B is a bit too much.
– Art
If it’s a solar flare campaign, image B
Depends on what you’re going to be using it for. They’re both great shots!
A is awesome though!
It depends on 1) what the client wants to portray 2) what you’re trying to illustrate or make the viewer feel Without more context, it’s a complete toss up as to which one is “best”.
My eyes are drawn to A. The sun flare in B is too distracting and it overwhelms the image, leading you to wonder more about that bright area and less about the runner next to it.
In A, the runner seems strong & in control – the photograph is straightforward with a narrative. B has a magical quality about it that I love – it speaks more towards the abstract feelings of endurance & perseverance.
A. Its been said, but the flair is just too much in the other. A seems much cleaner for an add.
Definitely A – B is very distracting.
Look at the human element, not the lens element!
In B she is rising up off the ground, with a holy glow and a look of passive wonder.
I connect with B, it makes me think, ask questions and keep looking.
A is like clip-art, B is a real photograph with a soul. Crop it right and it’s a winner for advertising or art.
B for me buddy.
But then I love flare: http://jgharding.com/post/836069531/haverhill-sunset-by-j-g-harding-welcome-to-my
A for me.
B is for Best…..there is more of a story here. What is she running from or is she exploding into a run.
A is for Any other picture with flare, car, and runner.
A is my pick of the bunch!
A, less distraction from the flare, more model visibility
B. the flare gives the image an energy that just doesn’t exist in image A. It is like the runner is bursting out of it.
sorry. forgot to put my info here.
I go for B. Has much more energy. The flare adds drives the runner forward allowing you to concentrate on the runner by fading out the lamppost.
In A the lamppost is dead centre and competes with the runner for attention
Reminds me of that famous apple add where the runner throws the hammer at the screen!
definitely picture A =) bc picture B has to much glowing light in the middle =)
I say A, its perfect for me, too much sunlight in B that covers too much of the subject…
hmmm toughie. I love the more documentary feel to B and the crispness of the shadow seems to really suggest the runner is in the zone (maybe because it looks as though her feet are more elevated- difficult to explain but I know what I mean!)
A has it’s merits but I would say B just edges it.
Reluctantly A.
I might like B better if the runner would obscure the flare somewhat… I’d imagine she’d just appeared out of some space portal. But right now, the portal is swallowing her, I have to fear for her life!
I do like the how the shadow of her feet is unobscured in B.
B – because A could be made by everyone…
I vote for “A”, my reasoning has nothing to do with the flare issues but with the expression the runner has on her face. Seems more of a joyful expression, that she is running for sheer joy or is enjoying the run.
A If you’re keeping it wide
B If you’re going to crop it in at the pole.
I like A better than B for all the reasons above, in addition, the shadows of the legs, although very similar in both, for whatever reason look less fake in A. I don’t challenge them in any way, shadows are weird depending on angles. It just seems to my eye that the one in A is less noticeably out of place.
Nice work,
–Pete
A.
Overall I like B better but there’s just too much flare.
My choice: A.
B’s flare is too strong, and doesn’t have a sensible point of origin (it seems like it just originates in the center of the picture for no reason). Also, the setting seems a bit ‘pedestrian’ for such an epic movie-poster-style effect. Also, A has a much more recognizable composition whereas the flare in B serves to divide the picture vertically, making the cars on the right seem really out of place.
But that’s just my 22 cents.
A takes it for me. It’s cleaner, I can clearly see the runner and still have just enough flare to be both pretty and interesting. The flare in B takes over too much of the scene and I don’t see the runner as much.
A. The flair is distracting – although as an art director myself, I dont know the campaign and the thought process behind what this ad is going to say.
From a personal standpoint I prefer A. I think it has a cleaner look. The lens flare is a bit too much for my liking in image B.
From a client’s standpoint, I think it really depends on what they were looking for in the brief, and how this image would be used.
I would like to see a picture that combines A and B.
I like the more clean result of A, and I like the sky of B.
The flare of B is just to much, and the sky of A especially around her head just looks funky (in a bad way)
If you’re putting “just do it” in the middle of the flare I pick B…… even so I would knock it back a bit in post to retain just a touch more detail of the runner, but ultimately my eye is drawn straight to her shoe – great if you’re selling shoes!
From an art director’s perspective, it would depend on the final use of the image. I could really see B being a stand out for an ad, or on packaging, etc. — the flare provides perfect space for copy. And the expression on the runner’s face in B is just SO much better than in A. Also, the lighting in B is sublime, which makes the image not just grab your attention, but hold it.
It depends what the photo is going to be used for. As just a photo A is much better. However if used in a marketing piece, B may look neat and more appropriate. For example, with how Chase has displayed the pic with the letter B overlay. It almost looks like she is running around the letter.
A is a better catching photo.
B is a better supporting photo.
For me the choice would be A, but with the legs of B.
Rationale for A: flare in B is way too much and she has a less friendly smile there as well. I like the stance of her legs in B slightly better though.
B has too much flare for my taste. I like A better. Is she floating?
I prefer photo A.
The huge flare in photo B bothers me too much.
A: For me, image A says something about running, but image B seems to be more about “flare.”
I’d have to say A. The other one is nice too, but something leans me towards the more moderate version.
A is much better. B has a big white blob of light right in the middle of the shot.
I think if they are going for a softer image for the campaign go with A. If they want a harder/edgier feel, go with B.
Image A evokes the general joy of running to me. She has a softer expression and is running down her block in the afternoon, after work, in anywhere America. She is just enjoying herself and chance to get out for a run.
Image B evokes the challenge of running to me. It’s morning, she struggled to get out of bed, she could have hit snooze but she didn’t. She is breaking through the barriers that stand in her way and will reap the rewards because it is hard but she is determined to overcome.
I think I prefer the look of A but they both tell a clear and different story to me.
I’d go for A.
B feels too unbalanced for me, although if there will be some text or other elements overlaid over the final, that could completely change my mind.
“A” for sure. The flare on B becomes the focus instead of the subject.
A, is my fav.
Hmmm I would say that B is more natural looking, but A (to me anyway) is a better all round image. There is just a bit too much flare for my taste in B, but that’s just my taste.
Have a Merry Christmas and A Happy New Year.
Will vote (B), but dissecting it I wish we did not loose half of the runner in the lens flare. (A) really has not central point of interest, just a blending mode and color drama. Sky is lovely in (B), hedges are not
50% blend of each would be ideal maybe. But in accordance with the voting scheme, overall, (B)
I’d definitely pick version A, its only “con” that I see is the branch growing out of the subject’s head.
The flare on B goes just too far, plus the facial expression isn’t one of those that I’d put in a brand ad. Maybe applying just some of B’s postprocessing (in vignette and toning department) to the A picture would make the decision easier?
I think that A is the winner for me. If this were just about which photo is cooler, the flare in B is kind of cool. But when I remember that this is an ad shot for a running company, the flare in B obscure way to much of the scene for the runner or clothing or shoes, or whatever they sell to stand out. I even think that the flare in A is a bit much and obscuring. I like the crunched blacks on the scene, but I wish the runner was a little brighter.
Cheers,
Ben
Personally I think A is “better” for a print ad. The sun in B is to distracting from the main element, the runner. As I can only assume that the company is someone tied to this and not the sun I would go with A.
Also her facial expression is A is “calmer” or less strained in B. Both are great shots but for if I was to pick which I would use for an ad, A is the pick.
A.
I could get behind B more if the left were cropped out starting at the pole. I don’t care for the massive flare being centered in the photo, I want it to be coming in from one side or the other.
I choose photo A. Only because you mentioned the ad campaign was for a sports company and I’m assuming the clothing on the jogger is made by that company. In photo A you can see the clothing much better than in photo B however I do like both images…then again my assumption could be entirely wrong…
A, without a doubt.
With current cropping, A would be my choice. The subject (runner), is more relevant to the whole image.
BUT!
I feel like if B had the cars cropped out, it would give a simpler composition and the flare would feel more like it was supporting the subject and I also like how it gives a warmer tone to her skin.
Then again, it might remove a bit of the suburb street decor and I guess the ratio of this image must be of some importance.
Love your work as always! I’ve learned a thing or two since I’ve been following your blog! I’d say keep up the good work, but I guess it would be of little importance… Its clear you and your team are a group of passionate people and will never stop!
Cheers
A has my vote. B is more lifestyle. Although I would note that if I saw B w/out the comparison of A, I would have liked it.
I like A better for sure. B is a good concept but a bit heavy handed and i would reposition the light burst and probably mast the runner so she’s a bit more visible.
A for sure. My reasons…expression, body position and lack of sun flare.
B
I like Photo A. I like the flare as opposed to the full out light blocking out the runner.
I vote for A if you consider to choose a picture for a campaign. The focus should be on the product which might be the outfit of the woman!?
A. If this is a product shoot, the light in image B hides whatever the product is that you’re trying to display, whether it’s her shirt, shorts, or shoes.
In image A, you can see the products. Simple.
A please
A.. The flare is just too obnoxious..
Pick A!!!!!
b looks like she’s running out of some portal.
Most definitely I prefer A. The flare is way too much in B, takes away from the vegetation (which in A gives it a nice comfortable feel), obscures the runner, and makes the cars look too dark. It’s about all I can look at in B.
If these are the only two options my vote goes for B. In A my attention goes to the pole rather than the runner. The pole is in the center, properly exposed and in focus. In B the center of the image is through out of focus by the harsh flare which draws my eye to the runner instead. In B I would have preferred the runners right side to be less impacted by the flare. But that was not the question. So, overall it’s B.
I’m more inclined towards A cause B just feels totally unnatural to me, truth is I think the best picture would be right in the middle, I can see where your going with this, but the flare just looks to even and computer generated, it needs more variation on it’s shape, on B, the edge of the runner would have a pretty significant high lite on the side the flare is coming from, and it wouldn’t fade evenly throughout the person.
I think a happy medium between A and B would be best.
Best for a photo contest? For a print campaign? For a web banner? For a print? For Nike? For Arc Teryx?
This is definitely an “it all depends” question.
Definitely A. It would work really well as a double page spread, with the runner perfectly positioned on the second page. As well as the flare being way too much in B, the runner’s pose in A is stronger; In B her running technique doesn’t look as polished. Her expression is also better and more engaging in A.
In fact, I’m surprised B was even in the running to be chosen, let alone in the final 2. As a photo though, ignoring all the criteria for a good advertising shot, I do prefer B.
i prefer photo B. for me, i have more of an emotional and real attachment to this image. its not perfectly lit and the model isnt perfectly posed and it just feels real.
B – Absolutely, positively without any shadow if a doubt B.
My vote is for “A.”
Here’s why: I find that the flare in B is too bright and prominent in the photo. But more importantly, I like that I can see the woman’s face in photo A – it lends a lot to the understanding and feeling of the “going for a run on a beautiful morning” experience.
I initially loved B, that was the one i instantly preferred out of the two (i love flare), however after a few seconds picture A seemed the most clean out of the two. B would definitely be my favourite if it had a little less flare, it seems to kinda take over the frame after a few secs, but flare is a strange mistress you cant always control i suppose.
Both great shots though, feels like Nike or Reebok to me
A + (1/4B) IMHO
The photographer in me chooses A
The designer in me chooses B
It really depends on how the final image is going to be used. As a stand alone photo A gets my vote. B looks like it would play better with type tho.
For the client I’d say B I like the shadow leading back to the runner in the air. Overall this looks less set up and more like a captured moment/candid.
A, the shadow of the feet in B does not match the light source so looks wrong.
A for sure.
on both the pictures the shadow from the girl is not good.
The light has NO shadow. The girl does. Thats not good it bothers me.
sorry
I think B is better. in A I only see a street, cars and a running woman.ı can’t focus anything, everything seems same but in B effect of the high sunlight could pointed to running woman and her footwear. ıt is much more clear than A
A…too much glare in the second picture. In picture A it looks more natural, but it still gives the shot an amazing light
A. The flare in B takes away from the subject.
B! Definitely.
Like some have already said, you need to think about the purpose, and other design elements (like added text and logos) and not just which photo is better.
Some said the lens flare in B is too “cliche”, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with using cliches if they work, which I think it does. In my opinion, photo A is actually more cliche, with an unnatural, bleached, strong contrast look and too distracting.
Quick comparison:
- her face in pic A is only pleasant, while her face in B is inspirational.
- the sidewalk in A is too “dirty” because of the shadows of trees, while B is clean, easy to see, with only the shadow of her legs, which looks quite good and dynamic, making her levitate.
- the combination of this “levitation” feeling and strong but clean flare gives it an almost “alien”, or hidden force kinda thing driving it through, which I would choose if I was selling a product and wanted it to appear powerful.
Possible B if you dial back the flair, think you’ve over done it, dominates the frame too much
Well, I look forward to seeing which was used, but I hesitate to even offer my opinion here, mainly because I can’t imagine you have time to actually read all these comments! =)
I like A better.
As many have mentioned, the overly bright flare in B is mostly distracting. Also, the model’s face in B looks distracted and uninviting.
In A, however, not only can you see the model, and, presumably what sporting good item she’s selling, but she’s looking at the camera and, therefore, me. She’s smiling and inviting and that creates a more positive response to her and, consequently, what she’s theoretically selling me. I get the feeling she might like me more if I buy it, whatever it is. And, I’d really like her to like me more. Isn’t that the essence of sales?
A wins for me. I feel like the flare overpowered the composition in B.
A looks more natural, but B could be cery attractive and useful in printed/billboard ad campany – you could put some nice, huge, clean and bold typography inside that would mąkę the ad very attractive.
A is my choice, the flare is a little too big for me and distracts me from the model.
Photo A has a more accurate exposure however because of this I find the cars distracting this leads me to like B the runner is blasting out of the light ! I like B the client Likes A so what, each image is serving purpose.
I choose A.
I like it because it is more raw looking – not so processed. The I don’t know if the flare in B is all natural or augmented in post, but it overpowers the composition. Neither one clearly depicts any of the items that the model is wearing so I don’t think the sports company is attempting to sell those items in particular, but more the lifestyle or image she is portraying.
To be honest, I don’t know how B even got in this race. Unless the company’s name is Solar Flare Sportswear or something. On its own I think it is cool looking, but it doesn’t encourage me to buy anything from a sports company.
I vote B. The flare may be a bit too prominent, but A seems too posed to me. In B, the runner has a more natural expression, and the other key for me is the clarity of the runner’s shadow in B. The well-defined silhouette paired with the bright flare makes the runner seem like she’s floating, kind of transcendent.
A fo’ Sho’! Its a cleaner image
A by far for me
cheers
DF
A is easier on the eyes and the mind; B isn’t–which can be a good thing, if you want people to stop for an instant longer and look at the ad.
But, the choice would be influenced by the purpose of the image and how it is going to be used and what it is going to be accompanied by.
I prefer A only because I think the flare in b takes too much from te runner. If the flare was a little smaller I would have picked b hands down. I do like how b makes you focus on the runner more though. Still choose a though. Nice work.
A as they stand.
B if cropped at the lamp post.
B. Just like the feel better. It has more mood than A. It’d give an art director more space for overlaying copy, and I find the lampost in A to be a pretty distracting element.
Definitely “A” – it communicates well, its clean and the eye is drawn to the woman, instead of the sunburst.
A.
I like her expression better, and the way her body is postioned. The thing that I do like about the B image is the way that the cars are composed.
Just my 2 cents.
I would place my vote on A. Aside from contrast, saturation, flares ect. Photo A is more about the individual and less about the environment. Also like that it looks like the model is just about to smile in Photo A. Her expression in Photo B looks more stressed. In general, Photo A tells a more detailed story than Photo B. just my 2¢.
i would say it depends on how u use the picture. picture a would make a good pic if the logo would be on the bottom or out of the frame, it shows detail. as for photo b it would be cool to put the logo in the flare and then show the background all in one. It all depends…..
Depends on usage.
personally I prefer A, but if it were to need text over any significant part of the image, the text would get lost. B provides a cleaner slate for things like that.
I prefer A, there a slight flare in the picture thats functions alot more that the other in B. Look at the amount of detail that is lost because of the huge flare in B. I love the shadows on the ground cause by her running. Theres just alot more to see and connect with in A.
This question really depends on the brief and what the role of the photo is in the campaign or particular execution. I could make a case for either. I like looking at all the details in A and I think the details in the shot hold my attention, but if I had to set type or put a product shot over it (say a close cropped running shoe) that big area of flare would be pretty useful and the extra interest created by detail in the shot would not be appropriate.
B, I would think. I think (insofar as the client’s needs are served) that it serves up a mood rather than the literal runner or literal depiction of the sporting goods sold. Once copy/logo/etc. are added, it won’t be necessary to show the literal. The idea is to aspire one to be a runner themselves, not to simply show product in action.
I think A
Im a sucker for flares, so I vote B. It would also be a great place to hold a logo or text if needed in the advertisement.
I prefer A, there a slight flare in the picture thats functions alot more that the other in B. Look at the amount of detail that is lost because of the huge flare in B. I love the shadows on the ground cause by her running. Theres just alot more to see and connect with in A.
as a creative director I like A
as a photographer I like B
If a bit more was provided about the clients requirement, it might be a little easier to choose a preference. A is a great shot as far as images go. But with everything going on in the pic, whats the focus? In B, the flare is very creative, but do I look at the car, or the runner? Hmm, the flare does give white space where logo and/text could be inserted to emphasize the point. I’d go with B assuming this was for an ad.
From a composition and product placement standpoint A is the better photo. The lens flare in B is a bit harsh and washes out the sports wear, which I assume is what is being marketed. Now the Client might like how the lens flare in B makes the subject glow and create an air of mystery. I could also see them placing some text on the lens flare also.
-R
I love B. The Flare is great. B is much stronger for me. The Flare is warm , has more emotion, more energy and seems to push the runner forward. Dynamic. A is a great, clean picture, B has character.
“A” by a long shot. You can see your main subject and has enough flare effect to set the mood. B – is over done.
Has to be A….. I love the lens flare arches centre bottom, also a lot more info makes it more interesting;
I think Image A is better by far.
The flare in image B becomes the focal point and obscures everything behind it. So much so that you can’t even tell that the runner is a beautiful healthy young woman.
Image B just looks like a bad shot.
Just my two cents here, but from a purely image standpoint, I think photo A is the better of the two images. The rim light produced by the sunlight is captured amazingly well. That being said, photo B is the more “experimental” of the two images. Some would say that the lens flare look is over done nowadays, but I still like the look. The nice thing about photo B is that lens flare is taken to the extreme. For a magazine ad layout it really strikes the subject as they open to that page and keeps them focused on the image. And really, that’s what the ad folks are looking for anyways! Cheers…
I like both of them, maybe the flare on the second one is a bit too much but bottom line is, it depends on what you are trying to portray to the client and customers and do they get the message.
I was leaning toward B, simply because it leaves the runner more anonymous and therefore the viewer can put her/himself into the scene. However, the more I looked at it, the more the flare was irritating.
I have to vote for A.
I prefer A, because the model in photo A the model is engaging the camera and she looks like she is having fun. The B photo her expression is a little different, not quite as engaging. I do like the lens flare in B, although a bit to much flare.
Photo A seems a lot more morning-ish, thus more appropriate for the jogging… B gives me the impression of very hot&dry weather, so not too good for a good morning run…
A. but i’d crop more on left to split the white car in the middle. somewhere there..:-)
Photo A. I find the glare in the middle of B too distracting from the subject. The lighting in A adds to the subject.
I like photo A. Simply because the light in B seems to blow a hole in the middle of the picture. But I guess it depends on what you’re trying to say. Though I have to say I like her expression better on B.
A is better. The glare is just too imposing in B, but A looks beautiful and highlights the subject.
I’m going with B. Given that this for a sporting goods ad campaign, the model should presumibly be the focus. The extreme flare in B lessens the distractions and provides something for the model to “emerge” from.
My initial response was, “this must be one of those ‘the client picked the crappy one again’ type of posts. My vote is for A hands down, but after reading many of the responses, it seems B isn’t as bad (at least based on opinion) as I thought. I think the sun flare is so overwhelming that the only reason to choose B is if the ad required a lot of clear space for text. In that case, A might be a little busy and distract from the typography, while B would leave a nice circle in the center.
I still prefer A from a purely photographic standpoint.
I revise mine… Didn’t notice that they are two separate pictures entirely… I’d go with B, the composition is better. But get rid of the flare.
B….In picture A, the light post has the same importance than the subject. Picture B has a more dramatic meaning than A…
For me, A allows me to focus on the runner rather than trying to look through the sunspot to find the runner. I’m sure you’ll prove me wrong.
I’m going to have to go with “B”. “A” is a great photo and the flare in “B” is a little much. But as cliche as flares are these days there’s a reason they’re cliche… they look cool and they create a certain feeling and I like the feeling in “B” more.
A for me. It’s the whole ‘light areas advance, dark areas recede’ thing. My eye gets stuck on the sun in photo B. After that, the runner starts to compete with the car on the left edge for next in line of importance.
While I personally like A better I’m going to go with B. Her “amputated” leg in A is a bit distracting and I’m thinking that B might fit the brief better- especially a tie in with a tag line. B also gives the early morning run feel which suggests a dedication to the sport. But, if I knew these things for sure I’d have a nice new expensive pair of running shoes too!
I like A better, the Flare irritates my eyes for some reason.
But looking at them again, i guess it would depend on the purpose of the photo. They are both very nice.
Absolutly A!
Skipping the obvious differences, I like A because she has a more pleasant expression.
B!!!!!
I like photo A. The B is too much for me.
I’d have to go with A.
B has more depth to it but the glare is so powerful it over powers the rest. My eye went directly to A when I opened the post, B was harder to focus on because of the glare.
But…
B is more fun to explore – just a little less flare…
->A parce que je la prefere…(mais a mon avis la B est l’originale avec peu de retouche)
A for me…the flare is too much in B
B
I like the expression of the runner better. In A she seems to be looking at me too much, and I feel she is too high in the air and floating.
B mohr have a bit too much flare, but when I look at the expressions, I can’t deal with A.
My 2 cents.
Ben
I’d go with B. The flare directs my attention immediately to the runner while my eye has to search a bit in photo A – I think A is just to busy and the flare helps to simplify things in photo B.
b is more interesting since I don’t know the subject
I vote for A too
A, though i like B but it’s just to much flare, if it was a bit less i would pick B.
I would like to say B but I can’t. There’s something not quite right about the flare. Too centered maybe.
A, unless they are going to crop it to use as a single page, then I say B
I prefer A, I find the glare in the B photo a wee bit overwhelming.
(mind you B is a little more captivating)
My 2 cents.
It’s not a same photo, but for me, deffinitly “A”!!!
At first, I thought A was better. But when I thought about the emotion that could be conveyed, B has something special about it. A seems like something I’ve seen lots of times before. B took me to the morning as the sun comes up, the quiet personal moment before you have to start paying attention to schedules and things to do. I could hear the sounds, smell the aroma of the early morning in B, I’ve been there, this took me back.
Choice: A
Picture A, no doubts. The flare on the second distracts too much
Looking at both images I find it impossible to choose which would be a better image. There are elements within each image that are great, yet the images on their own… well…. don’t do anything special.
B. I prefer this one because the flare tales away most of the distraction (light pole, cars, etc). It might be a little too much, but I still thinks it drives the eyes on the runner more efficiently and it gives a warm and pleasant feeling to the shot : you would really want to be outside at that time.
I say B, she looking at the camera in A if you look closely and it takes away from the message of the photograph.
Definitely A. B is too over the top distracting and looks like an error of some sort, not a sun flare.
They’re quite different and you obviously like B despite most people probably favouring A.
I reckon you favour B, the shadow is nice the sky clearer and I like that you don’t have the woman smiling.
Personally would have toned down the flare and gone for B with the logo in the middle of the shot.
Nice work.
Hey Chase,
I would go for A.
B to me is too busy and doesn’t show the details as well as A.
H.
I have learned that to judge a photo that is going to have text added, with out knowing where the text, is going to go is difficult. Truth be told A seems a pretty boring picture, B is much more intestting, but the flare is too strong. I would personally dial down the flare a bit.
It seems to me both of those photos are a compolation of the background, and the same runner, just exposed differently to match the backgrounds. If that is truely the case, move the runner a little bit to take her out of the flare, and that would be my choice.
A for the win, the flare in b is too distracting
Both are wonderful shots.
I go for B. I see more speed in it, more dynamics. It fits the theme of the photo. A is too balanced for me.
I would rather see her foot hit the pavement, by the way.
I like A Better.
A by far
Photo A is neatly-composed and I like that my eyes were easily drawn to the jogger however, I do find the photo quite ordinary.
Photo B caught my eye first but I think the amount of flare is just too much. It kind of “divides” in the middle too and I think that if I saw this ad in a magazine or say a billboard, I might have a hard time figuring out what was being endorsed. Maybe a smaller amount would do the trick? Nevertheless, you have nice photos Mr. Jarvis.
I vote for Photo B since it stands out quite a bit for me.
The glare on A is perfect ! Fence, details
B take too much distraction, can’t see the nice fence on B
A!!! Focus is the woman Running, not the light. The second images looks as though the center is about to catch on fire, its too bright, too much. “A” has that subtle lens flare and great back lighting, but not too much to push the key lighting off. Plus in “B” the shadow of the woman on the sidewalk makes her look as though she is lifting off by aliens. Photo “A”, her shadow is not as distracting. Also the Models facial expression is much better in photo “A”. I do like that the sky has a better blue tint (vignetting) in “B”, but that’s about it. This was an easy answer to me. “A” is a great shot.
Definitely photo A. The flare is too distracting in B.
‘A’ by a long long way for me, but i’d say client went for ‘B’
Oh, also? A is better because it’s the one in your portfolio in another section of the site. How many people commenting have actually looked at your portfolio, I wonder? =)
Photo A is my choice. I find that the lens flare in B over powers the subject.
Depends on what you’re trying to sell?
With limited info I would say A – happy runner. But she is looking straight at the camera…
The flare in B is a great spot for eye catching “text”
i personally prefer B but can’t wait to hear the decision. to me the runner looks way more “in the zone” in B, her face is more relaxed, she’s more at the peak of her stride, the shadows at her feet are more defined, etc. basically i think the vibe she’s giving off in B is more believable.
a.s.
A. all the way, just that bit more detail makes it.
A. Looks more natural and colors are pleasant.
B is too bright + the shadow of her legs is too harsh.
B. Flare is probably a little extreme, but client would be loving it…so common in lifestyle photos right now and provides a nice clean space for type/logo. Engagement or lack of engagement with the camera will help to reinforce the message the client includes – allows character to become archetypal, the fit everywoman. Finally, the shadow below the runner is clearly defined in this image and provides a clean simple element to round out the image.
My 2 cents.
Thanks for reading, keep doing your thing.
B looks like a darkroom accident. I mean, seriously…
A gets my vote.
A! B looks blown out, and you’re better than that
A has better commercial / advertising approach, since subject is more clear of distraction and as an observer, my vision goes straight at the running lady.
B is better for editorial purposes. There is more feeling, more mood and abstract concept implied.
I think it all depends on the context of the ad campaign, but I think B is a more powerful image.
B is my vote.
If I’m selling shoes, I have to go with B. Photo A is too much about the model and not enough about the product.
I find myself looking at B for a longer period of time.
A for her face and rim light on her hair. The cars are really distracting; I hope the add gets a square crop like the thumbnail. And what’s with the shoes?
Choice A for sure. Like it nice and clean, brings out the runner more.
Chase,
Rather than wading into the “A vs B” discussion above, I want to challenge you to go back to your purpose. How can I answer which is better without knowing the design brief / objectives of the ad?
If the brief says “we want to show a strong, powerful women who is comfortable with herself and her place in life”, or “it’s about our running shorts”, then image A is your winner.
If the design brief says “Give me a big blob of negative space in the middle of the page, so that I can put in text”, or “it’s about late afternoon running, but de-emphasize the subject”, then image B is your baby.
Love your work and your approach.
A A A
i like A better. B just sort of looks blown out and almost like a mistake. i like how you see the definition/tone of the runner’s body/muscles in A. she looks more badass!
I would go for the first one, but i has a blurry thing in the centre, so nr 2 it is!
B, because it gives a feeling of the moment.
what’s the product? Who’s the audience? What’s the campaign theme/concept? Where will this be used (print/web/billboard/etc.)?
the flare provides an option to place copy/text needed for the ad without being marred by a distracting background in B.
A is more traditional, clear and a very solid choice.
I think the lens flare takes out a lot of the busy details in A, therefore, making the image a little cleaner/simpler in B. I think I prefer B because, but I would have liked a slightly less intense sun on that one (but only slightly).
I find A is way too cluttered, but assuming the client has something to do with lifestyle or sportswear, the product is possibly more visible because…
I find B is way too indistinct, unless the client is the government, and they’re promoting vitamin D for health.
So it really depends what the campaign is for, which you (no doubt purposely) left out, to give us a surprise ending
I like the idea of B, but A’s details just please my eyes so much with all of the environment to look at. Also it might be because I can’t see the product as clearly in B. My vote for A.
B = stronger image
B. Makes you look back and forth, searching through the picture.
A. Is cleaner and more commercial, but it depends what the client is trying to sell. If they are going for something more homogenized, A is a better fit.
B. The light from the flare is making me uncomfortable, that said, I keep looking at it, where I glossed right over A. My eyes are drawn to the shadows of her legs, looks like she’s flying.
Hey Chase,
If the frame was cropped a bit more to balance out the flare with the girl, I would go with B, but as is the light is taking over the image and becoming more of the subject than the girl is so I have to go with A – unless the subject IS the sunlight, in which case you did a terrific job with B(gotta love photography’s subjectivity!). She also looks like she’s coming out of the light, like a wormhole, in B, which is neat and adds a unique feel. But A gives more depth to the image with the background detail and still uses the light to add emphasis to the subject instead of becoming it. Great shots just the same.
Michael Carty
ps-good job with HelpPortrait, I enjoyed the show and chat of all things photog
I like as well, the flare in #2 overpowers the image.
going with A
A of course.
B should be thrashed. Flare is misplaced and overblown.
A is the best. Think there’s way to mouch of the sun in B.
Tough choose, I liked both…
B for me. I love this light !!
Like most people – I prefer A, just a hint too much flare in B. Need to be a combination A & B.
If the client was a sports company then photo B was chosen. The glare is sufficient enough to blur out the lamp post & draw your eye to the athlete, which is the objective. Also the huge glare adds to the drama, as if the athlete is bursting through a mist or fog. She is caught with both feet off the ground (almost like levitation) to create an even greater impact. Plus, I really like her shadow cast on the ground, it also gives an ethereal effect to the whole image.
I like A better. It’s more clear and B looks like there is just a giant sun spot in the middle. I’d pick A =]
A, I don’t like the intensity of light in B – it is too strong.
My vote is for B. Here’s why.
I think A displays the runner more clearly. It gives a more natural everyday look to the image, while B is too flare-y and distracting. However, even though A is obviously clearer, I think the pole that splits the frame is less aesthetic than the flare in image B. I also like that the runner’s head is in the clear of the sky in image B, with no major greenery around her hair.
Result: my vote is for image B.
Because of the distracting flare photo B is a unique proposition.
A is all about the runner. B is all about the technique. A gets my vote.
Another vote for A. The flare in B is just too overpowering and distracting.
A for sure
AAAAAAA
The flare on B is quite distracting.
I’d go with version A.
Prefer: Image A
Reason: Since this is an ad for a sports company, the image of a clear well toned body makes a better impact as compared to half hidden image of the model…….
seeing as a lot of your work is lifestyle based, I’m a huge fan of B, I think it looks like she’s bursting out of the light, it makes me want to get out and run on a sunny morning, the whole image has emotion.
The flare’s fine, I think it works for this shot.
Opposite my house there’s a park and in the morning when the sun’s rising it comes through the trees like this, sadly there’s hundreds of school kids in the way but i’ve always wanted to shoot it and this is how i imagine it would look.
Go B!!
Photo A.
The flare in B overwhelms the shot.
A.
Better smile. Less flare.
I think A is better.
A for commercial or advertisement I definitely think A. You could imagine yourself being that person jogging down the sidewalk. You can imagine yourself In her shoes. Lol no pun intended. It gives you a sense of where you are where the jog is taking place. Pic B let’s your mind wonder to much it bothers me that I don’t know what’s behind her. Which in sense distracts me from what she is actually doing.
A for me.
B
My eye is drawn to the runner’s left foot and more particularly the shadow, and the fact that the runner is in the air. The seemingly distractling
A – Less clear as to what I should be looking at, the washed out sky is more of a problem (for me), ironically, than the flare out centre in B.
As a few have remarked above, B allows me to imagine the idea of me running (I wish), whereas A is more an image of that particular runner.
My vote: B.
Why? For the emotional skills of photo B, which has some touch of vision, of unexplained and unexplainable. A burst of light like runner’s flow, makes the beholder’s mind wonder … and his thoughts wander – go walkabout into phantasy.
A is a technically perfect picture, but somehow boring like “seen a thousand times, seen before, seen every day in the hood”.
Well, if you are still counting…..A
I have to agree with most of the prior posts why it is better. BTW, I really do like it a lot!
Rick
I vote A, though B would be better if that flare wasn’t obscuring the runner.
I think Photo B emphasizes the act of running more as a force. A just looks generic. I would shrink the burst of light by a bit though
I Vote A. For me, the post divides and creates a question. To drive or to run. Her composure and smile says Run.
A-1.5 combine a & B more flare on an and less flare on b.
A
The too-bright lens flare in B divides the photo and makes the subject unknown. Is it the car or is it the woman running… or even worse, is the subject of photo B the lens flare?
Oops, started a sentence in the middle of the previous reply.
“The seemingly distracting” should have included “flare actually seems to lead the eye towards the feet and shadows”.
Kazi
To me it depends on the story the client wanted to tell. If the story is, “you will look sexy and feel great running in these shoes” then “A” gets my vote. If the story is about the dream like runner’s high “B” gets my vote. I like the expression on the model’s face more in “A” but if I were buying one of these prints to hang on my wall I would go with “B” because it leaves more to the imagination.
Based on the gradient nature of the shadow along the fence I would guess this is backlit with a strobe instead of natural light, with a ring light used for fill.
A – Nicer facial expression on the runner, and the flare in B seems a bit overwhelming (my eyes are drawn to the light, not the runner)
I prefer A for the cleanliness of the shot but prefer how she looks running wise in B.. you can see her camera left leg a lot better in B but she’s looking directly to camera in A… they’re both perfect in their own ways but a combination of them would be the answer for me. I think A.
I vote for B, unless the add itself is for the clothes she’s wearing in that case i vote A. I like the look and feel of B, the warmth and the sunlight makes it a nice running add campaignshot. But again, this is my opinion, we can’t all like the same can we
A.
Looks more like a Chase Javis Photograph.
Personally too much flare in B, but if the flare is the story, then B.
B
In A my eyes are stuck on the lamp in the centre.
Edit: A if cropped like in the small pictures. Full pictures, B.
A, but you have to crop out the cars
My vote goes to B for several reasons. I prefer the composition on B because the large pole is a little more off center making it less predominate in the image. I also like the fact that the runner is further past the imposing pole, leaving it and whatever else is behind her in the “dust” provided by the lens flare. Also, the look on her face is a more believable depiction of what a runner looks like while running. Life isn’t always a white picket fence, and this image makes that statement. While A is a pleasing image, B gets my vote.
My choice is “A”. Nicer facial expression, and lovely backlight.
I usually like flares but in “B” it´s too much (at least in my opinion).
Saludos,
Federico
A…
I think B it look slike she is being teleported from some other planet… or something like that.
I am going with B. I feel with out the flare the first thing my eye is pulled to is the cars parked along the street. The flare seems to push my eye to the runner which is the main subject of the the photo.
I prefer A, but like different aspects of each photo. The models face in A I believe is stronger or at least happier looking. However, I like that you backed away in shot B because I’m not as distracted by the SUV’s mirror or the poll in the center. The shadows on the ground and the contrast on the vehicles I also find distracting for me in photo A. If you could replace the ground shadows with the shadows from B and also tone down the contrast in the vehicles to closer match image B I feel like it might (imho) increase the strength of the image(s).
As always thanks for sharing!
I like A.
B makes me squint.
My pick: B
If the photos were to stand alone and I were to choose simply which photo I prefer, I would choose “A.” However, I have made the assumption that the image is for a print ad campaign. If I were the designer for that campaign, I think the negative space created by the flare offers some cool possibilities for integrating copy or branding.
I like A, but only because her expression in B is pained. Coming from that huge flare, she looks like she’s running for her life (maybe that’s the intent?) Photo A has just enough flare and the better expression. She looks happy, confident, powerful and healthy.
Both are amazing images. But from a marketers point of view (which I am not, so this is an assumption) photo B focuses more on the product and feel to the image and also provides some great space for copy to be added (which I’m sure would have to go somewhere). But also really like A for it just being a darn great image. (B) is my choice though
Photo “A” has my vote. While I am a big fan of flare, I think Photo “B” has too much of it. The runner is beautiful athletic woman. I like her facial expression (smile) better in Photo “A.”
The color is more rich and the runner’s tone body, and her clothing items are better defined in Photo “B.”
Chase Jarvis & Crew Rock!
Christopher
My Vote is for B.
To me A just depicts the action of running while photo B creates more a emotional connection with the runner.Thats just me though. Both are great shots either way.
Extraordinary that so many have so much to say about so little.
C’mon, guys this is not a choice between which picture is best because frankly neither is any good.
The discussion surely shouldn’t be about choosing A over B, but the need to discard both and find a better picture.
What’s interesting is that given a choice between two images almost everyone has been caught up comparing one against the other when it’s obvious neither should be used.
I prefer image A the photo of the runner.
I do not care for image B the photo of the lens flare.
I believe my motivations are clear from the statements above
My vote is for B. The photo provides a nice ambience of the early morning run, which provides a better mood. The flare provides the feeling that the runner is bathed in sunlight and also helps to mask the pole and the cars. Photo A is too detailed (if that makes any sense). I don’t think the ad is about the act of jogging, but the feeling of a great morning run. Photo B promotes this better than Photo A.
A
Usually a fan of big lens flare and sunbursts, but this one goes into the distracting realm. It looks like a mistake – even though we know it is not. I also like her smile in A, but the way she’s looking at the camera is a little weird. So, A is less of two evils, I guess.
A. The flare is too much of the center point in B and would take away from the rest of the message
Depends on what your client is going for (if they even know that lol). If you’re going to release it as is/stock , then A.. but I like B if the focus is on outdoor activity. If you go with B then crop out the cars and give it a little more contrast maybe?
A. B is way to distracting. The general public won’t appreciate it.
I am going to have to say A due to the fact that the flare changes the entire perspective of the image. The image could be used for anything that involves someone to run. Chased by muggers or the police. Or she could just be running recreationally. Running to get help. It takes the emphasis off of the runner and makes it way too ambiguous. My two cent.
B is the better picture.
I feel that the cars in picture A gets too much attention or that was were I was looking, not at the running girl. In picture B the light draws the eye’s attention and you look closer to the focused object, the girl. Picture B really feels like a perfect summer day to run, and I guess that’s is the object with the photo.
Well, that’s just my thoughts.
I like Photo A better. As it’s been said already, the flare really takes centre stage on Photo B and is distracting, at least to me (and several others, based on comments).
Is there a photo in B?
A. Better expression.
I happen to love flare. I use it a lot and many of my own favourite images contain flare. I feel warm and part of the scene. However, it’s obvious there are many who disagree and find the flare distracting.
To answer your specific question, I prefer B.
I pick A for a campaign. More clear and more focused on the topic.
Photo A.
A does it all for me.
A!
too much light in B.
A. What a nice smile she has. No smile in B, maybe because of the nuclear bomb and all…
For the 600 pixel size, I think A works better. Like many others, I find the flare in B distracting.
HOWEVER, when the photos are a smaller size (top of the post), I find B better. The details in A are distracting with the smaller size and the flare in B actually helps draw the eye to the runner.
So I guess my vote is, it depends on what size the photos will be presented, and of course what the client’s campaign message is intended to be.
The flare in b is simply too distracting, but it would be helpful to know what you were going for in these shots.
B would be my vote if I were creating this purely for myself but if I were voting as a stakeholder in the company I’d likely be voting A
I must say, I like the shadows un the floor in B
I think it depends on the product and the message the client wants to get across. Both photos are great. Photo A is kind of earthbound, girl-next-door is having her morning run. Photo B is more dreamy…for the woman who has great ambitions and wants to achieve more…she’s setting off from a giant light and gazing to the horizon. I’m sure you catch my drift
Maybe the flare in B should be reduced just a little bit…like 10%?
And ps…. thanks so much for posting your interview with Jeremy Cowart. I saw it live, but you guys said so many clever things that it calls for a review!!!
B.
Definitely.
It has more ‘intrigue’. It makes you wonder a little bit more.
A is the shot that that the ‘normal’ shooter would make, thinking that ‘B’ was a mistake.
Just saying.
I prefer photo A because photo B is a disaster. The flare in B is way to big and very distracting. It looks like someone spilled bleach in the middle of the picture. Even if the advantage of B is the available white space the flare needs to be much further to the left in the composition where it doesn’t obscure the subject completely.
Photo ‘A’. I like the lens flair in B, but it’s a little much, and i think that photo A has enough lens flair as it is. But even thought they are the same, they are sooo much different. Very creative on two different takes on one photo.
A. The flare in B looks too much like a blotch of vaseline, and A has enough subtle lens flare to indicate the fact that the image was backlit by the sun.
Wow tons of comments!
Without hesitation, A for me.
A is much better… at first I thought it was literally the same image, but then began to see the subtle differences.
In A the model is smiling at the camera, in B she’s looking off into space, probably trying to figure out why the sky got a million times brighter as she’s about to get nuked.
“A” – cleaner shot.
In my opinion, A is a technically better image. But, B may work “better” with the ad campaign. It’s sort of not a fair question.
If there’s going to be copy on it, then I’d say B. Without the copy, judging is as a photo, I’d say A.
It all depecnds on how you want to use the flare. It’s the perfect vehicle for some copy.
I lean towards A. The other picture is too overwhelming for me, I can’t actually focus on what’s happening.
I like A better than B, however might prefer something that has the flare somewhere inbetween the two.
It rather depends on the brief which might alter my decision. I go for A because it is cleaner. If the point of the flare in B was to add liveliness and happiness then it isn’t needed as those are present in A. If the point was to romanticise then I think it is over done. If there was some other point then I’ve missed it.
Both good eye catching shots. my vote for A because for obvious reasons I’m a guy and want a better look at the girl. For tech reasons: it’s cleaner more natural looking than shot B with it’s extreme light blaring in the shot. I do like that effect (which i have seen in your pictures a lot) but here this seems like it dosen’t work because the overall feeling of the whole shot is a “Captured in the moment: type shot and the blaring light makes it look unnatural which I feel most commercial stills suffer to much from, which is that fake manufactured look.
Your a awesome photog get rid of that crazy nuclear blast of light.
I prefer A. I find it has a more realistic feel to it. However, B gives it more of a fantastic feel.
A for sure!
A gets my vote
In B she looks like she’s about to be abducted by aliens, but the flipside is that you see less of the cars.
If you could cut the flare by 50% and/or shift it left then B would be the winner
A gets my vote
In B she looks like she’s about to be abducted by aliens, but the flipside is that you see less of the cars.
If you could cut the flare by 50% and/or shift it left then B would be the winner
CW
I choose A, because it’s clearer than B (it’s too flare)
from my eyes … A is better
A is my pick- her run looks more natural. B looks like she is hopping to her next step.
the mix of A and B
)
little bit more of B in pic A
I vote for B. I like the more well-defined shadow of the runner emphasizing that she’s in mid-air….that and I’m a sucker for blowouts.
‘A’ for sure. The runner seems too enveloped by the flair in ‘B’, drawing more attention to the center and away from the subject, although the cast shadow is more favorable.
The damaged bumper on the white car is somewhat distracting and the SUV perhaps too easily identifiable (is that a bad thing?).. Will the final image be cropped square?
I like photo [A] better……….. photo [B] looks like she is being chased by the smog-ghost.
I assume it’s a sports wear company.
In which case I’d also say A as the product (the clothes) is clearer to the potential buying segment which I would assume they’d say is women runners.
A win B
I’m gonna go with B. It has a stronger emotional pull and a sense of mystery. I also think it gives the runner some power and energy. Overall, from an artistic and a marketing standpoint, I think B has a more solid signature.
Great work!
I say it depends on the graphic layout. I would vote for A if there is a lot of type and the look is clean. I would vote for B if it’s more of a loud ad.
B – assuming there will be text/graphics over the photo (otherwise A)
Without hesitation, I vote for A.
My first thought on B was that it had water on the lens.
B is more dramatic, the body language of the girl is more tense and focus on her running and the big flair adds some mystery to the image.
I prefer the B picture..
Coz I fell it’s more unique and warmth.. Make me feel the spirit and warmness of great morning. And start the day with jogging..
I like Photo A because I can see the subject more. I also really like Photo B cause I spent more time looking at it trying to see more into it because the subject wasn’t as clear as Photo A. Great photos. Keep up the awesome
I like A better, but could see B being chosen for commercial purposes as it adds more wow to it. Plus it isn’t about the photo so much as the brand and product. Love it.
B for ad copy placement, A as a standalone. But the real answer is, neither. “Better” is in the eye of the beholder.
Personally, I like A. I think her expression is better, her skin tone is nicer and there is still that warmth and flare without it being too much. I don’t like that in B, she looks like a leg is missing, especially when the image is smaller.
B for ad copy placement, A as a standalone. But the real answer is, neither. “Better” is in the eye of the beholder.
A is technically ‘better’. However, the dramatic flare in B will grab lots of attention.. Furthermore, the flare decreases the amount of detail in the image and draws attention away from the pole (which is kinda distracting) and out to the sides (where the runner is); making the image, I believe, unique and therefore more memorable than the competition- which is great for a company’s exposure.
Big respect for your work, man.
B all the way !!! nice one
I like B, the sun brings focus to the girl running. Who needs bokeh with cool sun flare!
I choose B. Even tho it look distracting, but when look for second time it really have the special in it. I guess by feel I will choose B. But by pretty photo, A is prettier…
A, without question. If given the choice of A: staring at a Hottie Mc Hotterson, or B: Staring into the Sun (or flare), I’m gonna choose Hottie Mc Hotterson every time…
Def A
A – not that I don’t like (B)… but rather (A) more
I don’t prefer B, because, the flare is too large.
But, what message of campaign does this sport company wants to offer? If there’s something mystery etc, or becoming an effects. I think it’s okay.
While A, although I like it, seems so many objects there. Perhaps requires post-edit to adjust contrast between the runner and other objects.
I guess it depends on the purpose of the image, but I would actually choose B. Image A has a lot of detail in the scene, and I actually found myself looking all around. Image B helped me focus solely on the runner. Another reason is that there is some minor lens flare in Image A toward the bottom, which is a little distracting. With Image B, I know the flare is deliberate and serves a purpose. Just my opinion though. I’m in no way a professional photographer, designer, or artist. Thanks for the opportunity to share my thoughts.
A. looks more posed and looks like it could have been taken at any time of the day.
B. looks like early morning first light with the more defined shadows. Looks like she has been out running before light and now she is in her stride as the suns comes up
B is definitely my choice
My vote goes to A.
While B has that extra energy burst in the flare, A is still powerful enough on it’s own (her expression, mid-air moment)
A. See the 6000 flare comments above.
I like A. It’s about the runner, not the sun.
Unless you’re going to load the centre up with copy, A is my choice.
B has too much cowbell, I mean, flare.
I assume that if it’s for a campaign of some sort there will be lettering involved. So my vote goes to B. From a design standpoint, A is way too busy for any type to attract the eye.
B is more focused and will lead the eye to the flare and then the runner.
I agree. I couldn’t make a better explanation.
Also, the runner’s face and the projected shade makes me vote for
B.
I’d like to see “C”. Somewhere in the middle. A is not enough punch and B is overkill.
My daughter and I vote for A
B. The runner looks like she’s floating in the glow and the flare takes viewer’s eyes away from distracting parked cars.
If cropped as a vertical removing all elements on left of screen including pole, the flare would be extraneous and A would be a stronger, more classic shot.
it’s in the eye of the beholder. if you like what you see thats all that matters. thats what makes it art . by the way I’ll take B
A. B hurts my eyes. That can’t be good for advertising.
I prefer B. I like the sunflair, the shoes are lit more and she has two legs.
In A the girls leg looks stumpy, which does not speak athletic to me.
I’d do a blend between the two in PS and use the photo of the model in shot “A”, I prefer the general colour temp of “B” as is more apt what with there being the sun (or a warm strobe) back lighting the talent. My thinking would probably change if I knew the size and placement of the text / logo.
Forsure A over B but i really dont like how the light post in photo A is dead center.
To me A is the winner…
They are both fine images…for different applications. So, I ask you , which is a better photograph for the project you are working on?
Definitely B!
A is an average photo … The environment in photo B carries a lot more energy!
I vote for A . I think A gives more 3D look, face expression is better, with any nice font wording to the left it would, increase space, atmosphere and 3d look of that photograph.
Distracting cars and lamp post would dissapear behind lettering.
I love this picture anyway
Those cars and the light post sort of wreck both, so B is better because it hides them a little, especially the light post which is the worse offender. But that flare looks a little like an alien life form or something.
Vote for ” B ”
The image “A” is not enough punch.
A. It has a cleaner look and the lens flair looks a bit too much in B
face is way better in B and I like that she’s distanced from the pole. If the flare were just a tinch less….
I’d say A. I like that you can see her more clearly and she’s smiling. I’d really like a mix of both though.
A with only a little flair.
It really depends on who and what it’s for. A is cleaner, with the emphasis on the runner. B is more emotional, and would work well as a symbolic shot of someone achieving some goal or overcoming difficulties.
Very curious to hear the full story…
I vote for A. I like pictures with flair, but not when it overwhelms what should be the overall subject and theme. The obscured and less contrasty details in the image of the woman detracts from its physicality and dynamism.
I like A
A for sports campaign, B is all about the Flare
I like A better but B looks more dynamic and that’s probably the one chosen.
Hey Man, I love your work and have profound respect, but honestly A is boring and B is too much. I think some context for the use of the images would help folks decide which achieves the intended goal. Is there a story as to why it comes down to just these two? Pat.
ill take B
At first I thought A because the runner is much more clear. But after looking at it for a while, the area around the lamp post and the runners shadow is MUCH nicer and less distracting than in photo A. However, I think the runner gets lost a little too much in the flare, so would consider combining the two, using B as the base and carefully masking in the runner… It may not work but I would try it. Otherwise I would go with A.
But really, the way the light plays on the surroundings is perfect in B. Really tough one!
Definitely B.
A has too much personality in her face. I think it would work out better for you if the subject looks as much anonymous (if that makes any sense) to viewer as possible
B, I can relate as a sports theme. A just looks like a girl running.
I’m struggling to choose. I wish I knew a little more detail about what the client wanted.
PHOTO B: if you are looking at placing the the client’s name in the middle of the flare as the main focus point. Without a name embossed in the middle of the flare. The flare becomes to much of a distraction cause the second thing my eyes focuses on is darkness of the car in the left foreground because of the contrast.
Photo A: is better if you want the focus to be on the runner. However, the white post in the middle of the photo is to distracting, especially with the color of the runner unable to over power the present of a white car at the curb. But if you were to crop photo A at the line of the gutter, removing the cars, this will give a much better focus on the runner by positioning her just left of centre.
So I’m sorry I’m undecided, I’m a big fan of your work. Especially your work shooting for the ski industry. But this time you’re not catching me with these photos.
Maybe that’s why you can’t decide.
Anyway keep up the inspiring work.
A. B is totally blow out. Can’t see much detail.
I’m a fan of A. The light pole gives it a diptych/contrast feel between the sedentary cars and the active lifestyle. The minimal, warm flare of A tells me it’s a first thing in the morning and that’s my life priority – an active lifestyle first, work second.
I don’t know the art direction, and maybe the max flare is needed for copy. Dunno. B doesn’t have the story that A does from a photographic standpoint.
Cool Stuff. I love it when you do this type of thing. Thanks a bunch.
In most situation A will be my choice, as B is a bit unrealistic and fake to me. Anyway, it depends on the purpose of the picture for.
B. It emboldens the “break of day” theme and the model looks like she’s really running instead of just posing for an ad. It’s like she’s got that “i’ve gotta keep this going” emotions running all over her, and the scene is on a pavement round the corner of about just any neighborhood.
If i’m the art director, i’ll choose B because it relates to the audience better
two great shots btw
‘A’ is professional. ‘B’ is amateur.
‘A’ was taken by a professional phot
I prefer A for being a better standalone image, mainly because the glare in the middle of B is very distracting for me. I imagine that, since this was an ad, the company might prefer B so they can put text and extra graphics in the center.
A for sure.
For an ad or any thing else for that matter it’s not about which photo is best, it’s about which components work best together to portray a specific feel or meaning. I think the flair is distracting but, it does take my focus off the runner and put it on the environment…thus if the ad is about gear for the elements or just getting outside it does it’s job.
A.
A has my vote. there are minor details like the runner’s expression and other things but the biggest factor for me was too much flare in B. while i agree that the whole “over flared” images are starting to show up everywhere, i still feel like they have their place. however in this example the position of the flare is just distracting. i’d prefer it come from the edge and lead into the shot toward the subject.
I’m going to go with “A”, since this is for a sports campaign. I’m usually a fan of a lttile over exposure, and heavy lens flare. However, If the flare in “B” was a little toned down behind the runner, I would say go with “B”. It dominates the photo too much.
Thanks for asking our opinion Chase!
Ilike the sidewalk and how it is lit, with the runners shadow in “B”. Maybe a composite of the two?
A is a cleaner image, the glare in B is very distracting, with photos your eyes are drawn to lighter parts of an image but this light just blows the picture out too much. From a commercial point that light might be right for overlaying text to get the message across to the audience Like Just do it. I’m intrigued to find out which one wins.
If it will be used for print ad, B gives you more “white Space” for text/graphics and washes out the street light pole, sidewalk and the white car. Pulls the black car out of deep contrast and suggests the runner and feel of early morning fresh run rather than “bam!” cute runner chic in photo A.
Very Lululemon look to it….Hmm?
Photo ‘a’
I personally don’t like the flare in photo ‘B’
‘A’ has me looking at the runner, taking in the details. I like it. I could see this being an excellent photograph for an ad.
‘B’ has me more interested in the car on the left. I feel the model is overshadowed by the flare.
Actually… Now that I look at it again the flare in B causes my eye to sort of flow through the image, from the car to the girl and around in circles, while the pole in the middle of A is -slightly- distracting.
I still like A more.
The obvious choice is “A” based on general photographic design principles. HOWEVER, I really do not know the message the sports company wants out of the photo. The photo that best accentuates and conveys the message wins. Thanks for this opportunity Chase!
It would be a tough choice to choose between these 2 photos..
However i chose A as the details are all there..
I would had choosen B is the flare is just around the face making her mysterious..
If you cut out the cars, I prefer A, but with the cars, B is better. There is just so much symbolism attached to running out of the light…
I personally like A , overall composition
“A” is the one.
The flare is a bit much but I still go with B for many reasons. 1. I like the fact she is not looking at the camera. 2. The flare makes it appear she is blasting thru which in the photo case she is running. Etc…
So, when are you telling us which one you used and why? Come on, Chase! :c) I want to hear the end of the story! :c)
What about C?
A
B makes me want sunglasses
I really like B it lends itself to ad layout and text in the hot spot. Both images are great but like I said B is better for a commercial or print ad purpose
B. It is real. It displays the source of the light. It accelerates the runner and gives more depth. Forget about the optical flaws of flare. This is where flare works. Leave it alone.
Although B seems cleaner, the color and detail on the runner is nice. However, for some reason I am drawn to B (perhaps with slightly less flare). I find the car detail too much in A-too sharp, my eye goes between the runner and the cars. I guess it depends on the focus of the campaign is though, right…
A seems cleaner and the color and detail on the runner is nice. However, for some reason I am drawn to B (perhaps with slightly less flare). I find the car detail too much in A-too sharp; my eye goes between the runner and the cars. I guess it depends on the focus of the campaign is though..
Neither actually….. personally, I like A better for the ad but the runner should have some sweat on her shirt to show that she’s working hard…. what kind of sports company doesn’t like sweat. Talk it over with them and see if you can photoshop some sweat in there….
I like B the best. The photo shows the runner running out the early morning sun, breaking free, powered by the sun. It would be great for an ad promoting orange juice.
The absence of detail in the middle gives the client plenty of space to place text. The runner on the edge of photo B is emerging where the runner in photo A is just another detail in an busy photo. Photo B is simpler and the subject of the photo, the runner, is not competing for attention with a number of complex elements as in photo A.
I think A because I want attention toward my runner. I feel that between the two it would be A that an ad company would prefer but I like many am also interested in which is chosen.
A: Nice rich photo. Subject is clearly defined within her element.
B: Flare is overpowering. makes me want to put on my glasses (not corrective, just glare
My Vote: A
I like B. love the lens flare.
B.
More dynamic and less competition for the runner’s attention.
How it is that you came to present these 2 versions to your client?
Were you responsible for the postproduction?
This is what i think.
A : Advertising campaing
B : Artistic content
B definately! The runner stands out more and her shadow is more prominate! More dramatic! The flare just needs to be softened and faded out towards the street.
A … that flare is sooooo 90s’
B has stopping power. A is average.
If you choose B, you might as well, click “Filter > Render > Lens Flare,” oh and after that you can add the campaign text in the big sunflare with a “dropshadow”
i think A is an excellent shot, the lady’s face is quite bold/rigid/confident, and her body is well defined… Great shot. Pick A or no more ChaseJarvis Blog for me!
jp.
I prefer A by far. I really enjoy flare in photos, but it’s much too dominant in B, so there’s really no comparison for my taste. Maybe you could compromise by just adding some flare to A in post.
There are so many votes for A, its not hard to understand why. You can go back to your client and tell em the public choice (which i guess is the key) in case they have chosen B. I am not a pro in photography or arty kinds but B fails on me.. the flare is awful! The expressions on runners face tired. Sorry no disrespect but thats what a consumer would say probably.
A is a good picture and B sucks.
On second thought I was way too harsh on B not knowing what the criteria is for the shot. I does seem that the flare in B is over the top.
I like ‘A’ better… I like the crisp colors, and the flare is there which gives me the feeling of a morning run – and I like the expression on her face better…
Just Do It!
To be honest, I don’t like either one.
I vote for A, the flare in B is just too much. It takes away from the image
B
imperfection is absolutely perfect.
rocksteady,
danno~
I like A better, B looks like someone spilled somthing on the fotoprint.
… if there is somthing like “better” out of context, at all…
B. Definitely B
The flare blocks the street pole thingy and leads my eyes to the runner…without the flare, my eyes would be distracted by the pole
B gets my vote +]
B is better in mood. Not as technically good but when you look for raw emotion, good is not always best..Plus she is looking at the camera in A..Too staged.
A for Me
A – B has too much flare.
There is no right or wrong answer, especially since no context was provided (i.e., background on the client’s objective). Judging by my own context, I find both pictures to be defective: (A) has lens flare that doesn’t appear to have any enhancing effect and (B) is completely dominated by the excess of light. I like (A) better though (B) appears to be more prepared.
My vote is for photo B. You said that this project was for a well known sports company so I will assume there will be some type of branding added in the form of a logo or text, therefore, the flare in photo B provides the perfect spot in which to interweave the branding. The cement lamp-post in Photo A severs the image in half leaving the viewer bobbing back and forth between the parked cars and the runner and ultimately creating unrest. However, that could quite possibly be your/their intention: “contrasting the gas-guzzling littered urban landscape with a breath of fresh air hurdling down the walkway…the choice is yours?” I do still believe that with all of the competing lines in Photo A, it will be much more of a challenge to add a logo/text and still make it all jive.
It all depends on the identity the company wants to embrace… but A is too standard or everyday. I agree that the glare seems too much in B, but hands down it’s more memorable.
A for me. Nice smile and everything just fits in.
B has too much flare. She looked like she just ran thru a portal. Unless that’s what the agency was looking for.
A.
B has too much flare for my personal taste.
B is better. The pole in A split the image in an unpleasant way. The flare in B masks the pole and split the image in a more dynamic way which also challenge my imagination.
My vote goes to B. A is a terrific photo but B requires good understanding of the lens, camera, exposure, aperture, and shutter speed to create this particular image. Personally, I love photos with flare, intended flare of course. It adds depth and a level of imagination to the photo. A is absolutely great, but B takes the view beyond still photography. I can almost imagine her in motion…running towards me.
My preference is A , the flare in B is too shocking and distracting , however if you can mix the 2 photos together to get less distracting flare , then my choice will go to the 2 photos combined..
A is the winner, you lose focus on the subject in B and just wonder about that sunspot/flare in the center.
They are both cheesey cliches, which is fine since it’s advertising, but the mega flare is just too much, seen it a lot . Then again in A, the model seems to be looking at the camera to see how Chase is reacting. maybe re touch her eyes and it’ll be ok.
B.
In A: the pole and cars are too distracting. Pole is in the middle of the frame – not too dynamic. However, better facial expression in this shot.
In B: ball of sunlight (plasma gas cloud?) hides pole problem; also keeps the rest of the frame mysterious – you can’t see all of her, but you can keep trying – good to keep the eyeballs on the image longer…better angle to reduce presence of the parked cars. Can you crop those cars out instead?
For me, photo A is better..Lens flare is too distracting on the photo B
A without doubt. The flare is too strong in B. Makes me look away
A has my vote. Flare can add a creative touch to some shooting situations but in this instance, the flare in photo B is deconstructive.
Hello, Something between A & B. The contrast of the girl on the picture A over the “Background” of B picture would be a nice agreement for me! But if I had to choose, the A picture. Lens flare on the girl too strong for me
A presents the runner best. The circle in B is taking over the image.
Definitely A. If the flare in B was higher and not competing for the same space, then I might have chosen B.
The leading lines composition for picture A is stronger and the eye is naturally garnered to the brighter side of the image -hence the girl. A simple test would be to show image A to 1 group and image B to another group for 1 second. Ask them to recite the elements in the image. Picture A will probably garner more reaction to the girl -if this is what you are after. If you are still undecided ask your client to do a quick ‘qual’ test with small sample size within their target audience online.
A. The flare in B is just too much.
I would have a 2nd look at the other 998 pictures …
Sometimes I find it hard to choose between CJ images, but this one is simple A. I find the glare in B is too distracting, B would work for me if amount of glare would be somewhat 20-30% less dominant.
A
The flare in the second totally kills the bg which I don’t like. It’s my opinion, anyway.
A, without a doubt.
I have a feeling the stakeholders who prefer B like it because the flare takes on a symbolic meaning that the more literal image of the sun in A just doesn’t have. While I can see the appeal of that, A just reads more simply and easily as the sun so the image just remains more relatable. Now, if some carefully crafted text or a logo were to appear in that flare, I might feel a little differently…
Depends on what the photo is for. Its purpose always ranks out its beauty. But for me “A” is much prettier, more calm and leaves credible dreams. IMO “B” is too fake, too much and less focus for the mind..
Hi chase, You say you took 1000 and A or B are the best I think you most listen to kevin chase.
If the campaign is selling a product, the clothes, then definitely A.
It the campaign is selling something simply via mood, then B has a lot of power.
If the client has a short and simple slogan (Say nike’s “Just do it” and the swoosh) the big glowy orb makes a perfect spot for it too.
Definitely a tough call, but for general use, I’d have to say A.
Photo A, of course. Too much flare on photo B.
Photo B makes me feel like the girl is flying. No hard shadows as seen in photo A distract my attention from the girl and her legs shadows that makes me feel like I will fly with these pair of trainers
I would go for A. The flare in B is a little too distracting and doesnt look real.
I love flare. A lot. But a more natural flare than what’s in B. Also, I know people are saying the cars and pole are distracting but it makes it more real. Sets it in the “urban” environment.
A is the better shot
Easy, Photo A is better. The flare in B is too distracting
definitively A
definetly “A”….if thats for a sports company.
both the pics are good..but “A” got my vote when theres a lot of decisions behind choosing 1and that too for a branded sports comp.
A, definitely.
Better pose, better face. Flare in B doesn’t look nice to me at all.
The only reason why it might be B — if they needed to put a text on it.
For me it’s photo A.
I like A better – the flare is more subtle and the model’s looking at the camera, which gives a connection to the viewer.
In my opinion either A nor B is a “better” photo, the “better” one (if indeed thete is such a thing) is just the one that the client feels is what they need….
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and so the choice would come down to a majority vote. Both are good images in their own way, but just don’t think you can say one is better than the other!
Art is subjective, not objective, so someone can look at the Mona Lisa and say “what’s all the fuss about” and someone can die for the love of it, this is what makes photography great, it’s the artisitc vision and drive and creativity that’s important, and did your art exceed the expectations of the client
My 2p worth :-0
B for me.
A has far more distractions, my eye keeps getting around the image, the pole in the middle, the cars on the left. In B my eye is drawn to the runner en tends to stay there. Although I do find the flare a bit much.
Regards
I go for A. The light is to blown out for me in B.
A. I think B is a little crossfaded.
A. Balanced.
B is “too much”
Hello Chase!
I am French so sorry for my English …
My vote is A because it is clearer and more readable, there is a slight halo of light between the legs of the subject and cars.
In relation to B, I prefer the framing that lets us see the curb, I also like the shadow of the legs is more pronounced …
I hope I was useful …
Good day …
Greg
It’s a question that is impossible to answer until you know specifically ‘what’ it is for?
I can tell you which photo I ‘like’ best, but that photo might not be the best one for the purpose for which your client wants it.
This is the classic photography as a tool/photography as art dichotomy. Perhaps from your point of view the only salient issue is that the best photo is the one your client ends up selecting and paying for!
I vote A. If the flare in B was slightly less I would have chosen B as I think the Flare makes the image burst with energy
A with the sky from B .
The flare makes it look like she is hovering and won´t touch the ground
Definitely A
I prefer B, as there are fewer distracting elements in the image and the subject seems to be popping out of the flare – very effective. I guess it’d also be easier for the sports company to put some advertising on image B as there is a less-cluttered background to use.
B would be nice with a Logo right in the middle floating above the glare. The runner would then give a nice ‘subconscious’ background message. Otherwise A.
A, flare is too distracting in B.
If only possible to have B overall with less flare and more flare than A! B good if product copy placed in centre of picture. A is the ‘safe’ choice.
Definitively “A”! The women is smiling.
She is beautifull so why do you Wan’t to hide her by huge sun flare??
The first question is what is the ad campaign for? Without knowing, it is hard to judge which image would be better.
If you need to pour a LOT of text into the image then B might be better because you could put the text into the lens flare. If it is going to be a relatively text free ad, where the image sells the idea, (although I’m not sure what that would be without some context), then A would be better.
So my answer is: it depends.
I think the company would choose A
)) B is nice but maybe with less flare
Hi Chase,
I believe this shot was aimed at the runner. In this view, I think B is better.
The large flare in B, helps bring an emphasis on the runner. It kind of silences the row of cars in the left and also blurs out the background in a passive manner. Nevertheless I think it will make more sense if you could bring the runner in front of the flare with a slight merge by brushing it out.
I would gladly pick B as my desktop background.
Best
G
A gets my vote because of clarity. B definitely has a bit too much flare and like others have said, it ‘s too distracting. thanks for posting this and great job on both photos !
I prefer Photo A because I can clearly see the person running. In the other photo, the glare becomes the subject. To be fair, either photo could work given the requirements of Victory.
couple of toss up reasons. regarding photo comparisons:
* athlete’s expression is better in B photo because she is looking onward instead of smiling down at camera angle.
* hands down though… for my taste, there is WAY too much opposing sun glare in photo B. that garish huge sunspot looks to be the focus of the image. I see nothing else. So, do not like B.
In the end, A wins for me.
I’ve got choose B its perfect if you need to put logo and or slogan. For example: if you put the words “destination: reach goal” or “towards the bright path”. However if you use it as double page advert with slogan “burn gas or burn fat” A is the perfect image.
A. I like some flair too but B is just too much. I think the pole dead in the middle of the frame is distracting in both.
I’d go with B . . . why? It’s simply a more artistic shot. A, while a fine shot, is less dynamic. If I am flipping through a magazine, me eye would skip right over it. The bright flare in B draws my eye to the image – in this age of rapid attention real estate, you need something like that to catch the eye quickly . . .
-pmk
Photo A
A – it’s a beautiful, well composed, sharp, shot. There is nothing not to like about it.
The only thing missing is the little magic that the right flare could provide.
B – I like the flare idea even though the flare isn’t quite right.
I like it because its composition emphasizes the girl running.
Perhaps If the flare was smaller, B would be perfect for me.
Best regards.
Mauro
B cause it’s imperfect. Perfect is just something created by what other people tell you is perfect and if something “imperfect” is released out into the world by someone of importance and viewed by millions of people who all love it then it will most likely turn into a “perfect” picture. So what would you rather do, put out an already perfect picture that won’t change people’s minds and instead will just make people say “hm that’s pretty nice”, or do you want to put something out that makes people look twice and think “hey that’s really cool. I don’t think i’ve seen something like that before but it looks awesome!”?
Seems like a no-brainer to me. A, all the way. The glare in B doesn’t look intentional. It just looks like a mistake. With B, was the idea that there would be copy on top of the glare?
Absolutely no question in my mind. A is the better photograph. The overexposed portion around the sun on B is just too much for my taste.
B
u can put any slogan on B – enough place for advert and it will look natural,
A is too sharp and wood gates catching too much thoughts
B. As a runner… I don’t always run with a smile on my face. Her expression in B is more realistic. Plus I like the flare. It’s kind of like she’s running from something or being propelled out of the flare. Just my thoughts, it looks like A’s got it pretty wrapped up here.
I’d rather see B than A
Photo B for me. Photo A’s composition lead my eyes to the white car’s taillight while photo B keeps my focus on the runner which I assume is the main subject matter for a sports ad.
B
I feel as though A has too much detail, depth and the tone is too dark creating a distraction from what the primary focus is, the runner.
In photo B, the sun has created a natural diversion that pushes your eye to the runner rather than the light pole, fence detail and tail lights of the cars. I also like how the shadow under the runner is much bolder in B. This creates a draw to only one of 2 defined areas of the photo split between the car to the left and the runner to the right. Naturally, the runner is more interesting than a parked car creating one area of interest, the runner.
Thanks for opening this up for discussion Chase.
A is my choice…by far.
Both beautiful shots, but B is more intriguing and dynamic. The sun flair allows space for laying in taglines and logos in the ad layout as well.
B, A is nice but B has that something special.
Has to be A !
The flare is too distracting and dominates the image.
For some strange reason B makes me uneasy, as if my mind doesn’t know where to look or what to focus on.
.. both of them have their own expression…
in my eye i prefer A.. it s more a clean shot and shows the atmosphere on a run. if it is just for an image
in addition to running or sports, — relaxing/repower yourself being free outside and so on..
B is more effecting because of its glow… it could underline the power of a new shoe or sth… like an after burner .. lots of power .. the product is more in focus or better the feeling you have when you use it …
that were my first thoughts/feelings when i saw those to fotos!
to decide which one is better for the campaign it would be helpful to know what should be expressed ..
thx for sharing:)
kevin skusa
A. Absolutly AAAAAAAAAA
A for sure. Too much flare in B obscuring the runner. Perhaps something in the middle would be nice.
A. I love flare, but B has too much, although, granted, this can be very appealing. And A has just a little that adds a nice, warm feel. I just think A is the better photo.
For an ad, I’m going with B. Very eye-grabbing and the big blast of surprisingly soft light gives a great spot for a logo or a little bit of copy. Nice work as always – and I’m sure you know this well already, but don’t listen to the haters.
Not knowing product and intent means I’m picking purely for my own criteria.
Her expression in B is much better. She’s in her zone and not mugging for the camera.
In ideal world, I would try to PS her expression from B to A because I really don’t like the light burst, I think it detracts.
Forced to choose, have to go with B. Her expression wins the day.
I think A, but it really depends of the purpose of the campain, and the message of the pic should deliver. B is cooler and more different, but also I think the sun flare is to big and perfect in it’s shape, looks almost made i PS… or a misstake. Little more disturbance and dirt and B would get my wote for sure.
My vote is A. I like your facial expression better and B has too much of a flare, but I like B’s sky better.
*A* is the clear winner for me. The lens flare in “B” is a little too much.
Well, I guess I’m going to go against the flow and choose B.
Although I like lens flare… I think it gets over used… and so for that reason I was tempted to go with A. But with A I tend to wander around the frame… to the cars, and the pole, and everything else in it. With the flare in B, I see her face [which is what I feel like when I'm running, not like she looks in A "oh look, there's a camera"] and her footwear. Even though it’s got the large overexposed center, I feel like it makes it a more simple image.
It was really fun to read comments, though!
‘B’
‘A’ seems generic to me. Since it is for an advertisement, something different is calls out to us. Photo ‘B’ got my attention immediately for its flare, composition and non-generic form of photo.
Artistically, I like B, but considering the commercial nature of the work, I would choose A because it emphasizes the runner more.
A, handsdown! Flare is too distracting. not sure why the sports company is considering photo B.
Hmm. I would love something in between A and B concerning the backlight. In A I don’t like the tree coming out of her head. But if I would have to choose I would take B and lighten her up a little
. Cheers Andreas
I have to vote for A. I love the shadows in B but prefer the clarity of A.
My vote is for photo A. I find the sun flare in photo B too distracting.
I choose B
The pole in A grabs my focus and keeps it. The flare in B grabs my focus and pushes me to the runner.
I think B is more powerful, the woman seems to be coming out of ball of fire, traveling faster than the speed of light.
B – If the purpose of this is for an ad, say in a magazine, then the power, the expression, and the light are perfect and the huge highlight in the center leaves a perfect space for the graphic designer to lay out the campaign’s catchphrase, logo, whatever.
I feel like most people picking A are doing so because they have been brainwashed in to what makes a good photo.
The best photo is the photo that is right for the situation.
I’d go with “A”. The composition I think is better, and the shadow from her running is great along with the plants and car shadows. It works. Photo “B” that light is kinda to harsh I think, and it blows out the shadows from the plants which I enjoy.
I like B because despite having the strong presence of the flare , it attracts your attention and isn’t a forgettable image.
It looks like the runner is being propelled forward by this strong morning energy at sunrise. An inspiring shot..
Prefer B with that floaty ethereal look. A may show more of the model, but that lamp post and clarity of parked cars look distracting.
I like both elements of A an B.
I like the clarity of A, the runners expression an the shadows on the floor, but I prefer how the runner is further away from the lamp posts an the ‘warm feeling that the flare gives it in B. Personally the flare is just a little too much for me though. However as an advert I would say that B works better an is far less forgettable.
Technically, A would jump out as the obvious choice, but, since I know nothing about the campaign, the company behind it, the product or lifestyle they are trying to sell, the type of copy treatment they want to use on top of the photo, then I really cannot say. I can see the merits in both photos from an advertising angle.
So just on aesthetics alone, I vote for A. It made me feel like taking a run.
B. the flare suggests time and freedom (this was shot on purpose). the timing of her feet shot off the ground suggests balance, energy, rhythm and power. plus the shot makes it easier to add text
My vote is for A beacuse the composition and the light is better than B
A… Absolutely!
This is a tough decision. There are great things about both photos, but I think photo B has two things that make it the winner. The first reason is that you can more clearly see her back foot than in photo A (both photos captured her during the best part of her cadence). The first photo almost makes her look like an amputee. The other thing I noticed about B is the distinct runner shadow on the sidewalk – this make the shot much stronger than the shadow in A, which is muddled with the shadows from the other branches.
On that note, I do feel that the flare on B is a hair too strong. But I think that is a nitpick. If this is a shot for a shoe or clothing company, shot B helps sell that.
B for me definitely. I like the way the the glare removes the less important details, leaving the eyes to focus on the runner and part of the cars telling there’s a road beside. The shadow below the runner in B also gives a deeper impression of a morning/evening run.
The glare on B though is much too centered imo(i liked the square-cropped version), does feel a tiny bit unrealistic but I would still go for B comparing both photos.
Photo A
Definitely A
B suck major ass
A, but I like the facial expression and positioning of the runner in B more.
I prefer A. B is more dynamic to say.But for publisizing the Image It may not be appropriate.Because of the bright flare I feel there is missing something and little bit distracting the first impression.So I vote for A.safety Bet.
In the end the client will pick they one they like! regardless of it’s technically correct form. It’s B.
Haven’t read all the other comments, so I may be redundant, here.
I like both. I see merits in both. Ultimately, it depends on what the client directive is, which none of us know.
One thing that bugs me about A is that she seems to be suspended in mid-air, like a Warner Brothers cartoon character; there’s not enough sense of motion, and she almost looks ‘shopped in. At least, in B, you have a sense of the environment… early morning run, maintaining your health, “in the zone”. The flare – while overdone, anymore, and in this instance is a little heavy for my taste – actually helps push the runner into motion, in my opinion. It also leaves space for copy, which would center the viewer’s eye and pull it a little out to the right, again suggesting motion.
I prefer Image A.
To much flare in B!
Greets
I prefer A. It’s not clear to me why thee’s a big patch of light obscuring the figure in B. If I knew a logical answer, maybe I’d change my vote.
For me it,s image b.
The flare gives it more speed
Regards
A! or maybe a mid version…
A. I find the flare in B way too distracting.
I also like her expression more in A.
A, mos def. I love a good sun flare, but in B it becomes the subject of pic. maybe that’s what you want.
Hallo Chase.
I prefer the A one.
Even if I don’t know the needs and commitment (do you need space to write something, or do they need a mystic image?), I would select the A one.
It’s a stunning image, strong impact, strong contrast… in the opposite of the girl that appares weight-less.
In my taste the B leaves too few space for the image…
…and the amount of light give me some noise at the eyes (but that’s just a trouble of me).
You need a photo C, where it’s in between the both of them. Hard pressed, I’d pick photo A as B has too much flare.
A! the expression works better, and the flare in B is just a little too much for a “commercial” shot in my opinion.
great work as always CJ
Both photos have problems. B because there is too much flare, and the vines over her head look like some sort of streamers, and A with that stupid post in the middle of the photo, and because of the smile she looks like she is mugging for the camera as other reviewers have noted. Toss’m both.
just B, but if some of her body is recovered from the flare !
I like “b” because the subject is not looking a the camera and appears to be focused on the running.
I prefer A, because it definitely gives me a feel-good vibe. Photo B just makes me look around to figure out what’s to see on the photo. I think the model looks better on B, but you’re selling activewear and it’s much more visible on A.
I really want to like photo B. I love the idea of her running out of the sun flare, as if she’s being born from the star itself, full of energy and life. Unfortunately, I think the flare is too blobby for my taste, as if something is actually on the lens. I
I prefer A. It’s sharp, clean and expressive. I’d like to see more flare if possible, but I find the amount in B to be distracting.
doesn’t it ultimately depend on the message trying to be sent??
I like A best, but that’s is just for looking at a picture. If this is being used for an ad, or for an illustration, there will be a different focus. Then B may be best since it lends itself to some text over the flare.
I think that both images are very strong and has its own unique characteristics (obviously since they’re both different images), so I don’t have a specific choice at this moment. My only question to be able to have a valid answer to this debate would be “what will the copy say?” and “where will it be placed?”
A.
Why ?
A – clean crisp image, conveys urban environment, summer weather and the joy of running / excerising; something I can relate to and I get it quickly
B – good if sticky is my goal – makes my eye wander all around the periphery of the flare to see what might be missing in the light. Spend more time on this image but I’m looking for what I can’t see, not at what I can see.
A. Dont like the huge flare in B
Everybody seems to have a problem with flare. I choose B because it is more interesting than A. A is nice and neat but B has more oomph.
B in my opinion, seems like walking on the light
Clearly A.
Although the lamppost is almost too important. But the runner shines and is beautifullly lit. The lamppost adds a sense of realism, of everyday reality, going for a run out your door.
The ominous white light in B is too dominant and overshines the main event – the jogger!
Definitely B if you are wanting to call attention to the runner. Both feet are showing. The flare knocks out the background calling focus on the runner. I like the shadow better also as well as the warmth.
Definitely B if you are wanting to call attention to the runner. Both feet are showing. The flare knocks out the background calling focus on the runner. I like the shadow better also as well as the warmth.
The outstanding photo is B because of the lens flare. A is just a good photo of a pretty girl running.
B is bathed in sunlight, the warmth oozes out of the centre of the frame. I know exactly how that sunlight would feel on my skin. I can picture the long shadows and sounds of the suburb as I run the same route as the model.
A is a picture, it’s very straight but doesn’t really tell me that much. It’s a capture of a moment in time, nothing more. It spoon feeds me the explanation of events and there’s not a whole lot to tell.
B invokes so much more of an emotional response, it pulls out memories of jogging in the summer and pulls the observer in to the neighbourhood.
On a photographic critique it also obfuscates the big streetlight post and diverts the eye to the detail nearest the light bleed, which just happens to be the girl.
In short B is for people with great imaginations and a sense of being, A is for people who need to hear stories at bedtime
I prefer A, I think it shows more detail
I feel strongly that A should be the choice here. There’s plenty of definition for the eye to feast on, yet you still have that glow of the flare.
B seems to have a cataract and give me visual discontinuity. I spend more time trying to figure out what is covered by the flare than understanding what the image (and client) are trying to speak to me about.
First series: I like B. I like the lens flare effect, It adds environment and she’s emerging from, “the light” I also like the cropping as opposed to the second series of A and B. The dark car on the left is very distracting and my eyes jumps to it first as opposed to jumping to the runner. Good job Chasers! ~ Dov
B seems to be my choice; she seems boundless by everything…even gravity (very cool shadow). With the flare there’s less complexity in the background too. The wall next to her in A has a lot going on, but like the change in textures and materials being displayed in the street lamps, trees and walls. Also seems that if you add the advertisement to the photo it will soften the “nuclear blast” effect.
I’m very new to photography and love your stuff; thanks for creating these experiences to learn from.
A to me is a better portait shot but since this is for an ad my vote is for B
I like B but for the campaign, I’d have to choose A. A bit too much sun burst in B.
Cool post, Chase. Thanks for giving us the chance to react.
Mark
I like the cleaness of “A”, but I find the cars distracting and feel that the light pole splits the image. “B” is my choice because I feel that the flare lessens the distraction of the cars and pole and adds an element of movement. The flare gives the effect that it is a force propelling the runner forward and helping her to complete her journey.
A, to much lens flare. And A is much more cleaner. I feel the sun is taking to much space in B and draws my attention away from the subject. No you have almost 1000 votes to go through
It really depends on the purpose and use of the photo to say which is better. Having said that, I would pick B. A seems to be the better one, but the light green in the background draws my eye away from the runner. The overexposure certainly draws my eye here and hence on the runner and her shadow.
Chase, two of my housmates say A. They think the flare is too strong. I said B earlier. ALSO, fyi.. It’d be great if you can throw the comment box at the top especially when viewing on an iPad. Otherwise one has scroll down 900 comments. Not so fun.
Although I like B I think the flare is just to much, and is taking away from the photo itself. But if the shot is dealing with flare and light I would say B. So not knowing I’m going with Photo A
My choice is B. A is nice and neat but B has more oomph.
A! The flare in B is just a little too much, unless you want lots off negative space.
My choice is A
B
Why is she running from an explosion? I like photo A. I feel like the huge lens flare takes away a lot of the photo. Maybe if the flare was half way between the photos?
for me A is much better
Two sides but only one vote: I like A because the fit/action model looks more relaxed, she almost looks like you caught her walking on air. But my vote has to go to B, she seems to be working at it, which I like. As a reader, I don’t want to see how perfect her body is or how calmly she can look on a hard core jog. The extreme lens flare is suited for the activity.
A: the flare in B overwhelms the frame.
A for me.
It has more depth
I’d say it depends on what the goal of the commission is. In my opinion A is a very clean and brisk image, but I find the athlete’s look at the camera very distracting. To me the feel of the image is more that from a photo shoot rather than conveying an emotion of what running is about. Maybe just a bit too perfect. A great photo if clean is what you’re after.
On the other hand I think B has a more realistic feel to it conveying the enjoyment of going for an early morning run. The size of the flare does however require you to look at the image a bit longer before you grasp what’s going on. It wouldn’t be my pick for a magazine or billboard add, but rather an in store display comes to mind.
So I guess my answer depends on what you want to use the image for.
I prefer A. The flare in B overpowers the entire image, while in A the flare doesn’t detract attention from the model and the clothes she’s wearing.
Holy c$&p …. how many comments??? lol
Chase, ‘A’ gets my vote; love it!
Cheers,
Glyn
As a digital artist who composites images…and the fact that I like image B for it’s more artist approach. I would say combine the two… Since image A to me is a better representation of the the woman running with the sports gear. You could get the best of both worlds.
J
The Company will probably pick A, and they’ll be wrong, because B is by far the better image. A is the safe bet, its not as ‘artistic’ if you will, which again, is false. The big flair in B really takes the image to the next level, especially with the warmer color cast, and the burnt out sky, not to mention the difficulty of actually getting the flair in there and having it look natural.
A is better
I think A is better
My first vote was “A”… But the thinking about it “B” would be the better choice for the client. The Flair creates a better negative space for any copy. “A” there is to much going on in the background that the copy can get lost with out using tables.
She is not wearing any branded clothes that needs to be visible so the over lapping flair is not a issue. B also having the flair lower has more of a morning feeling which can be looked as refreshing.
just my 2 cents
Which one I prefer goes out the window and it really doesn’t matter which one anyone here prefers.
No offence intended. What’s going to happen is the usually. Give the client the best of both worlds.
The final image will end up somewhere in between the two.
Personally, I would like to see a shot that is in between. B, will probably be the choice.
“A” for me…better eye contact and whole feel of her presence with the wider frame…flare on B looks way to artificial, not really supporting the message but being the message. And flare is no message at all
I like B. Looks more powerful.
I really like the way the energy that the woman in A had, however there is a tree near the center of the photo that is distracting and kind of prominent. The flare in B hides that element. I do think that the woman is tired looking in B, but I think B is the choice.
I like “A” a bit more – the flare is a bit distracting on ‘B’. If the company is going to place some copy over the flare, that may help.
A slight flare on ‘A’ might allow you to keep the clean look & focus on the runner plus allow a space for copy.
“A” is clearly a better picture for a sports company. Photo is divided in two and clearly contrasts the two sides of the image. the left hand with its dark cars going backward and on the right we have a lady enjoying her run to the point she looks angelic. The thirds rule broken with good effect. You can either glance at this photo and automatically get it or you can look at it further and get more involved as a viewer.
“B” I’m not exactly sure what this sports company is trying to sell. But if attention is what your trying to get maybe it will work.
Which photo is better depends on the context of what your trying to say
I like B for the energy. From the images, the ad must be something active (exercise gear or some energy concoction etc), and the flare makes it seem like a burst she/you need to get active. Also, the flare helps keep the eye on the foreground. A is a “clean” image, but it also causes eye-wander into trivial areas.
I’d bet money B was used for the ad.
Clearly B. It stands out and makes a branding statement. The other one is very plain-jane and wouldn’t keep anyone’s attention.
The “distracting” flare makes it not only epic, but also draws visual interest that the other lacks.
-Ravi
Vote for B. Both are good but B has more mystery and universality for a main visual.
I prefer A but would have explored a version between A and B. If that didn’t work I would definitely go with A because the product is clearer, the runner seems happier, more energetic and accessible. B’s flare is too over the top and takes the image into the realm of the fantastical and unrealistic therefore more difficult to relate too and isn’t selling products all about identifying with something in the image?
U must be bored by now. I have not looked at what other people have said but A. gets my vote. Flare is over powering in B.
Being honest, neither are particularly interesting.
Sorry
Conor
I would like B better if it was cropped vertically to remove everything to the left of the lamp post. A has better lines in it, but the lens flare near the bottom keep drawing my eye and the shadows on the ground behind it aren’t as cool as B’s.
Cropped square at the top of this post, I prefer A. It is cleaner, with better contrast. A well balanced image.
Full images in the body of the post, I prefer B. The left half of A draws too much attention. The blown out flare in B focuses attention on the runner, and the clever shadows under her feet.
First reaction is to lean to A but after study I think I like B better. The runner seems to be coming out of the light and higher off of the ground with the backlit effect.
I prefer B it’s more creative, atmospheric, suggestive and engaging, it leaves a longer lasting impression in my mind. It has more depth, mystery and many more zones of interest.
A seems straight forward. Well shot, clean, nice overall impression but as a purely creative point for me it has less juice than B.
In B you could place type or a logo into the middle zone where the flare is.
However I like the runners height in A, in B she’s a bit too far off the ground.
Thanks
Prefer B of these two. Has a better atmosphere, allows the viewer to read into it. ‘A’ is just a lady jogging on a pretty day.
B has better atmosphere? If atmosphere requires a high patch of glare obscuring the subject, sure.
I vote for the B. It’s the most creative, interesting one. Even if I think that the A has a better composition my eyes keep going the the B!
One of my questions would be “what is the concept for the campaign?” or what was the creative intent for the image…. Failing that, I vote for A… B is an interesting image and might have been usable if the flare was less intense.
Holly sh#@ balls Batman!!!! Ask the publics opinion and the comments flood in. Everyone seems to mostly notice the flare, I love the flare but go with a for a simple important reason “a smile.” Luv ya bro.
I would vote for A. It has more clarity and definition, composition-wise. B looks to have been overdone and the blinding light is almost too strong to be included in the frame. The positioning of the “blob” seems to be lower too, which makes it a little bit odd. So definitely A.
-Reyn
A
I’m a big lover of invasive sun flare, but I think B pushes it a bit too far. The sun flare is kind of odd looking and clearly the focus of the image. A definitely achieves the goal of an artistic, interesting, sports-focused photograph.
A…. The flare thing has had it’s time in the sun (pun intended
)….. about time for something different – like been able to actually see the subject.
I really didn’t care for either. but if B were cropped so the flare became an accent I’d choose that one.
i hate to use the word “better” because i feel like photography is so subjective in nature. each viewer has a different experience with an image. that being said, i prefer A. like a lot of others have said, i feel like the sun flare is a little much in B and becomes distracting.
Def. B would make the best ad.
A wins. Just enough flare to make it cool. B the flare is way too strong and centered.
I really like A. B is cool but a little overdone for my taste. To me it looks more like B was a mistake where A looks intentional.
A has my vote
i go with A
its a crisp commercial picture .
I’d go with A. It clearer and crisper. The light in photo B kind of obstructs the runner.
A gets my vote. I like the facial expression the best.
I love A. Really nice subtle semi-circular ghosting between her lower foot and the pole base. Nice dappling on the sidewalk. Too much flare in B for me, it dominates to the point where she is no longer the subject of the photo. I like backlight but not into the massive flare look. Great work Chase!
I think they both have great appeal. B- with the flare is a little distracting and does take away from subject a little. I think the real debate comes down to what you are trying to say with the image. Or perhaps what the client is using the photo for.
I vote B! it’s just different. Something not common or anybody would come out with
A.
B. The runner looks pissed, and sunflares are cliche, especially after that horrible new Star Trek movie.
Too much flare on B so the pick is A.
A is better.
B. The flare makes it more abstract. Because it is more abstract, B is more about running than the runner. The shadow adds a strong counter point, if the client sells shoes, then it adds even more. The flare gives a place for the client to put some text.
I vote A…
I like B, this is a feeling image and B makes me feel more engaged to the idea/emotion of the time of day and the runner. I believe that a lot of advertising is afraid to take a risk and let photographer’s push the envelope.
Vogue let’s their editorial photogs sometimes shoot a feeling rather than the literal clothes.
Also, the pole in A bisects the image a bit too much for my taste.
Nice job on both! Thanks for sharing.
B seems to convey more energy than A
Absolutely Affirming the A on this choice.
Too much flare on the B side mate!
It all depends on the the message the client/company is trying to convey. Which image supports the concept the most? That would be my choice.
A is better although the background is more busy. B is overdone and does not look natural. It would make a good advertisement for a Photoshop “creative” plugin
So for my answer to “Which is better” I say A.
If the question was which is more creative, more abstract, more “different” then then answer would be B. But even so would never use B unless it fulfilled the scope given to me by the customer. For me the flare is just too much. Although it does hide the lamp post.
For me though, something in between the two would have been ideal. So more flare to create a halo around the lady giving her an almost ethereal feel (we all feel like that when we go jogging in the morning after all) but not so much as to dominate the image.
A for sure.
We have enough sunlight in the A and in the B there is too much of it.
I vote for A!
Definitely A. If that shoot for a sport campaing – you need to see the subject which is the runner.
I vote for A… looks well both as a large image and as a thumbnail. There’s a lot of magic in a B, too, but as a thumb it doesn’t looks good to me.
Image B, without any doubt.
A client wants to sell a dream, not a street scene.
B has more romance, less realism, more questions, more emergence. A Phoenix rising. B needed vision to let the scene roll. Maybe an excess of flare, but still the clear winner here.
Image A is more obvious, less accomplished, too ordinary and the Marketing Manager could have shot it with a decent camera.
I vote A, the flare is way too much on B..
A. Too much flare for me in B. However, I do like the shadows of her legs better in B.
So which 1 did u go with Chase?
A!
B looks like it has been taken because of the flare, not the runner.
Well I have to be honest and as soon as the page loaded my Eye was pulled toward B. Isn’t that what you want when you are advertising?
A for me. The skin texture looks great in it
… B it hiding the subject of interest.
Photo A. I am pulled to the subject and notice the excitement and pleasure in her face. That makes me interested in what she is smiling about.
B is my vote, The flare makes the runner look like she is coming from another dimension.
I prefer Photo B. Photo A is excellent, but it is also expected. Some would argue that the the flaring in B is “technically incorrect”, but it adds a whole new level to the photo (warmth / visual energy) that makes it more unique than Photo A.
Honestly, I used to avoid “technically incorrect” shots at all costs while shooting until about a year ago when I began working on occasion with a friend who is also amazing photographer. Seeing him create unique and amazing images by doing things I never would have attempted just because I had told myself I shouldn’t be doing it and I realized I was limiting myself from creating some amazing photos. To create amazing photos there is only one rule to follow and it is there are no rules. Art is subjective. There will always be people who don’t like what I like and vice versa, but you should never limit your creativity because you were taught / read somewhere / someone told you that what you want to try is technically incorrect.
Well I personally like the first “A” photo more than “B” but I think it depends on what exactly we gonna do with this image ? If we are going to add some text on it I think “B” is better dessicion because of the space that we have for the text
A has my vote, I think B is more Jarvis style, but A has a better appeal to it.
Photo A looks overprocessed. I prefer photo B. Looks more natural, colorful, and warmer.
My first impression was to vote for A.
After really looking at the two images for a couple of minutes though I really enjoyed the vignette and detail of B.
It would be interesting the see the rest of the project though to get a sense of the overall feel to the campaign.
Either way great shots and I look forward to following more of your work.
A for sure, B looks fake and overdone.
The shadows from the legs in both shots also looks out of place as there is no other noticeable strong shadows.
my 2 cents
Without knowing the product or goal of this advertising campaign, making a choice is nearly impossible unless based on technical/creative merits. I’d pick B if the product was something amazing, a break-through, a smart idea. Kinda like the cartoon where someone has a great idea and this lightbulb is shown over his head. In that scenario, the flare is the main point and the runner serves to link the light to active lifestyle. Fiat lux!
B, dont´t like that green colour in the middle of image A.
I prefer A. Too much flare and the runner’s smile make the difference for me.
I think I chose B… if it s a campaign picture it is about the mood of the picture coming through plus the flare in the middle gives you some nice space to put the slogan of the campaign in or the brands name…
Picture A is too distracting (the blown out sky – the cars – too many details – the high contrast)
thats my quick feedback…
I would probably pick A between the two but to be honest they both have things that bother me a little. But what do I know….
I like B better. There is a weird shadow in that light green tree behind the runner that I do not like. I don’t like the dark shadows at the cars and the ugly bumper of the white car. And I happen to like the flare in B because it shows motion that is lacking in A.
i choose image B. image A is nice but it’s just a stock photo…it doesn’t have the chase jarvis personality to it. i actually think i would want to composite the girl from A into B. so much about her in A that is great this is missing in B.
dunno which sports company it was shot for?… but having done some stuff for both i’d say,
Nike = B
Reebok = A
both are great but i would say…. A
Not too sure if i can say something that’s already been said in over 1,000 posts.. but A makes me think i’m that guy who enjoys watching beautiful women jogging (heck, who isn’t that guy?) but with B it seems more about having that surreal moment in your morning run that just clears your head
A is about the physique of the woman and B is about the emotional appeal to running (to me, of course)
I dig A for the reason that the model’s face and expression seem more affecting and would probably be more effective for an ad.
This is an easy choice for me. I choose B.
This is an advertising photo. It is meant to draw the viewer in through emotion. “A” is a nice image but does not draw me in. To make the case for “B,” how many runners can FEEL like they are in the image with the bright sun low on the horizon. I know when I ran it was usually early in the morning or later in the day. I can almost feel the sun in my eyes or on my back. Or if passing another runner, seeing this exact image. The difference here is perspective, don’t look at this image as a photographer, look at it as a runner.
Steve
A. I don’t like the gigantic flare in picture B.
I prefer B.
Image A is beautiful but it’s very verbatim: here’s a woman running.
Image B has more of a sense of how it feels to be running. It’s less of a literal telling of what was going on and takes you more into the scene. In way you become the runner. If feels warm and you imagine how pleasant it would be to be running through this scene. I suspect that that feeling is what the sports company was going for with the purpose of this shot.
I prefer B in that I find it creates more story – the viewer almost feels they’re on a warm morning street. However I would have chosen A for advertising purposes. It shows the apparel more cleanly and her facial expression is more open and happy making me feel like it’s actually enjoyable to be out jogging at sunrise.
Two great pics.
But in B is the flare a little over the top. Love the idea though
but A is the best for me !
I would have to say I prefer the unconventional B pic. The flare give’s it that unique look that you probably could not have captured entirely intentionally.
While also adding to the intrigue to the picture as previously mentioned” a jog on a warm summer morning “. I dont jog but I would run a 1000 mile’s for the subject in that picture.
Where’s the Brief? The one that nails the brief wins.
Technically however, I think B is more interesting. The model’s expression is better -pushing a little harder – and I absolutely love the surreal glow around her legs/feet and the shadow. If I used it, I’d probably crop halfway into the flare and let it bleed off-page to hold copy, but you’d almost be forced to speak to the strong suggestion of the perceived “blast”, which could work pending the content of the brief. A is good and safe, but just not compelling and the model is smiling, which to my thinking, is not the “goin’ for it” attitude most running companies are seeking. But did I mention the importance of the brief…?!?!?
A has a better smile, but B is probably more suitable for copyspace.
Im gonna go A.
Nice work as usual chaser.
The cars are too much of the photo in A. B would work great for use with a logo and or text.
B would look better on a composition – like an ad with logo and text over the flare.
It would have a lot of personality, while A would be unnoticably boring.
I vote for A. I love flare most the time bit it’s a bit overkill and distracting in image B.
B… Just do it!
lol
I am guessing they used B and dumped some kind of product image right in the middle of the flair!
A all day long. The flare is overdone in B
If the client is selling sun flares, definitely B. Otherwise A. This is assuming the client doesn’t have some alternative plan for using the flare we don’t know about.
It depends on what you want to say, what is the verbal message associated with the image (non verbal message)
A.
B flare is distracting
A, because I like the smile on the model’s face better in this image.
For me “B” works best. My initial reaction was to go with A, but given the depth of field of the image, things other than the runner were drawing my eye and became a distraction. The flare forced me to focus on the runner and not the other things in the image.
IMHO Image A is what most photographers would prefer because is technically successful — less flare meaning better contrast than image B. One negative comment for image A: The lamp post is a bit more distracting than in image B.
Image B may be more desireable for advertising as it provides a convenient location for text. It also emotes a greater sense of experiencing a “runner’s high”.
Either image is successful in its own way.
As the others have said, photo A definitely. The light is too distracting in photo B. However, the shadows and illumination of the foreground, and the blue skies in photo B are better than A.
Pic B has too much of vignetting, the flare looks good but vignetting is a huge minus for me in that picture, because we dont have another choice will go for Pic A.
Cheers!
“A” looks a little boring, but 1/3 intensity of B’s glare would be nice
Better for what?
The woman is smiling in the first one, the scene is a pleasant sunny day.
In the second one, the woman is tired and the sun is very hot.
It depends on what you have to do whit this shots.
(sorry for my english)
Personally, I’d prefer option B.
Option A: First of all, I find the pole of the street lamp a tad distracting, it seems like there’s too much tension between the subject and the pole. Both vertical, and the pole being so well exposed and sharp, it really does IMO creates an awkward tension. However, someone mentioned above, the expression sure looks better in option A though, more energetic, more well modeled.
Option B: I really like the mood in this, especially the strong shadows, I feel it really does emits a strong mood. I feel if you’re using it for sports, despite people have mentioned, the flare might be blocking the subject, but I don’t see a need to show the subject full upfront, people would still understand that she’s a runner.
My bet will be on B definitely, mood > technicality for me.
A has my vote. It is crisp. Sporty. Makes me want to run. And I hate to run.
A is better in my opinion.
In B my eye is imediatly drawn to the flare in the middle. Then after I look around it for a few seconds I get drawn straight to the flare in the middle again.
In A my eye is naturally drawn to the runner first and it stays there for a good amount of time, then to the cars, then back to the runner. However, the bottom of the street post is more distracting in A than B.
A
The Flare in Picture B doesen´t look that good and realistic for me.
I really love Pictures directly shoot into the Sun but B doesn´t work for me.
Looks too much PS
I like B, A is too typical, nothing fancy or extraordinary about it, B is distracting, but interesting at the same time. From the point of view of marketing, B create a curiosity and intriguing enough to look deeper of what is happening.
I’ll vote for A-and-a-half-to-B
A is safe
B (as currently shown) is too over the top, the flare is overwhelming and becomes the story.)
halfway from A to B is my vote.
I like B. If this is a print ad then the flare gives you that negative space for text.
A
Although the model’s pose is better in B (slightly more dynamism), and although I like flare (doesn’t everybody these days?) – the flare in B is just too much.
That’s what I think.
Therefore I also predict that the client went for B.
I like photo A. Photo B have too much flare.
I’d go with A, because it just seems much more natural. The sky in B looks somewhat odd due to the vignetting and the flare is too much. I do however like the warm colours it has.
photo b holds my attention longer.
I’m going with A. I’m a huge fan of sun flare, but in this case the sun seems to be beaming through the fence. Not realistic. Not to mention the sky is rarely blue when shooting towards the sun with this type of exposure. *drops mic and walks of stage*
I think a, because of the model.
Greetings from germany!!
I vote A. It’s a tough call, but I agree with previous comments that the sun flare in B is just a bit too much. It gives B a beautiful sense of atmosphere, but I feel it dominates over the model.
My personal fav is B,
Photo A is very much suitable for campaign point of view because of concept and in advertising its hard to choose Photo B coz the sun glare is making distraction from the concept, Photo B is good in cinematic shot, where camera pan making a glare n making the subject more visually appealing
Unless the sports company is selling flare I don’t see how there’s much of a decision to make here. A, though I’m not fond of either.
Definetly A Mr Chase.
Flare is too distracting and looks photoshopped on B
Definitely A. B looks like a defected image to me.
I’m guessing B was used because the flair could be used for logos and such, but clearly the A image is the better one.
A for a whole host of reasons; facial expression, clarity of product, less distracting flare.. although one could argue that the composition of b was better. was that the final crop?
I feel it really depends on the use of the photo… As a straight on photo yes A. is less distracting but if the photo would be used for print ads a designer might like the flare in B. for a logo and text of some sort.
Holy comments Batman!!! As others are saying, the flare in B takes too much away from the subject. Unless, of course, there is a theme or tagline for the product that would account for that flare. So, I vote for A, unless B fits better
Actually, after looking at it again, I could see a situation where B would be the better fit. If you wanted to put text or graphics on the image, that blown out area in B could be perfect for that. In that case, I choose B.
Its obvious, the photograph with The Star in it is the most eye catching: B.
I would say for use on a Billboard or Magazine ad where people would look at the details, A would be best because its technically the best exposed. But for the box cover of a breakfast cereal, sports drink or other product, B has more instant punch and more atmosphere.
if a text object (slogan, logo or something like that) will be placed on middle of the image, B is very good. otherwise, A is better. I wish face style of Runner in B replaced with her face style in A
B for sure. Because most of the people who choose A chose it because of the faults of B. B is the star character. A is just plain normal. and B is really like nothing I’ve seen, the flare is so big, so much.
A b/c you can actually see the model. If the flair was smaller/moved a little more to the left, B might have a chance.
Photo A has my preference, cleaner image model has better expression in relation to camera position.
But of course it depends on for what the photo is intended.
clearly A. B looks like she’s running away from an atomic explosion!
the girl is pretty…you can see more of her in A. She makes me want to buy whatever they’re selling.
A is better.
I vote “B”. The glare will provide lots of room for the adds text.
I like both photos but based on the information given I will say that they went with photo B. If you look at picture A my focus goes toward the parked cars. In photo B my attention goes straight to the lighting flare. She’s not wearing any logos so I am assuming the purpose of the image isn’t to display the clothing she’s wearing. It’s probably an inspirational/motivational photo and image B gives PLENTY of clear space for the text and logo of the ad.
I vote B. : )
prefer A because it a cleaner look and B seems overly diffused by the flare.
I like both A & B. Each photo has a mood/feeling. Photos speak stories. So depending on what the message is…..
or what product is being sold will determine the best photo.
2 thumbs up
Prefer A, (flare too distracting in B)
Commercially, I could prefer the A because of the hair light (the sun). This picture shows some glamour, though it also promotes the product : running (the shoes give power to the woman which feels light : her feets even dont touch ground) after work (it is obviously the evening after a day at work: the cars are back home).
BUT : in B she looks like an angel flying in a halo of light – it is like a take-off : the shoes drive you to heaven.
B – you only get a few seconds (if that) to make an impact and the flare does that – even if for the wrong reasons.
Ads create an emotion and I think the sun in your eyes is a feeling any runner understands. Either works but B will get more cut through in a busy market or magazine.
A but I also really like B. It would be nice to have about half the amount of flair. I love how the flair brings you into the photo and makes you look at it plus it kind of cleans up the background but it is just a little too much. It is getting rid of too much of the detail and color
I choose A just because I think the additional flare in B is a bit too distracting.
Personally prefer A. It has a subtle amount of flare and the warm and rich colors remind me of the 1970 vintage ads.
I do like B and although the flare seems to be to strong it does cover most of the big pole and could lend itself as a white space to add some text in the actual ad.
is there a letter between A and B
I prefer A because the image looks so much cleaner and crisp and a bit of lens flare to make it look different
A is the obvious choice, it a perfect shot, nice clean image and the safe choice. The flare is just too much in B, you can hardly make out the product, and she isn’t smiling either.
Still, for advertisement, I think B would be the best choice. It will get more attention from the viewer, it is something different compared to all the perfect clean crisp images we get to see everyday.
I would assume some text and maybe a close up of the product would be added, so the viewer can at least see what this is about. But yeah.. B would be the best pick here.. I think.
Pick one?
Not enough information
Are we still waiting for few billion more people to “weigh in”? The suspense is killing me.
Photo b. my thoughts are that this is for a sport campaign you would leave some space for some ‘words’ or slogans and the flare in the middle fits nicely. and photo A the right legs get a bit ‘chopped’ off.
I will take B.
It’s a more evocative image and will resonate with the idea of why people run. The A photo has its own good qualities but i think is a more descriptive photo not enough personal attachment to the activity for the viewer.
I like B better: I’m not a great fan of bright lights distracting me from the main subject within a photograph. Although, it does blot out the light post and the background adding a completely different feel in the A Image.
It’s not that the A Image is bad, it’s just different from the B Image, and each person will find something fascinating about both Images.
I guess I can find some fascinating things about the A Image, such as – how the runner is brightly engulf by the light, as she makes her way through the light, she becomes, clearer, as she draws closer to the photographer – still being able to see her entire body coming through this great light, is fascinating to see.
B is too subtle, too artistic for a comercial photo. I vote for A. The sun/flare in B is just too big in my oppinion.
A definitely. B is a cool artistic shot but to much emphasis on the sun and not enough on the product and the runner. I like the fact that she is looking at the viewer, builds connection which your client will want the viewer to have with their product.
For me, there is much more drama in B. Love it
I would say A. It fits better to the picture, though the flare in B is nice, I find it too much and is not contributing to the feeling that the picture -from my point- should communicate through.
I would say A too – I like the back lighting in her hair – too much flare in image B, but still a cool image.
Never A because the cars are too prominent and the main reason, she is looking at the photographer. The technical stuff doesn’t matter because B draws you in and the flare gives you room for type. She is also looking ahead in B at her destination and is not distracted by the photographer but looking at her destination. Feels like it’s just her now,alone, early,and running.
B.
It.Just.Is
I would have to say B. While at first I would have choose A). I think B conveys the sports gears message. Its probably heat gear there selling for runners. Thus B gives the feeling of running in the early morning heat. Shes alone hitting the hot sidewalk. B also gives a great spot for text to convey there brand.
B
I like B. The flare may overpower the subject a bit, but there’s more photo magic in it.
A; the flare in B is too much.
My vote goes to photo A, simply because, the flare in photo B is distracting.
My vote is for B. This image give you the opportunity to overlay text and graphics without it being too distracting.
My Vote Is For A
i like “B” for her strong expression, and the rest of all is an art
man.. this post blasts a glaring light on the fact that there are alot of people out there who know how to make a technically sound image, but not a lot who know how to make creative and out of the box decisions.
B, and here’s why:
1: Photo A looks like everything else. this shot has been done probably 20,000 times by amateur photographers. (*fingers crossed that it’s not A*)
2: Photo B, when viewed by itself, and not compared to A, looks fine. This is similar to the concept of a shade of red looking orange when compared to other reds. I guarantee if Chase had posted B as a final image in a blog about how he did the post-production, no one would have said anything and everyone would drool over it.
3: I didn’t read everyone’s posts but I did see a couple people hit on the fact that the flare brings movement and life to the picture and I couldn’t agree more. Not only does it grab your attention, (I’ll bet everyone who picked A actually looked at B first) it also does a good job of representing and communicating a FEELING.
A is a really good picture of a street lamp and some cars – and a runner. B is mostly a picture of lens flare, but it would make a great background for an advertisement.
i would say NR.1 to mutch flare on B
B
A, because she has a great smile and we can see her face/eyes better. I would “fix” her upper right thigh (outer). The flare here is enough for me.
In B I like the separation from the ground as compared to the first Image, she almost feels like she is flying…so if the shoes are of importance that may come into consideration. In the first image the other shoe is practically missing.
Great model.
B It has somewhere cleaner for text.
And I like it more.
At first I thought A. But BONG LEACH’s comment made me look at B differently and change my mind. It’s true that, overall, photo A is clearer. But the model is more separate from her environment in B and therefore stands out more. Her own shadow is not mixed/confused with the shadows of the leaves. I also prefer the position of her right leg/foot in B. It seems more in action. Her foot is almost completely hidden by her knee in A. And she does look like she is jumping more in B than in A.
She also gets a bit more space in B (the cars and the post are bit further away). And I prefer the contour on her left side in B (where the bushes are). It looks like there is a yellowish mist surrounding her and then her skin and clothing are darker, before fading a bit in the flare. I like that.
Oh and I prefer the sky in B as well. I like that there’s some blue near the top.
And as someone else has said, even though A is nice, we’ve seen photos similar to it many times before. Ok, that was my last comment.
B for me. It seems like the lady is coming from the light source from another dimension. The yellowish reflection from the greens looks like the aura of the lady changing her surround in a natural way, not “man-made”. In my opinion, it’s one of those things why some of us still loves film…. Perfect in imperfection.
B – I think B is more vivacious. The larger flare pushes the runner forward providing momentum. It also allows the viewer to focus on the runner instead of the lamp post. I will admit if we’re looking at a fine art photo, A would probably win, but to be used in advertising B holds a little more mood and options for type/copy placement. The flare also pushes her out from her background — her contour and shadow are more defined. I would like to add her expression is more serious and concentrated in B. Combine that with the large mood-setting flare and the whole scene speaks determination and reaching for some goal.
It depends on what your goal is. A is better if you want to want to speak to the majority of consumers (as evidenced in the comments of this post). B is better if you want to speak to a smaller demographic of consumers searching for nuclear arms or proof of the supernatural.
I agree with both Tim and Bighead Tallguy’s comments. However, most of the comments are from photographers and not from the main demographic. It would be interesting to hear what some of the demographics’ view points would be. In B I like how the cars and shrubs are not as pronounced which helps focus your attention to the running. Personally I would like two see a cross between the two photos.
I like A, the flare is too much in B. If it was less might look better but it takes away from the runner in my opinion.
I prefer B, I know that a photo is well done but B evocate like a photo need to do, not only explain a concept.
B. the other image is too normal.
I prefer A personally.
The focus in photo B seems to be falling into the sun in the middle and as if anything other than the sun is irrelevant in the photo. If this is the effect your client is after, why not photo B….
A is my choice
B is too distracting with the backlight and flare
So nu?
Which one did the agency go with?
W.
B would be my choice given the information we have been provided. I believe more detail on what the client is promoting or looking for would be necassary to make an informed decision.
With that said, I like the clarity of A but the composition is distracting in my opinion. The light post in the middle and the cars are very overpowering. Perhaps that is why I choose B, the blowout adds distraction to all and brings out the feel of ealry morning. Early morning makes me think of running and coffee, since it is a sports company and there is no burro present… Well, enough said, B it is.
I like B more than A…. I’d like a middle ground one probably much more….more flare than A not as much as B…..
A is a great shot, a great normal everyday shot….
B is a little more “edgy”….. so depending on “what” the client is going for it is really a toss up on which one was picked…I’m sure if we knew WHO the client was it would be easier to figure out.
Depends on what it is used for. A is pretty straight forward, and B is a bit more stylized. The flare in B could be used space for text or design and such for advertising…….although I prefer the facial expression of A. It all depends on the situation……
my vote is for B
looks like a morning run and for me it’s the hardest run of the day so this picture shows more drive. “A” not so much i think the setting pulls away from the focus (fit women running )
When will this end ? I wonder.
To try to say which is “better” is a bit pointless without some guidelines. What does the company paying for these want to portray. Lens flare is a certainly a trend these days, which makes me want to say picture A, but I actually like how the lens flare swallows up a lot of the distractions and makes you look for the subject. I would guess they picked A, but more because of her expression, which some have noted. Picture A’s expression would sell more shoes.
While I generally enjoy lens flares, I feel like the one in Photo B looks a bit too artificial and added-in-post-production. Whether that’s actually the case or not, it seems a bit too big, round, and placed in the center of the image, for me.
I like B better. Not from an artsy point of view, but for the emotion in it for marketing use. It makes me feel like the runner is out there doing what she loves after a hard day at work — running off the steam of the day. I think the flare adds to that and gives it that “I have to run off today’s crap” feeling.
I like A by far. I dont like the destruction of content or subject in a photo unless it has obvious meaning. A is a great shot
I like B, the ligth is beatiful .
hum… from my point of view it depends of what kind of idea you want to express with this photo.
Photo A – its better if you simply want to give an idea of running, exercise, it´s a good shot for a commercial of a simple bottle of water
Photo B – it´s a most powerful picture, the light gives the idea of explosion, strong, and at the same time she seems to flow in the air.
It´s a better photo for an energy drink.
BAZINGA!!!
B – get’s your attention. Buy, buy buy…
A. Great use of tone, crisp feeling but… ordinary.
B. More graphic, increased floating of the model with more visible shadows, the flare adds a supernatural feeling to the image… as if she’s passing through a threshold or stepping in from another dimension.
If this is a commercial shot, B should be the wise decision for there is natural space available for commerical graphics.
B totally.
In A the subject is looking to the camera, and her neck is tight…
B is the one… but I think that it would be better…
For me B is the winner I like the dreamlike quality that this image has, she is floating in his own dream.
You need to dream to win.
Regards
For me, the vote Goes to A, we could never forget that we are selling something, this cases, sport clothes, almost the hole light thats getting out in the B, in smashing the subject and the details on it..
So the A for me… Chase.
I love the atmosphere that is shown on the edges of a flare this size, which is funny because it’s the same thing that I don’t like about the flare, it’s size. More than this though, I believe it’s the center-punched position that is too ‘in my face’.
Both images hold my interest, but I’ll pick A this go around
I would say A is better than B. However, A is still not my favorite due to the lamp post that seems to split the image into 2. Plus, the post seems fighting to be the center of subject with the running woman in the photo. I don’t know the real condition of the place where the photo was taken but I would wait until the woman 3-4-5 feet away from the post. I think it would create some separation between the woman and the post, and hopefully the woman will stands out more than the post.
i prefer B artistically, but i imagine A would be better commercially as the product is of greater focus
For a campaign, A
For my office wall B
Since I’m not working on the campaign, give me B
A for sure. too much lens flare in b.
A. Less flare, feel the flare in B takes a little away from it.
B gets my vote as the flare provides an opportunity for company message
Honestly, I think somewhere in between would be perfect.
B
for your purpose definitely A.
I think B has a superior aesthetic value, the light flare is amazing. But for a commercial sport shot I would go for A.
B
I would definitely choose A because the flare is less distracting. In picture A you can see more of the image instead of having that big lens flare that cover most part of the frame and also I like more her face expression, it looks like she is smiling in A that in the B where she’s looking slightly tired.
Photo “A” would be the best image.
Flare can be attractive if it is done with in this case some symmetry to it, photo “B” in my opinion does not have that.
I’m not sure any of them are that good.
A’s composition doesn’t make much sense to me. Why do we need to see the cars, the lamp post and the trees when it’s obvious that that the message is in the right side of the picture; the running girl.
Therefore i think that B is the better alternative as the flare removes much of the unnecessary info but ideally I’d crop A much closer and only deal in the running woman on the pavement with the bush as background. And then of course not as much flare. That much flare is also just a cheap attempt at making the picture more interesting.
A is my choice as it brings out the details and having mentioned its for a sport company, I could see the details like shoes and the jersey better than B.
When I first saw the pics at the top, I liked B better right away. It has a different, ethereal thing going for it. But, when I scrolled down, I wasn’t so sure. I think I’d like B better with a different crop. Take out the cars and/or move the flare from the center. But, that’s me. Both great shots.
B
A
Will many people have said A and focused on the fact that the foot ware or what she is wearing is what suppose to be what is the main focus. This may and may not be the case.
I am going to say B is the choice of the client because even though it has a larger Flare and yes maybe distracting in of it’s own. It also gives a space to place a “product”. The photographer of these two photos states he represents a sports company. He does not say what type of sports company or what their product is, so even if it s the shoe they may want to put a shoe in the flare so that you may get an up close view of their product. If not then they need some place they can place their product where it is HIGHLIGHTED. The running model is the background so to speak.
my pic is a
A