W/NW: REVIEW photo 'People at Work'

<p>I'm game for the constructive discussion idea. I'm not much of a street shooter. But once in a while I'll have the time to go out and practice, or as in the case of this photo, an intriguing image will present itself to me and I will try to capture it as I see it. The sight of this delivery man sweating in the equatorial sun with a handtruck full of water was too ironic for me to pass up. I am pleased with the placement of the subject, I think I used the 'rule of thirds' to good effect here. I am also happy with the composition in general, meaning: I don't think the photo is too cluttered, and I have good enought depth of field to give a sense of location. However, I can never get close enough to really get an image that has impact. And, this photo is no different. I'm not thin skinned about my photography, so I hope that I get some really honest commentary. Hopefully, this will be a good start to Ton's, Fred's, and DS's 'Pub' idea. Let it roll...</p><div></div>

<p>The irony you talk about was probably more apparent to you at the time you were there than it is in the photograph. I don't think it's a stand alone photograph but maybe one that could fit into a group of photos telling a story. It's pretty utilitarian, not artful. The composition is OK, well balanced, feels solid, but possibly is a tad cluttered or not organized well enough. Maybe could use a little more contrast in the print.</p>

<p>Elmo, first of all thanks for picking up on this (and Ray). About not being much of a street photographer I would say that the D in S&D is too often overlooked. As we know you're right in the middle of making one.</p>

<p>I can see what attracted you here and I like the kind of triangular composition in which you've done this because it's effective. I do however pretty much agree with what Ray has said. It's a quite ordinary scene and the irony you talk about isn't evident (at least not in this format) so what we're left with is a photo that lacks some real binding interest as a street photo and context as a documentary one. I'm rather intrigued by your comment about never getting close enough because as you rightly stated you wanted to give a sense of location which I think was a good choice. You don't always have to shoot up someones nostrils to end up with a good photo. From your comment it's clear that you made some conscious and deliberate decisions here and as such your composition is a given for us as viewers. Still, although I agree with Fred that we too often revert to trying to make our own photos out of it or commenting on how we would have done it, I would like to know how you would feel about getting rid of that sky part because I could see it would leave you with all the good things in your composition while putting more emphasis on your actual subject.<br /> Lastly I also agree with Ray about adding more contrast. It's too grey now and given those hard shadows doesn't seem to be consistent with what you actually saw out there. Working on that could create a bit more interest in itself.</p>

<p>I dont see any irony in this photo.</p>

<p>Irony would be a snap of him taking a rest stop at a drinking fountain. Or getting a glass of water brought to him at his delivery address.. Or something.</p>

<p>Nothing wrong with your photo, btw.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'm afraid I didn't get the point until I read the commentary, Elmo. I was wondering more about the Police than about the Aqua. The sun and sweat might come across better with a bit more contrast, but this may down to the crappy monitor I'm vieiwing on.</p>

<p>I'm afraid I didn't get the point until I read the commentary, Elmo. I was wondering more about the Police than about the Aqua. The sun and sweat might come across better with a bit more contrast, but this may down to the crappy monitor I'm viewing on.</p>

<p>Elmo, not your best. I've seen a lot of your pictures and this one is lacking in a few areas in that it's basically pedestrian and there's nothing for the viewer (or at least this one) to really grab on to... And, I agree with the other guys about the sky and the lack of punch in the processing...<br>

There are a thousand ways to photograph a subject and in this case maybe a head on shot or a different angle would have captured more of whatever it was that intrigued you. Since you mentioned the guy was sweating, maybe it did call for you to come in closer to make that apparent. But, there's no real drama here and a guy with sweat dripping down his face may have added the necessary bite to make someone look twice at the photo.<br>

That being said, thanks for putting yourself out there...</p>

<p>Here's my $.02. Since the delivery man is the center of interest I would have waited until he took a few more steps. Right now in your picture he's buried in a tangle of the posts, bushes and sign behind him. DOF is good in many cases but not all. A couple more steps forward and his head would in an more open area. This is called in one of my books the figure-ground relationship. It's an area which I need to do some work on in my own work. I would also like to see an overall darker tonality. The highlights look a bit chalky especially in the buildings in the upper right and the background. There's not too many shadows but where there is could be a touch darker as well.</p>

<p>i like the shot but...there's something missing. the sweat on his face isn't really visible and the shot overall looks a bit overexposed. perhaps more contrast would have helped. i could definitely see this being part of a larger work but for me it's not really compelling as a stand-alone. more of an 'almost.'</p>

<p>FWIW, I'd crop it tight, and consider color. In color the Aqua on the boxes will stand out and draw attention, as will the sweat on his face if cropped tight, with it in the upper left third and the water boxes close to the bottom right third.</p>

<p>I have a matching image of a man at work too. It also has a triangular composition.<br>

I took this image because I have been in this situation, and many other people too: You tow a trailer with your car, and when it gets dark you find out that some of its lights don't work. Off course you have only few tools with you in the car, and you have to tinker with the trailer's cabling in the dark. It always quite annoying.<br>

What do you think of the image?</p><div></div>

<p>Elmo, I think the message you had in mind does not come across. You need something: a jesture, facial expresion, some sort of an action, some background artifacts that would communicate it. I also think the objects right behind him interfere with (at least my) focusing on him.</p>

<p>Elmo - thanks for picking up the ball and running with it.<br>

I'm kind of in a difficult spot here. I scrolled down to see the whole photo and saw the sky/power lines first. That gave me a perception, or first impression, of the picture that I might not have had if it had been handed to me in print.<br>

I think the idea of cropping out some sky has merit, but the "no U turn sign" would then be lost. I think that plays to the scene you saw - hard work, sweating, need a drink - but I'm pushing it, no turning back. So, I don't know how I'd crop it if it were mine.<br>

I also like the angle of the crates in relation to the step pattern of the concrete planters. If he were another step or two forward, that would be lost.<br>

I also wondered how color would change the feel of the photo. I think the dirt next to him in and around the concrete panters and visible sweat would help the photo.<br>

All that said, I like the photo knowing the context. And, I don't think I could have done it better in the heat of the moment.<br>

Again, thanks for stepping into the spot light.<br>

DS Meador</p>

<p>Much of the responses are what the photo " should " be, could be. It's not about a (the) photograph anymore but about photo possibilities, and " if only you had done this or that ". I don't see much validity in this and to me it exposes the weakness of discussing a single picture in this manner and perhaps without the fuller context of a body of work. The picture becomes a matter of technicalities instead of the ephemeral but strong recognition of an idea it can bring up without words. An idea which it doesn't necessarily needs to convey in the first place, it can be perfect being just what it is, a picture, a slice of reality. But reality ofcourse always comes with feelings and perspective and if I have to attach one single word or feeling / concept to the original picture then it's this : " work " and the " burden " of it. That's the ephemeral idea of the picture, the way a photograph can instantly communicate and it doesn't need the threads title for it, or even the photographers description of the picture. A critique I think should pick up, try to catch, this instant fleeting recognition where there's no conflict of ideas instead of giving a critique of what the picture should have been and could have been. </p>

<p>Phylo, it's an important distinction to make and I'm glad you adressed it so early on. However, while I agree that any photo should be viewed as unbiased as possible in this case it's uploaded within a format. Furthermore Elmo explained beforehand what attracted him and thus consequently wanted to convey. Against that background some of us adressed the actual content but given all this it's inevitable that the comments took a certain direction. In other words, Elmo got what he asked and I can see a lot of validity in that. More important however is how Elmo feels about that.</p>

<p>It's true that a lot of photographers tend to revert to technique too easily and there is a real danger to overlook the actual content and commenting on that. On the other hand there are more ways to look at a photo than merely philosophically. Some of us adressed the tonality/contrast for instance. Tools like that aren't just used a a technical means they can be used creatively as well.</p>

<p>Reviewing single photos doesn't necesarilly display a weakness. While it often indeed is helpfull to have some context as in being able to see a body of work I merely see that as a given. A good photo should be able to stand on its own like you yourself implied.<br>

Sure, a photo can be fine just as it is, a slice of reality. That's not the same however as being of interest. It's what makes particularly street photography so exceedingly difficult, getting a interesting photo that works on more than one level.</p>

<p>Eike, I see a trucker checking up on his rear lights. Maybe he's just being carefull or maybe some policeman pointed out to him that one or both didn't work, we don't know. Given the urban environment it looks like he's about to unload his what looks like a heavy load. Probably extremely heavy since most of these are only allowed to enter the city late at night. Yes, it's a triangular kind of composition and the good thing about it is all major lines in the photo point at the trucker as your main subject. It's there that I get a bit dissapointed because there is not much to hold my interest, no real facial expression of interest. Just a posture you'd expect. Basically a guy who's checking the wiring of his lights.</p>

<p>Ton,<br>

I didn't meant that giving a critique to a single picture has a weakness in itself, but it's more that the responses, in this particular case, have difficulty to go beyond what the photographer already said about the picture, and are "tied" to it and from that go on suggesting how the intentions could have been made even more intentional.Perhaps it would be more useful if the text in which the photographer states the intentions behind the picture was kept invisible to the commenters, up until a number of critiques maybe, and then at the end of the critiques the original text by the photographer in regard to the picture could be displayed and then you would have a real comparison between intention of photographer and what is perceived or seen in the picture and how far they are apart. And only after that, suggestions could be posted about how to "improve" it. </p>

<p>it's a good point Phylo and something that I personally would prefer as well</p>

<p>Elmo,<br>

In the other thread I referred to Ton's pub. You picked up on that. I recall Ton's first post about the review photo idea in which he likened the idea to sitting with friends in a pub and having a chat about the photos. So, that's why I used that term. All Ton's original idea though - credit where credit is due and all.<br>

DS Meador</p>

<p>I must say, as a tyro, that this type of discussion is helpful to me. I must agree with the creative analysis of Elmo's image but I also agree in Ton's statement about the pure document nature inherent in this image. It's descriptive nature of a working man going about his day, wearing certain clothes, using specific tools, is clear and at that level it succeeds. To incapsulate that document into a graphically pleasing composition with controlled depth of field or with a more decisive moment might make the pure document more artful and therfore more appealing. Trying to achieve that, however, the whole shot could have been missed.</p>

<p>Eike, I'm glad you posted a photo. In my opinion, the difficulty of the environment you were shooting in, defeated your attempt to capture the scene with any <em>artistic </em>merit...I mean the low natural light, and lack of sufficient artificial light or use of flash made a murky and unattractive photo. Your in good company, as Ray said, and others (myself included) agree with, I have a photo, but it isn't 'artful'. The great benefit of this type of discussion is that, the next time I see a similar situation developing I can take steps get a better photograph. This has been a great learning experience for me, and I appreciate all of the feedback. I hope we can all keep it up because this type of interaction has got to be PN at its best.</p>

<p>Before you go...</p>

<p>I was thinking about this as I went home yesterday. I think the human eye/brain is capable of latching onto details that simply don't come across in a photo. This is the problem with your photo, Elmo, and it's a trap that I too fall into rather often. See the attached photo, for example. The situation struck me as quite comical if you read the sign on the stall ('Me if you lose') as the caption. In the photo, it's just too small. I did realise this at the time, so I revisited this stall several times that afternoon in the hope of achieving a better juxtaposition of stallholder and sign - but without success.</p>

<p>Sometimes (often) I just have to accept that a whimsical idea didn't work out.</p><div></div>

<p>Just took this one this afternoon. After the shutter snapped I realized what the yellow sign said. For those who can't make out the Portuguese it translates - Street with no Exit. I left it in color and only converted it to .jpeg from RAW - no other editing.</p><div></div>

<p>The thing that attracts me most about so-called 'street photography' is that we are operating in an evironment that is completely out of our control. I think there are some huge obstacles to obtaining great street photos. The photographers who consistently post very good street photos hear are masters at picking the right location with enough light, interesting backgrounds, and either establishing a relationship with the subject; or being completely unnoticed by the subjects. Takes some skill. Jonothan, I think trying to shoot into the deep shadow cast by the canopy was too difficult to pull off in that situation. Somehow, if you could have gotten more light on the vendor....DS, I like that pic alot. Too bad you couldn't get closer (Ha, I hate to say that, my response when someone tells me that is, 'trying to get closer got Robert Capa killed'). Nearly a 'surveillance photo' as Jeff Spirer would say. But I like the colors! Her shirt matches the sign. Good eye.</p>

<p>Elmo,<br>

I agree it was too far away. I used 163mm of my 250 available. I guess I should have zoomed it in tighter. :-) Kind of hard to get it all right, especially when you're sitting in the car at a stoplight. It is a hard genre/style of photography, but when it all comes together correctly it is wonderful. I actually had that happen once too.<br>

Funny you mention her shirt matching the sign - I had not even noticed that.<br>

Still learning - DS Meador</p>