Reflecting on life.

Thank you for your thought.

The more I look at it, the more that I like it. My first reaction is "ugggly", then I see the somewhat contented look on the man's face. Instead of taking in a mountain view or an ocean view, or children playing, this man is finding solitude where he is. The fact that it's an ugly sight, makes the statement, "Find solitude, where ever you are." I like that he, his chair and the bench are the only things in sharp focus, making it clear that he and what he's doing are the subject. He got there using his cane, so this might be the best place where he can be alone and reach without assistance. He posture is very relaxed, so it seems that he's achieving his goal of being alone with his thoughts. The washed out construction site details are perfect, since I don't want to see details there, other than it's an ugly mess.

I think that the title adds to the story, but I didn't need it to understand the story.

In a way, the caution sign seems relevant to the photo, which cautiously maintains distance from the man in the frame. It feels like kind of a spy shot. The photo lacks connection for me. The sign is not enough and the man and the rest of the scene isn’t giving me much expressiveness or narrative.

The title detracts. It’s trying to lead me into something grander than what the photo is accomplishing and, had the photo accomplished it, the title would be unnecessary.

In a way, the caution sign seems relevant to the photo, which cautiously maintains distance from the man in the frame. It feels like kind of a spy shot. The photo lacks connection for me. The sign is not enough and the man and the rest of the scene isn’t giving me much expressiveness or narrative....

Interesting thought about the "spy shot." It did, indeed, cross my mind that this guy looks a bit like a retired mob hit man. He is a bit cocky looking. Instead of life, I was thinking that he's going to meet his hot, young (65-year old) girl friend to continue a longstanding tryst, with a romp at a nearby hotel. (Yes, those of us 70 and above still have sex). Despite my mind roaming to several possibilities, the title doesn't constrain me on this one. "Life" is a very broad, inclusive set of thoughts.

I totally understand Ludmilla's reaction. My first reaction was "this is crap." Without the title, I may not have looked further. The man seems to be on an island of contentment, in the midst of an ugly scene.

I thought Sam was suggesting the photographer was the spy

That's exactly what I was suggesting.

That's exactly what I was suggesting.

My thought was similar to yours. To me, the photographer is with the FBI, if this is in the USA.

My thought was similar to yours. To me, the photographer is with the FBI, if this is in the USA.

There was no photographic narrative whatsoever in my comment. It was a comment on an unfortunately somewhat typical approach to street photography.

Thank you everybody for your thoughts.

The first, this is not a street portrait that was taken after some talk/setting with man. This is non-intrusive capture of the life. The "spy shot" argument is nothing but laughable from point of view of the street photography.

Here is the story that I see.

I see the man with most of his life behind him. He found a comfortable bench, where he can shuffles through his life events, that requires some degree of solitude. The cones and the caution tape are perfect but not central attributes of his present being so they are out of focus. He does not have a perfect line of bleached teeth with smile because the life/age is changing the structure of human body and, most likely, the current thought is translating to his face. He puts his cane aside so it does not hold his thoughts down by reminding him what he is now. The bright part of pic with construction can represent the optimistic view on the constantly changing/future life. The ruler in the right lover corner may symbolize the tool that measures significance of his life events that he try to re-live.

Cheers.

p.s.: for me the composition rules are secondary to the story.

There are things I like about this street 'setting': mainly the very relaxed, leisurely 'body language of the man sitting in the middle of all the chaos of the street works. He seems completely unaffected by this. For me that's the only thing that would have made this photo worthwhile. I also like the contrast between the 'normal' exposure of where the man's sitting and the washed out exposure of the background.

That said, it's not IHMO a strong composition. From this viewpoint, there's a lot of 'stuff' that gets in the way between the lens and the man's legs and feet. The 'caution' pole figures large and centrally in the frame. It adds nothing to (and distracts from) the scene. A step to the right or (preferably) a couple of steps to the left would have given you an 'unblocked' view of the man.

I suspect that your desire to remain 'non-intrusive' is a factor in choosing this viewpoint. Being more up-front about taking the man's photo front/side-on or closer to him would have given you a better (unobstructed) viewpoint. You could ask his permission first or take a photo and ask permission later. Then, of course, you'd need to talk to him. Explaining why you'd been interested in taking a street photo with him in it his photo, showing it to him (if it was digital) and asking whether he had any objections. In the worst case, he'd object and ask you to delete it. In the best case, he'd let you take a couple more and ask you for a copy.

One of the benefits of talking to him is that you'd know more about him and why he was sitting there. Your fantasy about him 'reflecting on life' just might burn out to be true but is probably just your fantasy. Maybe he's just waiting for someone or taking a rest.

In all street photography there are ethical considerations that only the photographer personally can make. This short video is one of the best summaries I've come across.

My criticism of this photo wasn’t meant to be ethical. I used “spy” because, IMO, anyone can point a camera at someone and fabricate a nuanced narrative about them, but if the photo doesn’t show it then the narrative isn’t convincing.

I don’t think one has to talk to a subject to get a good or an ethical street photo. Good street photographers don’t always ask permission or talk to their subjects. But, through their cameras and vision, they often show a kind of engagement that a visual medium can establish, with or without a conversation with the subject.

This photo, in addition to exposure flaws and compositional misses, lacks visual engagement. No amount of a photographer’s musing about what’s going on can beat getting a viewer to imagine his own tale. I don’t need a photographer interpreting a photo for me, though hearing a photographer’s motivation can sometimes be helpful. I want a photograph that stimulates my own imagination and feelings for the subject or the scene. This photo doesn’t do that.

This short video

While I don’t necessarily agree with the narrator’s ethical takes, his approach to Fan Ho is noteworthy, especially in recognizing how much engagement, humanity, and intimacy can be attained via a visual language, style, and voice. It doesn’t require conversation or permission.

ethical considerations

I’d add two points to what the narrator says.

1. Photos aren’t necessarily representational. They can be transformative as well. A photo of a man shaving on a bus can be about something other than this real man’s story or biography. Photos isolate moments and freeze them, as often removing them from their real-world realities as expressing those real world realities.
   
2. Both insider’s and outsider’s views show truths. Parr doesn’t pretend to be who he’s not and his view is an honest one, from his vantage point. Avedon, a NY fashion photographer, was about as far from being a coal miner as you can get but managed to show truths. Robert Frank came here from Switzerland and about 10 years later started his road trip across the country that resulted in a classic photo book published as Les Américains that is better known as The Americans. While there can be a first-hand intimacy shown in photos by members of a culture or community, there are significant representations of all communities by many photographers who simply use the medium well and know how to tell a story. Sometimes, even honest alienation from a person or community being photographed can show a significant kind of truth.
   

Thank you everybody for your thoughts.

 

The first, this is not a street portrait that was taken after some talk/setting with man. This is non-intrusive capture of the life. The "spy shot" argument is nothing but laughable from point of view of the street photography.

 

Here is the story that I see.

 

I see the man with most of his life behind him. He found a comfortable bench, where he can shuffles through his life events, that requires some degree of solitude. The cones and the caution tape are perfect but not central attributes of his present being so they are out of focus. He does not have a perfect line of bleached teeth with smile because the life/age is changing the structure of human body and, most likely, the current thought is translating to his face. He puts his cane aside so it does not hold his thoughts down by reminding him what he is now. The bright part of pic with construction can represent the optimistic view on the constantly changing/future life. The ruler in the right lover corner may symbolize the tool that measures significance of his life events that he try to re-live.

 

Cheers.

 

p.s.: for me the composition rules are secondary to the story.

Thank you for presenting your view about your own work to us. It helps to gain insights into differences between individual perspectives and most importantly, how the viewpoint of the photographer himself about his photo is shaped by his unique experience of the shooting.

While I read your interpretation with academic interest, I didn’t think of them while viewing the picture. I see the photo as a dichotomy between the calm, inwardly reflecting environment of an elderly person, and a somewhat harsh, chaotic present world, with a barrier diving the two. While the photo has great potential, it also falls short in two areas.

First, I get some cues about the visual chaos on the left, but there are not enough elements to hold my attention, I.e. not enough traffic cones (if you intend to use them as symbolic of busyness), or no wider view of the street and day to day life to get better perspective of what the man is looking at.

Second, the traffic cone in the foreground acts as a divider, but not in an aesthetically effective way. I think, the reason is, it doesn’t extend the entire length of the frame. If it did, I think it’s identity would have been more abstract, and the out of focus property would have caused visual tension, and once again, hold attention. As of now, it creates distraction and aversion from the scene.

Composition rules are not even in my checklist when I shoot, but composition is. Composition is supposed to aid the story, and one need not compete with the other for priority ranking. Many street photographers rejected compositional rules and had great stories in their pictures, which at the end held viewers’ attention. Their breaking of rules led to successful compositions. At the end, a major role of composition is i think, to hold the viewer’s attention, and in your photo it doesn’t, at least for me.

You have a rich portfolio with beautifully composed (medium format?) black and white images with great natural tonality, that sadly fell through the crack at PN, because from the view count, it’s evident that nobody saw them in the last four years. Sorry, that’s off topic, but what I meant to say is that, your photos show great compositions without necessarily following the rules all the time, and some of them have storylines in them. You can throw away composition rules, but you can’t throw away composition, and only retain the story, because people may not care to listen.

Again, thanks for posting, and thanks for reading through, if you have come till the end. :-)

Thanks to the OP for posting his thoughts. Those match my interpretation quite closely, so I think that the image is successful at imparting a feeling that the photographer intended.

Also, my comment about imagining this being a FBI shot of a mob boss. That had nothing to do with the ethics of the shot, which I have no problem with. I just thought the guy had a certain look.

Those match my interpretation quite closely, so I think that the image is successful at imparting a feeling that the photographer intended.

From looking at the photo, I assumed the photographer had something along these lines in mind as well. I think the image may be successful at, even obvious in, conveying its intent but not at imparting a feeling that would go along with said interpretation. A viewer's having the same interpretation as a photographer doesn't mean success.

That being said, you may feel it's a successful photo, and more power to you and to the photographer for that. I just wanted to draw what I think is an important distinction between being able to interpret a photograph or a photographer's intent accurately from a photo imparting a feeling or being a success.

There are things I like about this street 'setting': mainly the very relaxed, leisurely 'body language of the man sitting in the middle of all the chaos of the street works. He seems completely unaffected by this. For me that's the only thing that would have made this photo worthwhile. I also like the contrast between the 'normal' exposure of where the man's sitting and the washed out exposure of the background.

 

That said, it's not IHMO a strong composition. From this viewpoint, there's a lot of 'stuff' that gets in the way between the lens and the man's legs and feet. The 'caution' pole figures large and centrally in the frame. It adds nothing to (and distracts from) the scene. A step to the right or (preferably) a couple of steps to the left would have given you an 'unblocked' view of the man.

 

I suspect that your desire to remain 'non-intrusive' is a factor in choosing this viewpoint. Being more up-front about taking the man's photo front/side-on or closer to him would have given you a better (unobstructed) viewpoint. You could ask his permission first or take a photo and ask permission later. Then, of course, you'd need to talk to him. Explaining why you'd been interested in taking a street photo with him in it his photo, showing it to him (if it was digital) and asking whether he had any objections. In the worst case, he'd object and ask you to delete it. In the best case, he'd let you take a couple more and ask you for a copy.

 

One of the benefits of talking to him is that you'd know more about him and why he was sitting there. Your fantasy about him 'reflecting on life' just might burn out to be true but is probably just your fantasy. Maybe he's just waiting for someone or taking a rest.

 

In all street photography there are ethical considerations that only the photographer personally can make. This short video is one of the best summaries I've come across.

 

Thank you Mike for your feedback.

I agree that some talk after the shot is a good sign of politeness. I should mention that the knowledge of personal life will helpful in case of the documentary photography but may create the limitation for interpretation for the other street photography genre. I believe that the freedom of interpretation is an important aspect that allows the viewer to create the personal connection and allows, up to some extent, to claim a partial ownership.

Thank you for youtube link. I found info about Fan Ho is extremely interesting.

Thank you Sam for your feedback.

My criticism of this photo wasn’t meant to be ethical. I used “spy” because, IMO, anyone can point a camera at someone and fabricate a nuanced narrative about them, but if the photo doesn’t show it then the narrative isn’t convincing.

It looks like this from point of view of the documentary photography.

This photo, in addition to exposure flaws and compositional misses, lacks visual engagement. No amount of a photographer’s musing about what’s going on can beat getting a viewer to imagine his own tale. I don’t need a photographer interpreting a photo for me, though hearing a photographer’s motivation can sometimes be helpful. I want a photograph that stimulates my own imagination and feelings for the subject or the scene. This photo doesn’t do that.

This is the perfectly understandable. There is no two identical human being on the earth.

Thank you Supriyo for you feedback.

Thank you for presenting your view about your own work to us. It helps to gain insights into differences between individual perspectives and most importantly, how the viewpoint of the photographer himself about his photo is shaped by his unique experience of the shooting.

 

While I read your interpretation with academic interest, I didn’t think of them while viewing the picture. I see the photo as a dichotomy between the calm, inwardly reflecting environment of an elderly person, and a somewhat harsh, chaotic present world, with a barrier diving the two. While the photo has great potential, it also falls short in two areas.

 

First, I get some cues about the visual chaos on the left, but there are not enough elements to hold my attention, I.e. not enough traffic cones (if you intend to use them as symbolic of busyness), or no wider view of the street and day to day life to get better perspective of what the man is looking at.

I can see as the bright left part may pull the viewer's attention and delivers nothing but burned out the street chaos. For me this is the secondary to the person's state of being.

Second, the traffic cone in the foreground acts as a divider, but not in an aesthetically effective way. I think, the reason is, it doesn’t extend the entire length of the frame. If it did, I think it’s identity would have been more abstract, and the out of focus property would have caused visual tension, and once again, hold attention. As of now, it creates distraction and aversion from the scene.

The cones and "Caution" tape are for passersby so they won't disturb the solitude of man. I'm not sure how the cone could "...extend the entire length of the frame"?

You can throw away composition rules, but you can’t throw away composition, and only retain the story, because people may not care to listen.

I'm completely agree with you.

Thank you for review of my PN portfolio.

Yes, it's medium format film.

The cones and "Caution" tape are for passersby so they won't disturb the solitude of man. I'm not sure how the cone could "...extend the entire length of the frame"?

Ok, I understand this can sound confusing. What I had in mind was to shoot from a lower angle to have the ‘caution’ pole completely span the height of the frame. Right now it stops halfway through the frame and I see that its aligned to the edge of the distant building (that gives the notion of a divider). I was thinking, how it would work to make the pole span the entire frame (by shooting at a lower angle) that would look more deliberate. However I understand that comes with additional challenges, like increasing the area of the right side box in the frame that could partially block the man’s legs.

... However I understand that comes with additional challenges, like increasing the area of the right side box in the frame that could partially block the man’s legs.

In addition to that, the cone will gain more an unnecessary visual power.

Sorry, but its just visually uninteresting. Giving it a title to try to lift a narrative out of the pic is just, in this case not working for me. Also the image is cluttered and the tonality is washed out. No worries, just take more pics and keep going, but this isn't a good pic IMO. I'd dump it and move on.

Thank you Uhooru.

I like the "calm amidst the chaos" angle of this but agree that all the stuff in the foreground kills the shot. I'm not bold enough to aim my camera straight at people on the street, so I totally get the awkwardness of doing so. I'm sure the intent was pure even if the execution of the shot is flawed, because I really want to like this guy sitting here with his.... well, whatever. Thoughts?

The look on the guy's face is hard to read, Looks more tense than calm....

could be anything from

"that guy gets any closer with his camera and I'm takin him out"

to

"who will be my next victim"

to

"Damn, I drank the milk money again, I'm in deep sh*t with the wife".

I like the "calm amidst the chaos" angle of this but agree that all the stuff in the foreground kills the shot. I'm not bold enough to aim my camera straight at people on the street, so I totally get the awkwardness of doing so. I'm sure the intent was pure even if the execution of the shot is flawed, because I really want to like this guy sitting here with his.... well, whatever. Thoughts?

 

The look on the guy's face is hard to read, Looks more tense than calm....

 

could be anything from

 

"that guy gets any closer with his camera and I'm takin him out"

to

"who will be my next victim"

to

"Damn, I drank the milk money again, I'm in deep sh*t with the wife".

Thank you Ricochetrider.

I think it's not so important, in this instance, to match the thought to man's face as long as I see the strong emotion.