Light my fire

Below table is quite distracting, I would agree with those suggesting cropping this part.

about the mess around and the 'balance' of this mess (there isn't any element in the surroundings that is more distracting than another!!... excluded the above suggested crop)... imo that is probably why it made the POW interest about this photo, the contrast between the quietness and absence of the model and detachment with her busy environment.

about the color and the mood, it reminds me some pics of Tamara's folders.

a BW version would certainly gives a more academic and classy result (color snapshots looks generally far better in BW) but in that case, it would also flatten everything I am afraid. Prior to go BW, I would have opted for a narrower DoF...

Ben S.

 

Sure the woman is attractive. But - as a woman - I would not be happy with this rendition due to the extreme problems in lighting and wierd coloration of the arms and face. To me? As a woman.. It is highly

unflattering and flawed. Just my opinion ;-)

Congratulations, Jochen, but I have to say that I see above all else a giant boom being pulled backwards, then swinging forward and hitting the model square in the forehead.

 

Yes, I know that it is not a boom, but that is what it looks like to me.

 

--Lannie

Nice photo. The composition, with the model's face slightly off-center is well done. The

window frames (the large vertical lines) and the window shade roll (the strong horizontal

line) lead straight to the model's face. Her expression and pose invite wonder and

curiosity. The lighting, while not studio-staged perfect, creates some nice highlights and

lets unimportant things fall into darkness. The "clutter" lets you know where the scene

takes place, at a cafe, which really sets the mood. The drip of coffee on the cup? That

makes you thankful that she is not as fastidious as she is pretty, or it makes you wonder if

someone just got up and left her at the table. The open space above her creates an open

atmosphere that lets you fill it in with imaginary thought bubbles.

Why advise someone to change a cafe scene into a standard portrait? Isn't it evident that

the environment of the image is as important as the model? I first thought those holes in

the steel beems were crystal balls. This effect is only reached with Jochen's tonal and

color adjustments.

 

I say this, Herr Jochen van Eden, you are an outstanding photographer! Checked out your

website. Your portraits are amazing! You have so many critical posts because this

photograph is absolutely beautiful!

Either it's a street shot or an environmental portrait. Since it's the former, you really have to pay attention to details even if every element is not completely under your control. The battering ram, the purple pants, the green leaves . . . they're all distractions that add nopthing to the purpose of the image and could easily have been avoided.

First, congratulations Jochen on a truly outstanding photograph. What makes it work so well for me is that the technique looks effortless. I'm sure that a lot of planning went into this and that you shot a few shots, but it looks like a quick snapshot that you just shot off the cuff. It's hard to make something look so real and you absolutely nailed it. I don't find the clutter distracting but rather atmospheric. I would agree with cutting off the bottom portion below the table and trimming the sides to maintain the aspect ratio. For me though, the thing that really makes this work is the model and the expression on her face, which is an interesting point. How much of this photograph's magic is due to the staging, lighting, etc. and how much is due to the models wonderful expression and pose? This picture, to me, is truly collabrative.

"I don't find the clutter distracting but rather atmospheric."

 

Agreed. The frame is a mess, but this picture is, imo, about a woman lost in her thoughts while seted in themiddle of a busy place. Therefore, the busy place is part of the photo, for me, and I'd personally call this an environmental portrait.

 

Dave, not particularly picking on you my friend, but I can't stand your crop. :-) Above her head was room for her thoughts, and I feel the verticality of the image, with the model at the bottom, adds to the feeling that she's alone and busy thinking, or dreaming away - lost to the world around her.

 

PS: So, Jochen, are we allowed to post a B&W version of this, for comparison...?

Just finished the bw conversion. (Will post it if get permission to do so.) Amazing. It's even better than I would have imagined. I think, it really is an excellent photo - just not in color.

 

Too bad, now Mary will have to take it out of the trash bin and frame the bw version. :-)

Just as you want, Marc. Let us see. :)

Why is it that so many people want to transform this image in a conventional one? I see so many remarks on how to make it more "academic": the crop, the objects on the table, the colors (like in why dont you do it BW, etc). The fact is that, had Jochen made his picture like that, it would be just "yet another picture". You would probably press the "skip to next picture" button and not even rate it.

The picture is special because he made it unconventional and IMO he did a very good job.

Frank: There are a lot of banal pictures in PN but this is not one of them. If you want to see banality, look better at the fashion shots. I personally like them but they could be used to define the word banal.

Googie style architecture and pseudo cross-processing, man this must be Mid-Century Modern bliss (actually the blonde model did help the bliss factor quite a bit).

 

In spite of all the previously mentioned faults (or because of them) this photograph does seem to have a pleasing organic energy about it. I can just imagine a set-designer scrambling to try and (skillfully) achieve the sense of perfect clutter we see here. In one sense you could almost categorize this as a test shot to sort things out.

 

In my opinion the original crop works to give a better sense of place and actually seems less cluttered than the suggested crop which strives to fit proportionately more content into a smaller frame. Still some clean up is warranted, so for my own entertainment I have provided a late night version as well.

 

In my imaginary story line, I wonder if she has been sitting there all night progressing from tea to liquor and then to strong coffee as the sun rises outside the window the next morning. Maybe she was stood up by someone who likes to play with cameras. Surely she is thinking at this particular moment that all photographers are dweebs.

I actually like the original better. More atomospheric. Loose the title.

Interesting to see how people are (re)viewing this one. I could nt upload this revisited version in my previous post.... so here it is!

Thanks, Jochen. :-) There, 2 versions. I liked the suggestion I read somewhere to also try a version with grain. So here you go.

Second version. By the way, I don't think the background is distracting anymore here, although it's busy. And we haven't lost that much depth - just enough, I think, to help her stand out better than in the color version. More unity too, I think.

You wrote: "The fact is that, had Jochen made his picture like that, it would be just "yet another picture". (...) The picture is special because he made it unconventional and IMO he did a very good job."

 

I think the danger is 1) to think that unconventionnal means appropriate, 2) that this kind of color manipulation (more or less the PS version of the old cross-processing) is really unconventionnal, and 3) that strong colors are a good thing - even if they seem to detract the viewer from the great content of such a photo.

How about the top right area in your proposed version ? I think it still has a little color in it, that's not elsewhere - no ? Why ? As it is, this part of the background seems to attract as much attention as the model while the rest of the picture has been toned down a lot by the blurring. I think, if you tone down the opacity of the blurry layer, burn the top right and blur it mildly just like the rest, you get a version that's interesting, because it adds a dream-like mood. Still, all these effects areimo unnecessary because the content of the picture itself is nice, and doesn't need anything particularly fancy.

I like a lot the photo, as it is. The only thing maybe, is that I would prefer a more empty coffee table (not really important).

To answer your query Marc... the version I proposed is not BW but rather desaturated to keep the necessary warm tone and avoid total flatness. It has nothing really fancy but just a simple blur of the surrounding (kind of 'radial' blur) to offer an alternative to the mind escape (out of the blur / out of clutter)... If not then, I'd prefer the original version versus simple BW which look indeed academically sober but plain flat. Grain version is interesting as it's warm and foggy at the same time, but why so reddish?

On the other side of the spectrum, I find your version, Dennis, quite brillant in various ways(!), and IMO better corresponds to the title, more 'cartoonistic' and flashy ... driving our vision directly to her Blue Eyes and following them to the outside, forgetting almost everything the messy surroundings. Just do the test, ask somebody to look at Dennis version for 1 minute and then after ask him/her to describe what was on the table, how many cars were on the street,...

:o)

I'm with Alejandro--why is everyone trying to create a conventionally flat Portra NC wedding-like shot out of this? I don't think that's his intent, whether you like it or hate it. I know it's just a pretty girl having a latte... guess it would be more interesting if there were an tiny aliens circling her head?

I agree b&w is a good option.. but depending how, and with what this is presented, the colour version can work too. I tried a contrasty yet detailed conversion :

 

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/8445/3724208lg3ra.th.jpg

 

It's been a while I have'nt liked a POW.. it has a great mood, and I think every little detail has it's importance. I've seen the word 'untidy' several times.. that is what makes the picture stand out. I have tried rubbing some things out, like the white under the table.. but the original 'untidyness' looks better in my opinion.

 

Maybe, if the model was looking slightly higher, she would look a little less depressed.. and the picture would be more dreamy (the french word I would use is 'onirisme', not sure how to translate)

 

Congratulation for the POW, and my compliments on your gallery.. Cheers from France =)

Oh, I also wanted to comment Marc G.'s sepia version. Your 1st conversion is nice and subtle, but why add grain ?? I don't see the point of adding so much grain, you loose important texture (on the skin mainly). Plus, digital grain doesnt look that good, and I think this picture doesnt need to look older.

 

Cheers

Removing the most distracting elements gives you an idea of what it might have looked like with a slightly different camera angle.

Carl's removal of "the distracting element" was a good move. It'd be better if the window element was much lighter, softened, flaring.

 

I think the B&W renditions are improvements because the obnoxious "architecture" is diminished by lost of color.

 

After the Revolution we'll first hang all the lawyers, but we'll get the architects next.

 

IMO the woman-with-hat in the background is critical to the image's value... older, she's from another time, she's had a life echoing that of the bland blonde in the foreground. There's some resonance, helped by the fact that she's adequately out of focus...but she's very much present.