Untitled

First class street shot..I love the "pyramid" in this shot with the sign diagonally placed on top--message on the sign is simple and STRONG.. Background is busy but not distracting.. a bit of motion blur of the truck behind would have added the dynamic of this shot. The two parralel lines running perfectly horizontal at the bottom add balance to the shot and further emphasise the sign...

 

However, I have a mixed feeling about the alighment being slightly off-center to the right when the overall composition is symmetrically strong...

 

So much for the technicality. I think shooting this man with out showing his face is OK... breaking away from tradition is OK.. as long as the image is telling story effectively...

Aldo.

 

You seem to have misinterpreted some of the criticism. It doesn't take studio lights or a computer to point the camera a little further downward.

Vuk,

 

For whatever it is worth, the negative shows the entire "foot". The person who transferred the image onto c.d. did not follow instructions. By the way, I do have another shot with his face showing (as well as the sign) but I am not convinced that it would add anything to the subject matter or what it is conveying.

A many have said above, guys like this are everywhere (complete with signs or perhaps cute little puppy dogs sitting with them - the puppies are always well-fed by the way). The signs are generally utilised to fool you into thinking that these people have Big Generous Hearts despite "The Losing Hand That Life Has Dealt Them" etc. In this case it seems it's the elves that seem to have been fooled (and anyone else who is shocked by this fairly tame scene). If you're going to make pictures of beggars you have to take a deep breath and get in a lot closer to engender some pathos into the picture, otherwise the whole trauma is for nothing - for both of you. It's too easy to just turn shots like this into Homeless Chic postcards. Sorry, but I don't think there is enough in this to get it over the line as hard-hitting candid photography, certainly not enough to justify all the weeping and gnashing of teeth about the Heartless Urban Jungle in the comments above.

Don't think me completely cynical (I've been suckered-in by - and donated money to - as many guys like this as anyone else; I've even found some of them are genuine) but if he really is as badly off as his sign makes out, I don't think you effectively showed us the depth of his plight.

I am surprised by the comments on composition, and the thought put into the shot. Street photography is capturing what you see, not what you make, or compose. To me it is compelling because you cant see his face. Do we realy see the face of the homeless? Do you?

Without commenting specifically on the compositional qualities of this picture, the fact that a photograph is taken in the street has never been an excuse for poor composition, and nor should it be.

I dont think the composition is poor. For me it is effective, and a matter of personal taste. For this subject matter, and the meaning conveyed, it works for me. Just my opinion.

 

Well, I think that's easy to answer, Mike Czepiel's photo shows a group of homeless people in an unexpected situation - enjoying a good time. This reveals their humanity, ie it conveys the message that they are people like you and me, not just the faceless, suffering subjects that many of see on a daily basis in the centres of big cities around the globe.

 

The current POW shows a homeless person in exactly this latter, totally expected, role. Whatever the good intentions of the photographer might have been, IMHO he has failed to express them in this photo, which consequently might appear voyeuristic to many, including myself.

 

It is easy to do street photography, and pictures of suffering people will always have a 'wow' effect with a large audience. However, it usually requires some sort of engagement with the subject do this sort of photography well.

 

Even though both of the photos discussed might have been the result of 'drive by shooting', Mike Czepiel's photo does not look like it, the current POW does.

I think it does take a fair amount of "guts" to take photographs of the homeless, let alone try to sneak them.

When I made my first comment about this photograph a few months ago, I was living in Rangely, CO were I encountered more deer than people, and I did not have a negative with a homeless person in it. Now I live in Denver where I take time between classes and my weekends to shoot downtown. Now I have a few homeless shots, and my feelings confirmed. However, I do agree that the best way to photograph the homeless is to get to know them. Give them a buck or two, maybe even talk to them. Then ask if you can take their picture, and they will most likely agree to it. More awkwardness will result from bystanders sneering at you than from the homeless.

As for this one, I think it works is an essay, but not as well as a single photograph. The most interesting part of the homeless are their faces.

And I thought this kind of shots is copyrighted by New York City photographers ... Well observed but I am reluctant to grade it. BTW ... did you ask what happened to him? Somehow, this kind of photography needs a follow up, preferably a series of images, or a thoughtful caption to give it a meaning other than an easy trophy. I call it "the reversed Kodak moment" shots (have commited a few myself). Doh ... a good documentary takes much more than one would've expected.

Would you feel bad for this person if you had to pay a tax at the gas pump to help solve the problem, and then saw the same bums everyday on the way to work? Like mentioned above, they always have well feed puppies and Halmark comments on cardboard. I've grown up around the homeless community in SF so this image, to me, the image is cliche (like many of the images in my portfolio to others). The fact that people still feel bad for the homeless who have so many opportunities, only shows me that there are too many flaming liberals out there. Everyday in down town SF, I walk by bums with cell phones, drug addictions, and mental instability. We had to put a gate in the entry of our home to keep the homeless from defecating on our front door! They come out of the woodwork ten-fold on holidays when they know bleeding heart tourists are around. Believe me, if they could keep up with cable cars, they would. "Feed the homeless to the hungry" was said by a retired police officer of SFPD to me no less than one month ago. Goes to show who really has to clean up the mess after we "help" these people out. Every big city has problems, tourists, and pet projects of the Mayor. Vote for yours today.

Maybe it's us, spoiled by "high standards" which requires us to be absolutely stunned by the POW every week. Truth is, it simply does not move me. The beggar in question seems just an abstraction, disengaged from his surroundings, and certainly not reminding me "of the gap separating the wealthy and the needy". Fitting that I was in a discussion the other day about how there is no real poverty in the US... Probably this one would deserve better (but then it was shot in color negative, which I assume it's a no-no for the elves.)

And some time passed, and I read some of the comments below...

Before I incur in the diatribe next paragraph, let me congratulate Aldo for taking the first step. It is not his fault that the pic was chosen for a POW, and I think -- as a lousy landscape/cityscape amateur -- that photographing people, and even more so street people is as tough as nails. Let us hope that someday he will be able to show the real thing.

Thank goodness Elaine explained what I meant by commenting on poverty in the US so I don't have to. To be perfectly blunt, when I see this pic I feel like I was shown some snapshots of a lion in a zoo and told that was the genuine article (I'm actually being nice, I could have said that it reminds me of this kid who stopped his bike by me and asked if I had some change to spare.) I don't want to transform this forum into a Davos/anti-Davos, but have to say that real poverty is tough to describe, and even tougher to transform into some message worth showing ("art"), something beyond voyeurism. It is what this picture falls miles short of conveying, and if I awkwardly raised the social discussion above, it was most definitely not because of this particular pic, but of those from Paulo.

Have to agree that the image isn't terribly shocking or heart-wrenching unless you live far away from a major metropolitan area. Do like the guy's posture, sort of echoes a formal bow at the end of an opera or somesuch... but the sign breaks that mood.

 

Do have to completely disagree with the smug cocky self-assured comments of the monied classes about the bunch of cell-phone toting bums running around secretly having a great time being homeless and crapping on doorsteps.

 

(I mean, really. Are you mad? Did you miss Dorothea Lange? Have you been to Detroit?)

 

Irrespective of the specific quality of this shot, I think that the confrontation and the subsequent issues raised by street photography make it an important genre for all photographers to at least experiment with. Getting a good shot oft requires guts, forethought, and people skills, and shooting on the street is an excellent way to develop them all.

I don't like this. But who am I?

sometimes a photo of the week isn't just about having a 'technically' good photo as it is about having one filled with some sort of message/emotion.

What I found most interesting about this photograph was the reaction by the viewers, in particular those who alluded to well-fed puppies, cellular phones and playing on the sympathies of people who are better off.

 

What an interesting perspective. It is so much easier to demonize the poor, that makes it so much easier to ignore their plight, if after all they are deserving of it. Fits in nicely with a survival of the fittest, Survivor mentality, that is very much in keeping with a capitalist mindset. If only these people applied themselves, they too could be successful. Never mind the structural inequalities that permeate our western societies - that would require far too much reflection.

Better framing could make this image stronger. As for subject matter, it seems this is a relative issue. For some, it's the same old homeless short, not very exciting. For others, it's a provocative image about the perils of poverty. The more I study this image, the more I realize that I tend to agree with the former opinion, where this image is relatively cliche. Like I said, better framing would make it look better, but the subject material isn't incredibly strong, primarily because it has been done so many times.

 

As for the crack that there is no poverty in the USA (or any major country for that matter), I would have to disagree. Yes, (northern)industrialized societies are on average far wealthier than (southern)developing states, but in every society there exist impovered citizens who live off what little food they can scrounge. Poverty exists everywhere, only on different scales.

Altough i don't share the idea that photography has the mission to reform the world, I do recognize that there are some impressive pictures of homeless / ill / hurt / desperate / agonizing people around here. This casual image is simply not one of them. A rating of 6 / 6 would seem in order.

Aldo-

 

I see a certain amount of courage in these photos - you have stuck your nose into a world where you don't belong and have maintained a steady hand. But these first encounters only show the surfaces of a world we drive or walk by daily, and our reactions to the photos are no different than they would be glancing at the real thing. As a (presumably compassionate) photographer who has chosen the homeless as his subject, your job is to get well beyond the public iconography and to show us the spark of humanity that each of these men possess, something that allows us to make a connection of understanding with them, and from which a change in our perception might occur. OK beginning - now, back to the streets.

The shot is neat. Thats about it, it only grabs our attention because someone figured it ought to be POW. A great article and essay on this exact subject is in "Black and White Photography." Feb. issue of a magazine out of Great Britian.

 

It's an ok picture. I liked the ones on the various links way better. Especially the colour one with the feet coming out of the box.

 

PS.Only a fattened nation like america can 'seriously debate' the existance of povery in their back yard.

Technically, I have to agree with the camp that feels the composition is lacking a bit. The vehicle behind isn't the problem for me, and you explained the feet problem, but I think more context would contribute more to the shot. I was imagining this as a wider angle, with this fellow more the right say and some motion blurred vehicles entering from the left and/or leaving from the right with him and his sign in sharp focus amidst the moving world. His face down implies anonymity, but with him dominating the entire frame takes him out of his anonymous role in the picture.

What struck me about the subject matter is that homeless or not, deserving of charity or not, he is undeniably disabled, and somehow capturing him as trapped in his environment may be interesting (though I'm sure it may also look cliched to some).

 

Politically, the responses are predictable both from a conservative and a liberal standpoint, the sign being the crux. The fact that so many haves perceive these signs and situations to be bogus, coupled with our natural desire to not be tricked out of our hard-earned cash while on the other hand not to blow off someone in real need just creates a terrible dilemma in most peoples hearts. You give in to the charitable side and your a brainless bleeding heart liberal (and an anti-Jeffersonian?), you give in to your sense of self-preservation and you're a cold-hearted conservative. Figure out where you want to be and get on with it, blanket attitudes or case-by-case, whatever. I think folks should post their impressions of the sign since it is something that most people have encountered and that most have strong feelings about, since that is as important as any feeling about composition and lighting and motivations. I don't have problem with people telling me to hug my kids, I'd just as soon have a message like this in the world from someone with no money than have one from a corporation with tons of money asking me if I bought my kids their happy meal today. Someones always gonna tell you what to do with you life, your day, your money, this guy is no different.

 

Congratulations on your shot, not one I could take, from my car window or wherever.

I liked ths photo when I saw it a couple months back. Say what you will, but it does send a message. It's more a photjournalism shot than fine art and should be viewed that way. I'm surprised at the amount of negativity it's gotten. It sure beats some of the rather poor POW selected by the elves recently

This is a splendid example of a one-in-a-crowd shot--that is to say, it is one of countless photographs which wants to depict the same thing: in short, someone else's misery. At that, this picture has been rendered so poorly in terms of technique and comes to us so devoid of any pertinent human statement at large (that hasn't already been beaten to death) or one of more personal emotion that I find myself at a loss for words to even typify (much less rationalize) its inclusion within the context of this ongoing series. We've had our share of curious selections, silly selections, downright bozo selections . . . but this one takes the cake.

On the other hand, this week's pick for POW is so over-the-top atrocious that it stands a good chance as ranking as the all-time worst when everything's said and done, and while time can only tell on that (around here one never knows) it's a kind of positive sign, for, like a heroin addict detached and derelict on the same seedy street as this photo's subject we now might at least reasonably expect final release either way in a short while. A kind of happy spectre at that, when you think on it.

It is easy to do street photography . . . .

You couldn't be more mistaken, Frank.

I agree that "poverty exists everywhere". I agree that the car is too distracting. I agree that it's bad that his foot is cut off (doesn't matter if it's a scanner fault. I'm commenting what I see). I agree that there's better photos of the same kind on this site, and the link posted by Bruno is an example of this. To me, the one by Paul is of a different category.