Reality

What a delightful documentary image of something so simple as a wall of meters..the child looking out makes this photograph and yes, I'd hang it on my wall!

So I'll express myself plainly: this is a great shot, the type I imageine a service person who carries a camera might capture during work. It just has that realness to it that many shots lack. I think its strength is simply in having the elements present - pipes and meters, window and boy.

This is somehow a typicall Romanian reality photo; my view is that is too easy to get these kind of photos, though on the other hand these 'realities' si good to be documented. I have been tempted myseld of shooting images on the street, particularly last year when I've seen an old women in the window on a posh -like street, though her window was not fitting in at all; it was during a campaign by a food company, so the poor lady was looking oustide with no hope with her head near the red heart of the company advert. Unfotunately, I didn't have the camera with me, because the message would have been quite strong on this given context.

I agree with those saying here that the message in Marius's photo is not clear enough; I like the child expression, that was well captured by the photographer but I find the contrast with the pipes un-necessary. The modified version send my one of the contributors looked better, because gives a well-rounded Dickensian atmosphere.

 

Claudia Darian, Bucharest, Romania

To me it brings to mind "the Matrix". The boy is too young to be plugged in to the network yet, but is perhaps becoming aware of its existence.

Reality it is: no crop needed - is a man without his left hand a better man ?

 

That said, this reality is not quite as unusual as some may have felt. A good subject matter, but not so uncommon for anyone who traveled a bit and saw a couple of windows along the way...

 

Now, how well was it photographed that day...? Well enough. ood composition, imo. A better light with some shadows would give this a nicer depth and mood, I think. It was recorded in a very basic and straight forwards fashion, and that's ok - although I wouldn't mind a slightly higher camera, in order to reduce distortions.

 

This is a good or very good - yet not an outstanding - image to me: I'd be happy to have taken this, but I wouldn't frame it. Imo, a really strong picture of this kind is a picture that most people will see at first glance as truly great. This lacks a little more originality, and a better light. (I think.)

Sorry... I should have said, to be precise: camera slightly higher AND... a bit more to the left, too. And the light would then add some depth while enhancing wall textures. Regards.

This is a nice photo though not particularly original. It's almost what you might term a cliche photo in the realm of UK club photography. However it's notable because this photo genre doesn't have a high profile on photo.net. As far as technique is concerned it's essentially a grab shot so there's no point complaining about the lighting or contrast. Not perfect by any means but nice to see in this forum.

This doesn't hit me like many here. My eye continues to dart all around the frame without being able to concentrate on one subject. A bit too cluttered IMO. It just doesn't strike me emotionally.

I can understand that it might bother some people to see what amounts to two distinct subjects (assuming you process all the meters as a single group.) The tension created between two elements in a composition is inevitable and works if that tension is resolved by producing an intriguing association between them. I think the poverty theme is a bit of a stretch, but the chaos of the meters creates the impression of a living environment that is pretty far removed from what most would consider idyllic, at least for a child.

 

The crop ideas beg the question "how many meters do you need to make the point?" Mike thinks very few, and it's a reasonable argument, but I think the crop further down that crops both meters leaving you with an even more cramped sensation (as well as a more consistent use of lines (conduits) as a framing device, is the best one.

 

I agree with Marc about presenting everything square (which probably isn't possible if the windows are well above street level. I don't agree about the light, though. It could easily become a distracting element, and might improve the ambiance of the place and compromise the point of the picture.

 

Kudos to the photographer for seeing this composition and instantly recognizing the message. I doubt he would have bothered otherwise.

When I first saw this image, I was struck by a few different reactions. Looking at Marius'

other work, albeit limited, I had a different appreciation for this and maybe see it as maybe

a sketch for something to come.

 

Marius portfolio shows his interest in pattern and odd little things out in life, sans the light

bulb. I think Marc made a good point that this photo is not all that unique, but it is not

bad and is an interesting concept. I don't think there is one message to be drawn here,

but many as proven in the comments. For me, I was maybe more thinking the poverty

thing at first, but I think I ended up more in Julie's camp, thinking about how maybe the

mechanical, or "life support", seems to have gotten more attention than the human.

 

As to technical issues, I don't know that a crop is in order, but I really think the tight crop

makes the photo something totally different. Not being there, I don't know if there could

have been a bit better composition, but the current composition, altho alright, is probably

the thing that will contribute to this not jumping up a notch or two in overall quality.

Sometimes that is just what we have to live with, this is nice, but it doesn't reach out and

grab me.

 

Another issue I have here, and it is probably totally personal taste, is that I think the

"print" is a little weak/soft. Overall and also the boy seems to be "foggy". I don't think I

saw this treatment in any of the other portfolio shots, so maybe it is just an upload loss or

and oversight--then again, maybe intentional. I am posting a little tweak I did here on my

laptop--very quickly--just to indicate how I might see it moved.

 

Bottom line, this is a nice photo, but maybe not great, but as I look at Marius' work I am so

far impressed with how he sees and look forward to what may follow. (When I have time I

will go look at his personal web site)

I must say, my compliments to the plumbers. All the piping is even and parallel as it should be. Too often poor plumbers will cut a pipe a bit short and pull it to the connection or elbow resulting in a different slant to the pipe than the expected horizontal or vertical. Excellent plumbing job and nice photo capture as a result.

This weeks POW attempts to capture 'reality' but is hindered by a lack of conviction and

decision making. The potential is here for something interesting, even powerful and we

want the photographer to nail the moment as it speaks to the "reality'. I personally feel let

down here. The Artist was not up to the task. A bolder approach which might have

transformed the scene. The theme of contrasts and opposites might have been pushed to

a starker vision. The image ,as is, suffers from anemia. The color scheme ,as is ,seems

quezy and over time has become hard to appreciate. The design of threatening gas pipes

feels to passive by its portrayal. The boy seems removed from the danger. In his childs

world he (or she) peers from the window unafraid. I hope that the vision the child is

attracted to is actually a beautiful landscape and not just a photographer laying in wait for

the right childish action to fulfill his social concience. Social realism demands a probing

eye, one certainly not content with the surface presentation of life. To be honest, I'm not

sure what the photographer needed to do, but I feel a detached envolvement with a scene

that should have been portrayed in a more compelling way. I don't believe crops are the

answer as the composition works with the given elements. Vertical- horizontal

compositions are not the most interesting, generally, but sometimes that is all we have.

Showing the extent of the gas pipes surrounding the child informs us of how

overwhelming life can be. All in all- Close but no cigar.

"I must say, my compliments to the plumbers."

 

Yes, but he made a few unnecessary holes and didn't plug them.

 

Have a look at the site and you'll see competent photography, which to me, demonstrates even competent photographers will often make mundane images without deep meaning just for the heck of it.

http:// www.msamoila.ro/

Obviously people have never read the Elves' message when a photo is put up as a POW. This isnt necessarily the best photo they have seen on Photo.net this week, it is merely chosen to be discussed and viewed by many to give their opinions and thoughts on a photo that can be taken in so many different directions. The photo was chosen to be DISCUSSED, not necessarily praised, like many POWs turn into.

To my eyes, this is both a pj and a documentary shot and a hangable image.

Pj in that it makes a statement questioning the benefits of progress against need. It also plants a effective seed and gets your brain working. Where is this, is that gas tubing, what about the kid, at home or is it a nursery with explosive walls, where do all the tubes go, why so many meters, present time or past, what is the kid trying to say? (look at the eyes, hand on the curtain).

Documentary in that it effecticvely depicts a reality of rural development and the shallow benefits from deployment of "services" in exchange for some kind of payment, be it encroached space or payment from the poor (all the gas meters)

Hangable in that it is a brilliant snap of ongoing history and the kids pose and expression leaves as many questions as Mona Lisa.

Brilliant

I couldn't agree more with Brian Edwards, and thank him for sharing his thoughts. It seems he was able to reach the conclusion I was struggling with earlier.

 

I would have been more inclined to leave the image untitled, allowing for a more open interpretation because, like Brian, when I first saw the image I appreciated the moment in time - the decisive moment so to speak - the originality - and yes the graphic lines and composition etc. Then, when I came across the title I failed to (not so much 'understand', as much as 'believe in') the apparent deeper meaning or message the artist was trying to feed me. Consider the boys clothes, his neatly combed hair, and the very existence -like Brian said- of the electric or water lines...

 

I was thrown off because it feels like the title weighs more than the image so to speak; I don't see overt poverty, or modernisation. Take away the 'heavy' title and let the boy breathe on his own! ;-)

 

A great find and a very fine image nonetheless. Best Regards,

My first crop attempt was a bit too tight I believe, but I notice no one else tried thier 'luck'. I often teach to make sure you don't lose the story making a 'perfect image', (cleaned up, balanced, no tension points, no line mergers, etc, etc). Meaning it's better to leave the problems than make it boring! I did just that in some respects.

 

I think my second crop leaves more of the story, but still clears up a lot of the clutter/ left side heaviness. That is some of what most folks just can't put their finger on that bothers them. (Many state 'I know something is just not right, but I don't know how to fix it).

 

I think it more of a 'how much do you have to show to get the idea of 'clutter'. And each person will have their own response. I also note many folks have a tendency to think the owner's submission is just perfect to start with. This is caused by a type of myopic vision, where since you have seen it one way, it is hare to see it in another way, as it's 'not what they had'. Yeah, but is what they had the best that it could be? I suggest not in most cases. I study my own work for about a year deciding cropping before releasing an image, but in a few cases change it down the line.

In a nutshell, I really like the capture but I am not wild about the presentation. The

composition is awkward (as many have commented upon) and there is a yellow cast to the

image that mutes detail and contrast. Bill Tate commented on the absence of depth and I

agree.

 

I've attached one more crop alternative (although I rather fancy Michael's crop #2) with the

color cast removed and some density added to the shadows to lend some depth.

Call it myopic but I prefer the original. I need all the meters and piping to get the slightly crooked feel to the installation. I like the boy smaller and nearly overwhelmed by the ugly reality but holding his own in the chaos. I don't want the boy to overwhelm the crazy installation of the meter. To me that makes the subject more singular and how this picture works for me is the balance and tension between the two elements. So the subject is not either of those elements but the pair constrained to live inside the same frame. I like the shape of the original better than the shape of any of the crops also. I like living with the photog's original vision and going as far as I can with it rather than changing it into something else to "improve" it. I am less attached to what all the textbooks and magazines and fashion dictate a photo should look like. That is beginning to bore me. I would rather live with something I feel is authentic even if a little imperfect by magazine standards.

Crops that come this close to themeters at left or the meters at right and all main subjects in general feel a lot too tight most of the time, and are simply (imo) not even worth considering. Let the subject breathe would be my number one "rule" in terms of framing, but well, that's just the way I see it.

I really like this picture a lot -- better than the past 2-3 POWs.

 

The crops presented above do not improve the original image. My only complaint on the original is the quality of the digital image itself -- it seems JPGy and not all that "clear". It seems a bit too compressed (the image data) I think I am trying to get across.

 

Congrats on a fine composition Marius!

To me cropping of others photos is such a precarious undertaking and I think it needs to

be done with an awful lot of thought to what is intended and maybe a bit more knowledge

of what the intent of the photo is. With some photos, cropping may not change meaning,

but here all of the crops, first or second attempts, keep changing the meaning and spirit

of the photo as presented. From my perspective, there might have been a better framing

on site, but I don't see a better crop. Again, I understand where the croppers are coming

from and Marius may even like some of them better himself. But for me the xtra room at

the left allows for the mind to fill in that there are probably more meters out there where

the tighter crops tend to "limit" that feel. Limiting the feeling of more also minimizes the

impact of the photo as I interpret it. The two tighter crops make the photo about the little

boy, which is a totally different animal than the photo presented. It may be a better photo

to some, but it is not Marius' photo.

I like what Patricia has done with the color and contrast (although, maybe, thinking about it, a very slight yellow cast would be better -- something in between the original and the squeaky clean colors of the suggestion). In any event, in pointing to the yellow cast and the lack of depth in the shadows, I think she has identified the source of the quality issues that others have raised.

 

I disagree though with all of the suggested crops. They just don't work. They take what I think is a very fine photograph and strip it bare. The "tension" in the original that everyone seems determined to eliminate, to my eye, distinguishes this photograph and defines its emotional content.

 

I understand the concern over balance, tension points, line mergers, etc. It's certainly something we should be mindful of when photographing. And sometimes, yes, a crop is in order. But, if we let it become an obsession (and I'm as guilty as the next person), it really is a recipe for insipid, lowest common denominator, postcard images.

OK, the 1st instinct of photographers is to post process until there is nothing left. Most

POW discussions devolve into personal versions of others work. What a shame it is. I

suppose in a perfect world we would be reciting our interpretations and visual insights

into the work and it's meanings, refraining from pretending we took the picture and focus

our posts on an understanding of anothers methods and reasons. We may not agree, we

may feel we could have done it better, but maybe we should keep that to ourselves.

Marius and his image deserve our attention here. Understanding of his image will only

come if we can just try to see it his way. He was there. His decision making took place at

the location, not in the easy after the fact world of a web forum. I think there is something

to take home in this picture, even with its flaws . So much of what I find lacking was , well,

just lacking in the scene to begin with. Cropping misses the point in pictures like this, I

mean a tomatoe is a tomatoe at 10 feet or 10 inches. The boys world stays the same, no

matter how many gas pipes there are. It reminds me of a Dr. Suess story where the hero's

life was overwhelmed by all that it took to keep it intact.Images like this lend themselves

well to discussions and the elves ( or whatever) should be encouraged for this choice.

I knew it was Romania from the very moment I saw the thumbail, without loking at the photographer's name. I guess it's the only place on earth where they paint these pipes this yellow...