other a 50 years old man having a heart attack after seeing the winning lottery numbers

How would the image stand up on its own if it were without its title? What would one think

was happening just by looking at the photo? I am always somewhat aprehensive of any

photo that needs a title to declare what it is. If a 'thousand words' are not enough to get the

point across, then a title surely cannot offer much help. It shouldn't need to be explained.

Leroy, as was mentioned earlier the title is not what we see on the screen it is 6/49. A larger print or better screen enables you to see enough detail to know what is going on, it is very obvious to me.

 

The fun in this photo is studying it to see all the smaller details and the longer you look the more you see, maybe it is desighned to make us stop, look and take it in slowly, something the world has forgotten to do enough of in todays society.

I think it is a brilliant "staged" shot. There is not much deep meaning here though. I see many people on here nit-picking this image to death, saying the shadows are wrong, it should be black and white, and so on...My only problem with it is that its too good. Is photographing this kind of intricately set-up scene the artist's full-time job? If so, he, or she, is a very fortunate person. It must have taken a bit of money to finance the help, setting, and modeling for this kind of shot, very much like fashion modeling. I do not feel like this is representative of the whole of the average talent showcased on this site. I for one am a very busy person...and this makes me wonder what I, or anyone else for that matter, could accomplish with this kind of photography with an unlimited amount of time, money, and equipment, and support. This is a wonderful image, one of the best I've seen, but lacks in some of the creative "vision" that I've seen in others who are not blessed with the same resources as this artist.

This is an amazing shot, well done. The colours, the composition and the subject are just fantastic.

The lamp shade casts a shadow on the wall, and that creates visual conflict for me - nothing to do with lens choice. The lamp, as a light source, would never cast such a shadow in real life. That's why I suggested that a snoot could have been used to better control the light. I'd prefer that the walls were darker so that it appears that the room is primarily illuminated by the glow of the television. But that's just my personal preference.

I just love the humor, here. Great job. Many nice details as well as a great composition. Maybe the one thing I'd suggest is to change the colors, or to go b&w. I don't think the present coloring does much for the image - although it doesn't spoil my enjoyment too much either. Keep going, you have a very nice portfolio. Congrats.

Reply to Bruce:

 

WOW! So, I guess it's possible to "get it" after a quick glance to the photo.

 

Just one quick observation here: It says in the tag line that he is having a heart attack after seeing the winning numbers. It is not clear that he is having the attack because he has won or beacuse he has lost. Maybe he missed just one number, on the last ticket, he's last hope of a decent life!

 

(I'm sorry for complicating things, but I just wanted to show that the interpretations are by far limited when in comes to this photo) :p

I like the slightly desaturated colors and the overall execution. The model is great too.

 

The only issue I have is that the title is too long.

I love this - it is an example of great inspiration and reeks with human nature. Both in the

subject and as a sample of the humanity and joy in the photographers heart.

It is fun and easy to enjoy. It rises to the

top on it's merit as an expression of humor alone. Bravo. Well done. Give us more. I believe

that the 'content' of any art outweighs and transcends the 'technique' used for achieving an

emotional connection to the work. This is funny. That's enough for me.

cheers

Lee McLaughlin xart.com

I think that is an excellent photo. I love the colours, very european! Alex could you please explain a little on how you made the colours to look like that on PS? I am just a newbie but would love learn.

Personally I think it is fairly well done. The few things needing improvement have been already handled, but there is much about the room aesthetics that, from the comments, indicate youth and a lack of knowledge about prewar homes built in the 20's and 30's. That was a fairly elegant room, with solid paneled doors, radiators heated by an economical boiler, hardwood floors twice as thick as todays lumber. Lighting is soft and yellowish as it was then, except for th TV light which is a bit blown. And no, it doesn't portray the title as well as it should, but it does reflect a period of middle class America, 50+ years ago. A small incandescent light(out of camera angle) to give a better outline of the TV and rabbit ears might be of benefit.

Overall, a better document of our recent past, had the prime subject been dozing, or leaning forward elbows on knees, during a playoff game. I certainly admire the thought and effort that went into this submission.

Definitely a nice picture. However, when you are having a heart attack, you will never grab for your pectorals like this acting gentleman, but rather for e.g. you upper arm, your jaw line or at least your sternum, for those are the places where it is hurting, definitely NOT the heart's location. It is the lack of oxygen in the heart that causes the aching, notably at other places than the heart itself. As a medical editor I am talking from experience, regrettably.

Regards, Arnoud

To me, this would work well as an advertisement or a magazine cover. It gets your attention. However, it strikes me immediately as staged, which limits it from an artistic viewpoint for me. For instance, the TV he is watching has a nicely placed doily which seems odd for someone in this guy's condition. As for the heart attack reaction, this seems a bit over the top. His family is gone so he has no one to celibrate with - why the excitement? Perhaps a wry smile would have been more appropriate?

Great storytelling photo. When is this set? Is it June of 1949? (6/49?) or sometime in the 1950's? It doesn't look like the '60's or '70's -- and there's where the problem comes in, there were no lotteries then. Well, at least not legal state run lotteries, you could bet on "the numbers" from some corner "book keeper" or "bookie" but the results wouldn't show up on any TV. I believe, and I could be wrong, that the state run or legal lotteries didn't start until the late '70's or so?? Depending on location.

 

Of course this has nothing to do with the fine photograph, except that it did seem "anachronistic" to me the first thing.

"I never understood photographers who have to rip into a photograph with their idea of what is technically right or wrong. The fact is you created the image - they did not."

 

This is a critique forum, a learning place. The Photo of the Week is not an award per se. A criticism is not necessarily ripping into someone. It can be a valid suggestion as well.

 

Nonetheless this photo is very nearly technically perfect, although perhaps lacking in taste--but on such things persons disagree.

 

--Lannie

Arnoud,

 

While I believe what you say is true, the photograph itself is just an act, it was 'supposed' to get people to react. The general layman would not know where it would hurt the most when they have a heart attact (except for those who already had one). It is not real and most probably never intended the heart attack to be realistic (like in Holloywood movies, they always grab the heart, think deeper maybe it was a sneer at Hollywood). It was a staged photo which creates a very convincing atmosphere. It was well planned and well executed.

 

While I agree that this is a critique forum and 'taste' is very subjective. There is a HUGE difference between constructive criticism and just plain nastiness. Those who think they can do better, instead of talking about it. do it and show us.

 

Derrick

The photo critique was the high point of all of my photography classes. Not because my work was of so wonderful that I was expecting rave reviews, but because there were so many talented and creative young people displaying their work.

I really like this piece. It evokes the dramatic sensibilies one would get if it were black and white, but yet it isn't. It is a color photo. Subtle, but color.

I think many of the critics who don't like the pink cast aren't looking at where the cast is coming from. A perfectly legitimate pink wall paper.

I think the photographer has shown us a color photo that can truly compete with black and white.

Cudos.

I think this photo is a whole lotta fun, I think it portrays the mood that its creator was trying to get.

I love it!!!!

B Rennie

The overly enriched digital image has the look of a bad Disney moveie. Its distortive and really is cartoon based in style and intent. I think its pure kitsch and cliche.

 

Yes, the skills are there but so what. I just don't think its a very compelling photograph. I think it would be a lovely "cute" postcard for the cutesy odds and ends store, but I can't take it seriously as a photograph, sorry. That's my constructive or de-constructive opinion. If you like this style than you will love this. Have at it.

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/3735/a8mg4085cropts2.jpg

 

thank you all! i've attched a crop from the pict to see it dose NOT need the log title to epxlain it if you where looking at a large print.

oups HTML mode is not working...

 

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/3735/a8mg4085cropts2.jpg

I love it. One comment here said that your photo would not work without the title. I disagree, in part due to something another "critic" pointed out -- that "it looks staged." Well of course! It does look staged, and beautifully so. The title gives it a story but without the title, it simply stands alone to interpretation.

 

Capturing beauty and composition in nature is an amazing talent, I know. But doing so in a "staged" shot, is just as, if not more, noteworthy. Great work.

Excellent photo. I just wish he had made the lottery tickets a little more pronounced so that the image spoke for itself.

Fabulous set-up and treatment. This is a highly stylised piece.

 

My greatest objection to the title is the age of the subject. Speaking as a 46-year-old, there's no way that guy is only 50.

The shadow of the lamp shade is EXACTLY where it should be since the TV is the the only light source in the room... t

(great photo, by the way. I also agree with M.G., in that TV light is usually bluish, so a shift toward that spectrum may be worth consideration.)