20 seconds after the shot

I think that the connection between the man looking at the silhouetted woman and her shadow stretching back to almost touch him makes for a successful capture (and much more interesting than the scene would have been moments before).

Actually that's the whole point of the image.

 

I have a couple of shots when the man is shooting ( but not this woman ). And are, as you guessed, really uninteresting.

 

Then I saw him looking at the woman, but not having the courage to shoot her.

 

And this is after she passed him, and he was looking at her, that I got my shot.

 

The caption is meant to be what is going on in this photographer's mind ... I don't know how I could get a caption which would make that more obvious ...

 

 

because of the light, it is not really obvious that the man is holding a camera in his hands ...

Dunno about the title, because it suggests failing somehow, and I agree with Jeff, this image is a big success. The shadows and rim lighting are really effective, it has a great "mood" to it. Nice work!

Thank you very much for the feedback. I also like this shot very much.

 

I'll think of a proper title now. It is interesting to see how much a caption can break an image actually ...

 

cheers

laurent

And for people who will read the previous discussion, here is what happened here.

 

The photo was first posted with this caption " Haven't I just missed a good shot ?? "

 

And the excahnge with Jeff and Donn, made me realise that the caption was actually destroying the whole picture, instead of either explaining it or giving it the right "dimension.

 

So for a few hours, this photo has been called : "Formerly known as " Haven't I just missed a good shot ?? " now looking for a new caption"

 

And after some self-brainstorming, I remembered that I can actually mess with reality.

 

Nobody is supposed to know that the sitting photographer never took the shot of the woman. So Imagining that he did, I came up with the present caption, which doesn't have a negative connotation anymore, and I hope will allow me to keep this photo which composition was not that easy to get right in fact.

 

 

Thank you for your time and for your comments

The sun light killed it. You have two zones: black and white and virtually nothing in between.

Thank you so much for taking your time to leave a comment.

 

And a very interesting one at that. You have seen exactly my intention here, and I find it very interesting that for you it kills the image.

 

This photo is actually a live rendering of the Ying & Yang symbol : A perfect balance of half white and half black, but with some of the opposite color inside each of the elements.

 

From the darkness emerges only rimlights difining the human characters, or life, as well as the artistic and creative element inherent to life, which is the camera.

 

And from the light emerges only non oprganic elements which are stones and pavement, as well as only the shadow of the woman. We are only prejscting our whole self into light.

 

But then we also have the legs of the woman, as well as the feet of the photographer in this light part : Even if we can only imagine ourselves totaly and only belonging to the light, we still are "rooted" in this light, whatever our decisions and actions.

 

 

Yes, there is no subtelty in term of tones, but that was my intention form the start. I'm not a very subtle person anyway :-). But for me I saw a powerfull opportunity to use a very graphical way of explaining how I see the world surrounding me, and beeing more subtle, would have, for me killed this meaning.

 

Now what I find extremelly interesting here is the way people are reacting to this particular photo.

 

I like to ask for rating, in order to see how my photos are perceived, eventhough, of course a comment is always more valuable, and like just now allows a discussion.

 

This photo is for many reasons, for me one of the best in this portfolio. And people are reacting strongly : I got almos no 5s, but either people are giving 6s, telling me they think it is "very good", or 4s, meaning that they don't find it a "good photo", and find it "just fair".

 

And this is waht makes me really happy and shows that this photo is powerfull : people are reacting. Not only I get quite a few more ratings than usual, meaning other photgraphers feel the need to give a reaction, ans the majority of these ratings beeing anonymous, especially the 6s, tells me that they are coming from members who don't want me to "pay back" ( which I never do anyway ) with a good rating.

 

So, all this to say that I actually don't think that this particular photo has been killed and is dead :-)

 

Thank you so much for your straight forward and honest comment, especially coming from you whose work I am admiring greatly !

 

laurent

Laurent, I don't go into this discusion. I like the strong light and shadow, especially the way the woman and her shadow are like " framing" the photographer in a traiangle of strong light( which is not overexposed and has kept the texture), and the shadow somehow are connecting the two. There are very little grays in between the B/W, but the edges of light on the figures especially ,and also points of light on the black parts are illuminating the whole . The grays in the enterance are a nice soft enterance. for me it works asa nice street image.

Je trouve cette photo fort interessante, et surtout tellement subjective... grace a ce contre jour et cette coupure en deux, de l'image... je l'aime beaucoup, ... elle laisse sans meme avoir lu le titre, mes pensees se perdrent et suivrent cette femme qui s'eloigne, alors que le photographe assis... n'est pas le realisateur de la scene... mais juste l'un des acteurs, bravo!

 

Meilleures salutations.

The image is the play of light and shadows and you have achived it masterfully.

 

Complimenti

What a great shot!

Formal elegance: sun, shadow,silhouttes and geometry.

Ironic axis: photographer's eyes, "the new menu" and the woman!

 

 

Laurent, I have to say Meir has a valid point. I think if you toned down quit a bit you would have a far better and interesting image. And no, I'm sure he didn't take the shot!

Ton,

 

Of course Meir has a VERY valid point. Meir is personly one of my very top favourite B&W photographers and always have very valuable arguments.

 

We were speaking about provocation not long ago in some posts, and actually this photo is a bit of a provocative test for me see how far I could go to convey a very specific feeling which is a priori a bit aside from the pure narrative of the picture.

 

I'm very interested by all feedbacks on that one, and am really interested by all the many different comments.

 

I'm also wondering if this may also have something to do with the different callibrations fo monitors. ( I know that the dark part on the right is between 80% to 95% maximum black )

 

I also have to say I haven;t printed this photo yet, and I'll probably will need to making a lot of different adjustments ( But still with a very manichean way of thinking :-) )

 

 

"a very manichean way of thinking" I like that ;-)

 

You're a funny dude. Taking your sliders all over the place and then talk about calibrating monitors LOL

I had not looked at your folio. I do apologize in that my comment was directed toward someone who I figured did not have a clue. I would not have guessed your explanation. I take pictures; I am not an artist; I never heard of Yin and Yang. If I visited your show and saw all of your photos were as this one I'd have figured out that something is going on and I am missing the boat. Anyway you received better raings then I ever get. :-) .I did not rate it.

Ton,

 

The better the calibration, the more the sliders can move ;-)

 

Meir,

 

Please you have not a single reason to appologise at all : As I said your comment about the photo was and still is very valid. It is important for me to trigger some discussions, and understand how people are feeling when looking at one photo.

 

A photo in itself will create reactions, good or bad, and it is important for an image to be seen ( and even better looked at ) without having to look at other photos. This reaction has nothing to do with art or not art, and after all, PN is a photo sharing website.

 

And it is important for me to understand how some of my experimentations are working. I know I have a tendancy to complicate a bit too much to concept of what I want to do. I will always do that, but if the meaning and intents are a bit too esoteric, it becomes a photo for some kind of "initiates", or at least for people with the same references ( cultural/artistical etc. ), but then it looses some power.

 

Now that is why I love your work so much : there is no explanation at all : all the people you shoot are telling the truth about who we really are. No need for explanation.

 

But a such a straight forward truth is always painfull to accept : this is the reason why I think you say you don;t get the ratings I think you should : most people don't like to face their own weakness and fears. But you are wrong about ever getting good ratings : I have rated a few of your photos, and and don't remember ever giving you less than a 6 ;-)

 

Just don't take these ratings too seriously. The discussions, and contact you can make are far more imnprtant and rewardning than the ratings.

 

Also, you were absolutely right on another thing : I absolutely have no clue on a great many things, but I see that as some kind of freedom, and I only try to enjoy whatever I'm doing.

 

laurent

 

 

 

PDE