old musicien

I think you're right, Fred. But it doesn't bother me much (at all), as the highlights on the chair and cello case are so rewarding, as is all the detail/texture in the window frames, wainscoting, and the rolled awning/flowers, etc, where flare would have been an issue with more exposure.

I wonder how this would compare with something like TX or PX exposed with the same exposure bias?... t

The scene has interest as a life story, but I would have liked to see the musician closer with more details ,and less construction that does not have much to add ,because lack of details. I see a problem with exposure . Good discussion though.

Tom--

This is a case where the technical aspects, for me, are intimately related to the content. Aside from this photo being about the woman and her instrument -- a relationship made strong by their close proximity to each other and stronger by the seeming vastness of the surroundings captured by the photographer by allowing the environment to play a large role -- a dominant physical and emotional part of this photo is precisely that context and the light. The environment is a key in this photo. I have a hard time seeing past that shadow on the wall, which has become so strongly blocked up that it commands much of my emotional attention. Also, had this been differently exposed and handled, the dominant light areas, even with no detail, would have more depth and more of a glow, giving us the impression of atmosphere thick with light. As it is, everything is just flattened -- compressed -- so that the lights and the darks both have a graphic look rather than being rich and thick as they might otherwise have been. Of course, this is a very tough lighting situation to work with but, for that and other reasons, has the potential of being an extremely rewarding one.

Ottima composizione Andrea complimenti di cuore.
I toni sono bene gestiti e mi piace molto il contrasto.
Uno scatto dei tuoi caro Architetto.
Le mie felicitazioni.
A presto
Paolo

This discussion s very interesting, i loved togive my contribute too. I dont want at all to speak about this photo. It is easy to understand my opinion about, i posted it but i never submitted it.

I like to talk about street photographie, becouse sometimes i see a little confusion about it. And, as always, sorry for my english, for me is not easy at all to write in your language. I hope you will appreciate my efforces more than my language….

Street photographie is a particolar category: this photos have done the history of photographie, and many of us felt in love with this mode of expression for the emotions given by streets photos.

Street photographie has 3 conditions: people, place, moment (lets call this PPM). This means that have to exist someone, somewhere, doing something. After this, we can start judging.. it dipendes first from the interest of this 3 elements, then from how they are able to drive us in a situation. Last how strong, general, is this situation. Of corse, this photos have also to be well done, otherwise we are not well drived in the situation. (there is also the possibility to have only persons and places. So the interest is on the single persons in their daily life. For this, can i suggest to give a look to the exceptionals portfolios of peter blum and dara basseri, here in pn?).

Street photographie is done with what the moment offers. No “actors”, no artificial lights, no repeat…. So, the way to judge have to be different from the way to judge others categories. We have few time to shot, everybody remember the famous 1/125, f8, and 5/8 meter as point of focus with Leicas, and this to be always ready. In the street photographie we accept many “mistakes”, not necessary to talk again about the cutted feet of HCB.

But what happens today, often? That the 90% of street photographies doesnt respect the PPM. Normally i see photos where nothing happens, where the places are not importants, where the person have no personality. Where life, emotions,feelings, are absent. Photos that seems studied, not shooted when arrives (rarely) the moment. Here there are many excellent streeters, of course, unfortunately i dont know yet all of them. But, if you look at the photos, for istance, of El port-bonheur (and others, is only an example), you will see very well what i pathetically try to explain: the life everywhere in the frames. Is a difference that we have to see and understand.

So, why happens what i said? Maybe is the digital words? We havent to pay for shooting now… maybe is internet? Maybe some elaboration can save uninterestings photos? I dont know, but when i see a street, first i judge the meaning, then how the photographer shows this meaning. And, if there are no meanings, well…. what can i judge? If aesthetically i like? Yes, but is not this the reasons for which there are 40 years that every day i see 100 photos ….….

I repeat. Nothing to see with this photo of mine, yesterday i wrote that for me is a lost occasion. And this becouse there was a phantastic PPM, a strong meaning, but not shown as necessary.

And, my friends, really thanks and thanks for all the time and the intelligence you spent here.

Ciao!

Bellissima foto, difficile esprimere quello che mi trasmette mi trovo davanti a una di quelle foto che avevo sempre immaginato dovessero rappresentare i grandi momenti delle vita quelli che non riusciamo a spiegare a parole e possiamo comprenderli solo attraverso l'arte.
Complimenti.

Saluti Alessio.

Labeling this musician "old" is an attempt to create pity, something few accomplished people want. The photo tells another story, more about the photographer than the subject.

The cello case is maximum-modern. This particular musician is obviously a serious performer who travels to perform rather than someone who just noodles at home. To me that's enviable, not something to pity.

She is probably far from alone. Cellos are rarely solo instruments.

 

I find it interesting how many are technicians rather than artists. Neither technician nor artist is more important than the other and certainly photography or art is more about expression rather than technical purity. Photography is as much of a skill as carpentry; however, it's the artist who is able to take that skill and turn it into something beautiful. I think mastery comes when you can manipulate both for a desired result. Clearly the artist here did not intend to have the windows so over exposed, but very clearly the over exposed window works perfectly in putting the attention on the subject. I believe if we were able to see what was outside the windows; the attention would be more on that than they would be distracted by how bright the windows are. When I first viewed this image I thought why not crop tighter around the subject, the light is so beautiful on the subject, but as I studied this image more, I realized that the overexposed windows create a sense of space around the subject that is really wonderful. The space adds to the emotion and draws us into the subject. This is really a great image and a great capture..., Andrea your eye has served you very well! Congrats! Phil G.

Philip--

I haven't read anyone on this forum to be talking about technical purity. Just technique. Technique as it advances or hampers expression.

Interesting that you assume that those concerned with technique are "technicians rather than artists." Serious mistake. Most artists are concerned with and about technique, because it is what they use to express themselves.

The purpose of this particular forum is not simply to fawn over art. It is to learn. Sometimes, critical thinking is required to learn and sometimes it is required of artists.

The woman in the photograph has most likely spent a great deal of time practicing scales. That helps her to be an artist. She can feel the music all she wants, but if she doesn't practice scales, fingering, and good changes of voice on her instrument she won't be able to express what she feels.

Sometimes a photo should not be seen by merely its technical merits. Sometimes you just have to look past the flaws and try to see what the photographer sees in his minds eye. That is what is captured here in this photo. Well done Andrea.

Part of photography is expressing what you see in your mind's eye in the photograph. It is not the job of the viewer to see past anything and into the mind of the photographer. It is the JOY of photography for the photographer to convey to the viewer what's in his or her mind's eye. Technique is used to do that. Occasionally, thoughts of technique are made completely irrelevant by such incredible and outstanding heart and emotion, but it's probably better not to rely on that happening . . . because it's rare.

We, including the photographer in this case, are discussing it in context, in order to learn, and in a reasonable and critical (as in critical thinking) manner. That's what this forum is for.

 

Fred, I think you've got some of it correct. But to suggest that the photographer is actually communicating to us is a dream , I think. Discussions like this, especially when we focus on interpretation, expose how differently we each see the ' same thing '. The viewer always lays their trip on the art. That is as it should be. These discussions enable us to learn to express our connection to an image. There is great reward in learning to see an image and verbalize our reaction. It is too easy to stop 'seeing' the image and fall back on technique. Talk of technique almost always leads to a dead ended path. The photographer expressed himself as he wanted and what he felt is only interesting as a backstory and is probably as great a mystery to him as it is to us. That , I believe, is also as it should be.. It is how we view it that is interesting. None of us will ever become 1 with this photographer to ever learn anything for our own work. The technique is the mystery, the air we breathe without remembering the breath we took.

Alan--

While I agree with you that each viewer will lay his own "trip" on the image, dependent on that viewer's experience and feelings, it is not a dream to assume that I, at least, as a photographer, am doing a lot of things in order to communicate. No matter what you do with the image I provide you, I am providing you with something. Some images will be more open-ended and up for grabs, as it were, in terms of interpretation. And some images will be fairly directed with a pretty directed emotional outcome. Photographers have a lot of tools, a lot of things to use in their visual language. From symbolism to cultural schemes in the way certain colors work, the aware photographer will, indeed, communicate. That various people will interpret things differently does not alter the fact that a photograph is very capable of communicating. It is not as straightforward as words, perhaps more like poetry than logical narrative. Poetry is open to interpretations, wide with variety, yet it communicates. So does music, though it's hard to put music into words. There is, after all, such thing as non-verbal communication. That's photography for you.

The value of these discussions should not be limited to our role as viewer in terms of how we see another's work or how we "interpret" it. The value can also be in what we learn as photographers, as protagonists. They can aid in our creation of works and in understanding just how technique and emotion can work hand in hand. While there is magic in art, it is not all magic. Some of it is nuts and bolts, learning, reading, practicing, developing skills, and technique. Technique is not drudgery, at least to me. It is magnificent. Because it enables me to have a photographic voice.

I also think that the photo is overexposed and the contrast is too much. Though the lines - vertical and horizontal lines - made the image interesting. The spontaneity of the shot is also interesting. I like images when at first glance you wont see the beauty of it but after gazing at it, you will feel the message being conveyed.

I would have titled this photo "Music and Me". The subject is alone with her music...suggests loneliness, deep thoughts,...

Nice concept...but I think the overexposure is a spoiler.

First of all let me congratulate you Andrea on this shot being selected for POW though I must honestly admit it's not my favourite in your impressive portfolio.

Though the story is meaningful and powerful here, the overall impression is not so convincing. I believe the most important thing in the picture, especially in photojurnalism, documentary and street shots, is the content and here the content is great, put it shortly works for me as a story of the feelings of emptiness and solitude. I also like the composition , the space is for me a very effective idea here as it adds to the impression of loneliness. However the way the tools are used to convey the message are somewhat distructive and a bit 'noisy' and grab my imediate attention every time I look at this shot and to get to the content of this shot I have to struggle first with questions about technical aspects and post-processing that arise. I guess the less severe contrast and softer feel would be more subordinate to the story. In other words, this picture is like a very interesting book but written in capital letters, which distract the reader's attention a bit from what they read. This is of course how I look at this shot and I like the fact that not everyone is of the same mind here, this interesting discussion really helps to look at photography from a wider angle.

Thank you Andrea for sharing this shot with us, best regards -wm

The beauty ( or lack of it ) is in the eye of the beholder. The artist communicates, not by cloning their content into the viewers minds, but by awakening something new and unexpected within the viewer. Something that is personal to each viewer. Just as the artist interprets the view, the viewer interprets the artist by filtering their content through themselves. Ingenious imagery doesn't require spacious commentary, but in might inspire it ,as a catalyst for thoughtful thinking. :)

I like the concept a lot. On the other, technical side, there is too much of dodging and burning methods. These white windows are so whiteout that I can't look at the photo for a longer time. They are distraction to the main concept.

The bright white nothing is the mystery, and the head of the instrument is like a head turned to look out the window. I do not see the musician, I see the instrument and it looks outward, beyond this empty place. Well done.
Technically, the shadows bother me much more than the blown out highlights, but neither matter since the photo obviously works. It could have been even better, but then again, it _could_ have never existed at all, and that would be a loss. Great shot!

For me the photo is perfectly exposed. There is no remedy for this photo without supplemental light. Adjusting one way, the blacks go deeper while adjusting the other way, we loose detail in the mid-tones. The highlight to shadow detail is just far too wide to render much detail in both. Some correction in printing could help but I like it just the way it was taken.

It is, indeed, "interesting and worthy of discussion," but the scalding white squres are overpowering. The photo would benefit by having the right-hand 40% cropped off. That would then give prominence to the content that really matters in the image.

Andrea! complimenti per la foto scelta!!!!! che penso tu faccia grandi foto di street gia' lo sai!
non tagliarla pero'!

The basic content is great. Sometimes, you just don't have a lot of time to get your way in terms of an ideal environment. Still, I see lots of excuses but no real answers as to why this photo is so high contrast. It would help to simply cut the contrast in PS (best to use Curves). Even a little would help immensely. The subject and her instrument also seem crowded on the left side. To remedy this, I'd cut off the last window on the right and make the image more of a square.

I see a little bit different scene than others. Having been a performer (actor/singer), I see a successful musician, after a performance, the cherished instrument at her side. Note the well-polished case and gleam from her shoes. How many times have I sat with or without friends after an evening's performance and wound down with food and/or drink? I don't have an instrument, but I empathize with her having it close up to her side. How many of us use an instrument or tool (our cameras?) that we cherish as a friend or family?
I agree with Phil G. that the scene outside the windows would distract, and the exposure, whether on purpose or accidental, keeps the focus inside the room. In black and white, with the exposure of the windows, almost gives this a silhouette feel. The off-center subject and including all the windows in the frame give it more of a spontaneous, candid (non-processed) feel.
By the way, I just took a closer look at the room. The "ceiling" looks like canvas, and the floor looks like an outdoor tile. Is there actually glass in the window openings? Her coat/jacket is over her shoulders. Is she on a porch or patio? Judging from the light, perhaps it is after a matinee or day performance.
Bruce.

Love it! Everything in the picture leads "inward", in from the right, in from the left, and down from the top. Where does the picture take my attention? It bypasses all the unimportant and immaterial (to the musician) stuff in this world and goes into the imagination of the musician. Nice story. Good creation. A real bell ringer!
John Womack

 

I think it would be helpful, if the photographer were so inclined, for him to post the photo as it came out of the camera. It would be interesting to know what part of this photo is the original exposure and what part the post processing. Then, a real learning dialogue could take place. We could actually discuss some of the nuts and bolts instead of worrying about what we like and don't like which, to me, is secondary to delving into a photograph and how it works.