Untitled

Unique photograph, it is so perfectly into this frame of this 'blinds' ..... and ofcourse the compo and situation they are in, I LOVE IT A LOT.... this is a GREAT choise of the elves, something different (4 times Tim Holte... sorry I had to make a little statement, and I love the photgraphs of Tim and he knows I think) I am happy I did see this picture of Luca Sbordone , and it did and does inspire me a lot!
- Els, Netherlands

Hi all,
first of all, of course, I want to thank the Elves for choosing this image of mine. I was quite surprised, pleasantly, of course, when I found the email about it in my mailbox this morning. Then I had a very busy day at work and so I could not read all the nice comments, let alone answer, before now. And so thank you a lot also to all those who took the time to comment.

So here we are. One lesson I take myself from this image: it is one of the simplest I ever took in technical terms. I was sitting there waiting for my flight, and saw the two men. Opened the bag, the 85 was already on, walked behind my row of seats (this is why the photo is not taken more on the right) and shot a single frame. At my destination I went to the hotel and simply cropped to 4:3, applied a little curve and perhaps a bit of saturation. Sharpening, and it was done. It did not even need straightening, which is extraordinary since I never manage to take a photo straight. And yet it was immediately one of the most popular images I ever took. It was simply "born right" and vastly because I was lucky enough to be there at the right time. Which only goes to show that, especially in street photography, you can either be there or not, either see it or not, and all the rest is secondary. This said, this one was indeed easy to see, I cannot take merit for that: it was me, them, and a fourth guy reading a newspaper, within 30 meters there was no one else. And the two men were pretty static, so it did not really take any blazing decision on my part. I guess I simply got lucky this time.

On the technical side: many of you mention cropping. Cropping was the only thing that I was unsure about. I had considered a square crop, but it does not really work for me. Consider I had very little space around the framing you see here, so cropping square would have meant to cut away most of the wall above them and the floor as well. This for me somewhat breaks the sense of "context" for the two persons, the photo becomes somewhat claustrophobic around them, also.

Some also mention the slightly distorted perspective. I could not shoot this straight from the front, as I said there was a row of seats there. I could have corrected in post-production indeed. What I might say is that I did not feel the need then, and I do not feel it very strongly now. In a sense, part of what I like in street photography is the fact that one is never in complete control, but has somewhat to take the scene as it is, and some imperfection result always, some blur, some stain that would not be there in a staged scene. So I'm always a bit unwilling to completely "correct" an image so to say.
This said, I have used perspective correction before so it is not like I have some religious refusal for it. It simply did not seem necessary, I felt the image was already symmetrical enough... Shun says it is actually too symmetric. It might be true, but I should have framed much wider, in horizontal, and include part of the wall to the right. This frankly did not occur to me back then, but I agree that it could have worked possibly better.
The "symmetry" part is one that also inspires me a reflection: I have the feeling that here what actually works is that there is some degree of symmetry, in the equal suits, the equal computers, the equal seats and so on. But then the symmetry is broken, by the different poses, the different expressions... The contrast between the two things is what catches my eye. Again, something over which I had very limited control, and came mainly out of luck.

Well, I think I wrote a long enough sermon for now... thank you all again for the time you all spend in discussing this image, and for all the very useful inputs!

L.

It would be funny to find out they are playing chess - just like the old guys used to do 20- 30 years ago.
Great image, it speaks for itself. For me like I mentioned earlier, it reminds me of the old guys down at the park playing chess.
Good Job!!!!

What a sad metaphor of modern life.

Thank you Luca for giving a description of your process and methods. That helped me a lot in making my own assessment of the image.

I wonder how much of photography happens "after the fact". We see something we think may have potential, but we aren't sure. We make the image, look at the film or digital representation and then have a realization that something special has emerged. Luca mentioned luck and a technical ease in making the image. This implies little thinking, analysis, judgement and decision making. Perhaps just a RAW recognition of something. Perhaps the best art happens this way. That's why I think this image has the potential to teach us to think less and react more. It seems every time I analyze what is in front of me to try and decide whether or not it is a good image, I come up with something sterile and emotionally bankrupt.

Luca, is this right? Is there a raw recognition of something? If so, what do you think you recognized? What rung the emotional bell?

Now on to the image itself. For me, there are two things that make this image immediately striking. The image is clean, crisp and vibrant in look. The colors, saturation, sharpness and modern style of the surroundings all contribute to this. I want to look at it because it "snaps".

The image also tells us a "street photography" story that is not tired and cliched. Instead of making a statement about the obviously downtrodden, misfortunates on the streets of our cities, this makes a statement about the not so obviously downtrodden, misfortunates in the hotels, planes and executive offices. These men look unhappy and unhealthy to me. They look broken by the weight of their responsibility. I imagine that they will not die of disease or violence as their brothers on the streets may; they will die of stress induced heart attacks instead. All of this speaks to me very clearly here. It is street photography for the gilded. It speaks to "the other half" of us that are also trapped in and by our haggard lives. It is brilliant because it does not look in an obvious place to tell an obvious story. Bravo Luca. JJ

Jeremy, you've asked some great questions: Is there a raw recognition of something? What rings the emotional bell? While some people may be born with some internal photographic instinct, I think for most of us it develops slowly over time simply by doing photography and receiving feedback on the results. It also comes from looking at (or better, studying) the results of other photographers and the comments they have received. I find that when a really good scene is found, I'll know it immediately. When a lesser scene is found, I'll have to spend a lot more time trying to figure out an angle and composition to see if I can do something with it. In other words, the amount of time I have to study a scene is often inversely proportional to the inherent power or aesthetics of the scene. I don't do street photography, but I think I would have reacted as Luca did on this one: it's so perfect that it's immediately obvious.

Finally, I really appreciate what Luca says about the technical perfection of street photography. I've always thought the way that possible compositions present themselves and the fleeting nature of many of these compositions, on top of the fact that street photography deals with people who may not appreciate seeing a camera pointed at them, it's almost the exact opposite of landscape photography in which a scene can (usually) be studied for a relatively long period of time, and alternative compositions can be tried. For those reasons, I don't expect a street photograph to be as technically perfect, and the slight imperfections may actually be an attribute (i.e., it's obviously not a staged event). Luca didn't shoot straight on for a reason, and I totally agree with his explanation why he didn't try to "correct" the slight key-stoning and perhaps the extra amount of foreground.

Since there is a bit of a philosophical idea going on here, I think one sometimes has to recognize that at times we are more brilliant than we know at the time! Personally, I don't throw images away (except duplicates) because more than a few times I have discovered gems years later. One was discovered 4 years after it was made and inspired a whole series of work--but it was there because something inside "saw" it at the time but my conscious self didn't see it--it jumped off the page 4 years later!

I understand Luca's sense that it couldn't be missed, but since we all recognize that it is a more unique image than we generally see, apparently it has been missed and probably has been by many other photographers. I am sure it wasn't installed right before Luca got there. I am also pretty sure this isn't the only time, or even place, where such a scene has been played out, Luca saw it and got it!

Reading some of the comments after mine, I realize that I wasn't clear about the cords and such. I think these play an important role. My comment, which was out of Luca's control, was that there are some things about them that I thought weren't a optimal as one might hope for.

I liked Luca's comment about the context, as I think that is very important here. So much of what the image is about would be lost, IMO, to a square crop and, as he said, would become more claustrophobic. My own sense was just that there could be more off the top and bottom, but not a great deal, just a little tightening up of the composition. At the time, I knew the image was cropped and wasn't sure if it had also been done to the sides. Since it wasn't, there isn't more to be had, but I would personally have considered a small cloning to extend them a bit to add to the image's context--such might not fit with some people's sense of fairplay, but if it was there and it was just that the opportunity and lens on the camera didn't allow it, I am not sure it is any different than cropping, you are just adding what back what was there.

Anyway, I don't think luck has anything to do with great photography, being prepared does!

Homo Plugens! What a strange and physical inactive species we have become. Excellent shot!!

Many are talking about cropping the foreground. May be that's technically more sound, with so much bare space left. I would rather crop from top - just scroll the image a bit down screen so that the upper horizontal lines are not visible upto the white border. This makes the two men pasted to the wall and away from me - enhancing their high-tech distancing from human emotions.

I also agree with the commentator who said the men look unhealthy and unhappy . Rich and distressed, loners in their inner self, poor at heart - are the words that come into my mind immediately. Thanks Luca for presenting a picture that conveys the malady of the era.

 

Hi everybody,
sorry for not being able to answer more frequently, but I'm quite busy these days at work. So I will try to answer one question at time:

I think it is so, indeed. Only, it does not work every time. As John mentions, some times an image lays dormant until you discover it has some merit a long time later. And sometimes you take the photo, and you say to yourself: this one is good. The situation, the elements that I put in are interesting. And yet, then you start working on it in post, and it does not work. The ingredients are there, you see them, but they don't mix, they don't react as you imagined. It might be that the light was plain bad, or that some disturbing element was there, that you did not quite notice in the first place. Sometimes it might just mean that you started with one idea (e.g. make it a B&W) and went on with that and you then realize (and it might take time) that it was not a good idea to begin with. In these cases I often leave the image there and do not look at it for days or weeks until I have cleaned my mind from it and can restart from scratch. It has worked in a number of cases.

To answer your other questions, what I saw here was the symmetry: I always had a penchant for geometrical compositions. And then, as I said before, the breaking of that same symmetry. That was the most obvious part. But what I actually liked was the human component. I'm interested in unaware humans, unaware of me I mean, going along with their life. Not because I find them funny, but because I feel myself reflected in them: how do I look like when somebody looks at me as a stranger in an airport? I do not wear a suit usually, and I'm younger than these two men, but this is immaterial.
Many of you have seen in this image a metaphor of some aspects of our society, or, I would like more to say, a synthesis of them. But what about these two unaware actors? They might play here (without knowing it) that symbolic role but possibly each one of us would have been as good an example as them. And perhaps what they were actually doing and what they actually are is miles away from the role they play here. One of them might be, say, the beloved father of three and grandfather of 7, and what he is actually doing is look at the photos of the latest toddler of the family, sent by his daughter. And he is just on his way to Paris to meet her and her family. They might be way better persons than I am. For what I know, one of them might be a brilliant and renowned photographer, who would have taken this image much better than I did. So, what I mean with this bit of reader's digest philosophy is: I take photos of people because, and when, I feel that I'm like them, not different from them, or better than them. Although I'm a shy person after all and I would never walk to them and ask to shoot their portrait (a skill I really envy, just to make an example, in Meir Samel here on PNet), still I feel that we share something. And I guess tha perhaps this is what at the end drives me to a scene like this when I see it.

Ciao

L.

I think this photo nicely isolates a moment in time and speaks to a contemporary cultural phenomenon. Whether by design or by "instinct," it feels genuine and speaks to a somewhat universal understanding, two things that make it a compelling photograph to me. Whether precise or not, it has the feeling of symmetry and balance yet a strangeness pervades the image . . . is this what we've become?

Not all great photographs and certainly not all great art (not most) is "found." Most artists, though working from gut emotion as well, don't simply come across things, photographers included. They create. Thinking, in most cases, is as necessary to the creative process as is emotion and instinct. Sure, there are times when over thinking can get in anyone's way. Over emotionalizing and relying too much on instinct can also be negatives, if you haven't honed the skills necessary to communicate the instincts well. Many of the great painters made sketches of their paintings first, also called studies. I think sometimes there is a rush to assume that thought, intention, and planning are or are prone to be the undermining of the artist. I think that's a false assumption.

Even in street photography, there can be much forethought and as much creation as "finding." A good street photographer can make things happen if they want and be every bit as much an artist as the street photographer who supposedly simply shoots from the hip.

Luca
your commentry puts this image into a great context. without this comentry it would be dificult to understand the nature of the image. I think you have nailed it. Life has no down time now with all our wonderful gadgets. and th eexpresions on their face show this, I like the idea of them in the box, it pidgeon holes the buisnessman.
Life is to short to be boxed.
Cheers

richard

Luca, I am always looking for streeet shots like this, with powerful meaning and intense response from fellow PN members. I feel first and then I think. I know it is the other way around. I think first and then act. I facilitate Anger mg. classes and have lots of practice at it. My take on this image is that distracting oneself with work and technology is another way to avoid awakening to our inner life. Great image with an strong message. Warm regards.

love the "posture" of the physically inactive ppl....great yellow chair detail...

A very balanced and fun photo. Very well seen. The composition is just great. My only comment is that there is too much floor. I would suggest you to crop a little from the bottom edge. Congrats.

This picture is amazing, simple, true and very funny. It made me chuckle

Most have been said about this very humourous but slightly sad photograph. Coming back to one of the first remarks, in the "good old pre-cell phone/internet days" I could see these two guys happily chatted at each other, yes connected to each other. Now they are sitting in the same cubicle, connected to the whole world, but completely unconnected to each other...

Just my 2 pence...

Great photo

An insightful commentary on how "communication technology" has isolated and held us incommunicado from our fellows in real life. That they have corporate uniforms on and similar poses adds to the idea that these two guys have a lot in common, but they will never share it as they cross like battleships in the night. The slight off-center composition is one of the few things breaking the symmetry, one of my favorite things about this picture. Head-on would have been too much. It reminds me of a lot of the social landscape pictures from the 70's, brought up to date. Good picture, Luca.

The environment is a strong counterpoint the the living organisms in side of it. The wall is as welcoming as a roll down door covering a closed shop. The shared table maybe as close as two people are willing to come in today's world. The cutout space that the table and chairs inhabit is hardly more private than a blank wall. A purely functional way of keeping the furniture out of the way, not a cozy booth, strictly utilitarian. How much of life is wasted just making a living.

The environment is a strong counterpoint the the living organisms in side of it. The wall is as welcoming as a roll down door covering a closed shop. The shared table maybe as close as two people are willing to come in today's world. The cutout space that the table and chairs inhabit is hardly more private than a blank wall. A purely functional way of keeping the furniture out of the way, not a cozy booth, strictly utilitarian. How much of life is wasted just making a living.

i know that cropping comments are a throwaway type of comment, Luca. I personally would have tried isolating the major players by leaving out the corregated side walls entirely and added a stage- like thin proscenium sort of frame of gray. Not sure why, just a quick reaction. A wonderful slice of contemporary life, wherever it happens and it happens all over. I like it a lot.

Why do I love this photo? These are not Hollywood Hunks, the 'scenery' is not colorful or interesting yet it stopped me in my tracks. Amazing to be moved so much by so little. Great work!

nice composition with good ps work

although I wonder why the man on the left side put his hand over his grion? (perhaps he was watching x-rated stuff !) ;)