'Um . . . That Will Be Two Please . . . . '

This man seems to have his gaze set on what men usually have their

gaze set on when confronted with mostly bare breasts -- a phenomenon

well known to men and women. Photo taken in Las Vegas. Your

ratings and critiques are invited and most welcome. If you rate harshly

or very critically, please submit a helpful and constructive comment;

(please allow that this is a 'street' photo and thus 'candid' and would

have been submitted under 'street' except 'nudity' or partial nudity

required it to be submitted under 'nudes'. Please share your

photography knowledge to help improve my photography. Thanks.

Enjoy. John

'TWO' of what? 

'To go sir, or for here?'

and perhaps you have some further questions you might want to add (within PN guidelines of course and without lilbeling this poor guy with the fixed gaze downward.)

john

;~))

John (Crosley)

Last night, my task was to review some older photos I'd taken with an eye to unearthing any 'gems' I'd overlooked.  This is not a 'gem' in the true sense (I too one tonight) but entirely view worthy and probably should not be overlooked, as it tells a universal truth.

Taken under the most harsh lightning, with a much more rudimentary camera than today's D300 through D3s, cameras, this was difficult to work with, but somehow I just could not pass it over.

All in all, in seven downloads, I 'rescued' 31 photos, many well worth posting and a few that may end up being among my very best (again not including this, as this is 'just for fun').

I am certainly understanding Garry Winogrand, who liked to put his film 'on ice' or at least 'away' for months or even years to look at it afresh without emotional baggage attendant on having just taken the photos, and then allowing himself to put on his critic's hat and being his own most difficult critic for his own work.

That is the key, to take as much as one can and be open to everything, and not be too critical on the street when one is making captures, then when one is editing to be the strictest critic there is (I am not there yet, and may never get there; posting 'fun' photos is lots of the 'fun' of this exercise . . . . and there are some 'fun' photos like my most viewed photos that would have been edited out . . . as unworthy technically.

My most viewed photo, now with over 220,000 clicked views, is shaky and blurred, and another that has tens of critiques all with 6s and 7s, also is blurry from subject motion, at night under slow shutter speed, but are both among my most viewed work.

It helps to follow Winogrand's advice.

However much I personally don't particularly like his work, as a photographic philosopher, he was first rate.

john

John (Crosley)

Despite anything to the contrary stated, because of slightly distracting individuals, left and right, this is a crop, as I could not get close enough or zoom close enough to frame this one as tightly as I pleased.

Remedy?  Crop. 

I think I indicated it was 'not cropped' and was 'entirely originally framed'.

On reflection, that is wrong.  I make it a duty here to attempt to be truthful about my captures; what's the use of lying to others or making fictitious captions (to what purpose in a forum where people make up fantastic Photoshop creations)?

john

John (Crosley)

Im fascianted by this pic and many more in your port including the boy on the steps. You are a true street photographer and have akeen snse for taking a picture at the right moment, with perfect composition and grittiness to make you feel like you were there. Love it. As you mentioned...this pic is just so true and its art in every way. Keep on with the great work.

Thank you so much.

If it's any consolation, I took lots of photos and only two and a half years later on review did I realize the importance of this one.

Kind of like Garry Winogrand who put his negatives or captures unrevised and 'on ice' for a year (and in the event of his death) a lifetime, before review.

Then he looked at them.

I'm seeing the wisdom in that, sometimes.

Thanks for the kind compliment.

john

John (Crosley)