'Protest Cook'

Yes - the photographer gets an automated email the day before.

Thanks for your answer, Cara.

About processing/overprocessing, this photo and other matters

This actually works extremely well as a color photo, and it's one of those photos that works 'one way' as a color photo and 'another way' as a black and white capture -- each treatment somewhat or even more different than the other treatment.

In any event the color capture might have been posted, but it worked against the classical treatment of the hardship of war that this man, the cook, from Western Ukraine, had experienced as he cooked for pro-democracy, anti-corruption, protesters for months, and ended up unwashed, unkempt and exhausted, even here, after the President of Ukraine had fled and the protesters had their possibly brief and possibly Pyrrhic 'victory'.

In processing a photo like this, the processing is idiosyncratic, sometimes to the moment, the feeling of the moment, the monitor being used (calibrated, viewing angle, ambient light, etc.).

Would I process it this way today? Possibly and possibly not.

I was affected by the great hardship I saw and felt from interaction from this man, his lack of being washed because there was no running water, his determination to cook at a wheeled, mobile, military cook stove (one of several at the Maidan tent campground in what usually is the most pretty part of the center of all Ukraine in Kyiv), and this is my particular interpretation that particular day after having seen and met this man not once but several times.

The composition and processing reflects my interpretation that day (and possibly on a harsh monitor under unforgiving light), of what I experienced when I 'felt' his dedication. He cooked, and apparently did not fight with clubs, sticks, or Molotov cocktails, but his food filled the bellies of those who did, then he stayed on after months (until recently) feeding the same fighters and even the hangers on, all without pay and for the good of what he saw was a movement he believed in.

I am more neutral, having lived both in Ukraine and Russia, but I am resolutely anti-corruption, whether in Russia, Ukraine or even the United States where it seems corruption is institutionalized in the election process and the ever-running Congresspeople who constantly need to do 'favors' to fill coffers for campaigns that are perpetual.

I might very well process it differently today, and in fact if this level of commentary were available when I posted it at first, I might have reprocessed it and maybe given reposting a try, but to me the skin, harsh processing, etc., are secondary, as the keys to this photo I see are threefold:

(1) the eye of the cook, especially his right eye, (as we view it) which is particularly strong;

(2) the composition which leads one's eye into the photo; and

(3) the reflection of the man's vocation/avocation reflected/mirrored in the man (rear) handling his very hot cup just so with his fingers wrapped around the cup so carefully and partly extended so that he does not burn them from the hot liquid (soup/coffee?) inside.

The processing was meant to emphasize the man's obvious sacrifice, hardship, his being coated mostly with wood smoke, and his dedication in the face of what I think the world now knows has been a case of hardship -- living in tents over a harsh Ukrainian winter.

Processing is idiosyncratic, and I could process this honestly more than one way, and be proud of doing that more than one way -- even defend in good faith several different ways of processing depending on the venue for showing it. This is just one way.

I'm not always of one mind about each of my captures; this is one rendering of one capture.

I share the idea of master Ansel Adams who once was a pianist (no comparison otherwise to him from me). He likened each capture that he made to a score that he might play in a concert during his pianist performing days before he became a full time photographer.

Each rendering of each negative in a photograph/image he made he likened to a 'performance', and in a video (originally a film) I once saw, he made a point of showing how the same negative had undergone various changes over time from the 30s to the 60s, and the changes were substantial. He did not make excuses for that, and instead used the changes to point out how he had changed as a printing artist; his 'performances, he noted, had refined over time.

I might have made similar changes from hour to hour depending on my audience and my feelings as I processed this image. This is the processing I chose that hour, that minute, using the monitor I had that moment (I have several available to me, and one has defective software, Adobe reminds me each time I fire it up, and it just cannot be fixed with available software . . . ).

In other words, this is one rendering (performance as Adams would have it), and just one variation on a theme. But it's my rendering, and I stand behind it 100%, but acknowledge I also might process it differently even today. I like to work with processing . . . . and often when I have worked on an image and viewed it later, I might process it again; I'm still reprocessing images from 2006.

I just stumbled on this as 'Photo of the Week -- My Third by perusing comments made on my photos,, before examining my e-mail, so I had not yet read Cara's official notification. Thank you for the honor once again, on this my third Photo of the Week - I'm highly honored, and as always especially by the usually high level of commentary that so many members contribute here (and in so many other of my posted photos, for which I am very, very proud).

Thanks to all who have commented; your comments are all acknowledged and so far seem well made and quite articulate. I take them to heart as I think my reply comment shows.

john

John (Crosley)

Bravo. It's refreshing to have a photographer respond at such length to what could be viewed as somewhat harsh critiques of his work. Your comments are well said and you do a great job of explaining your rationale(s) in reference to this photograph.

I still may not like the photograph as it is, but at least now I know why you did it this way.

I was a young boy when World War II veterans were making their future and raising families in the early 1950s. An uncle of mine had a special volume of 'Life' magazine which had the best of their best 'Life' photos chronicalling World War II in the European and Asian theaters in photos. I read it cover to cover numerous times and knew it by heart.

Many of the photos were of political events, but the most part were of both combat and some of support troops (all Allies) from all the various war theaters as they eventually marched to victory.

Many were profoundly gruesome; bodies were shown and in particular those from the Russian front during winter, show horrifically contorted and frozen bodies with soldiers just walking by - sometimes fighting as they went.

I was profoundly moved and influenced by those black and white photos of the war; some very gruesome, and understood from a very early age as I poured through that photo book at each visit to his house, the profoundness of combat on its participants.

That was reinforced when I went to Viet Nam as a civilian with a camera, and there shot mostly black and white, although one of my cameras was devoted to color, but color film was scarce, and processing was hard to come by during my brief stay there as a combat photographer.

Throughout my career (which ended as a photographer in my 20s, to be resumed intermittently in an interregnum in the early 1990s when I was influenced by a now-famous German dance photographer into exhibiting some work in Wetzlar -- home of Leica -- and taking a few photographs. I mostly had no audience until Photo.net. Photography as 'fine art' had not 'taken off' basically, or I would have kept taking photos -- 'Aperture' monographs I saw as the ultimate (and only) goal.

Unlike Vivian Maier, I didn't see much worth in photography that could not be shared; but my true test of a female companion was whether or not she understood and liked those hidden away photographs I kept. Few did, and many got rejected, but when one did, my arms were open -- I had found someone sympatico.

Even today, I rankle when someone looks at my portfolio and whines, 'where are the pretty photos -- the sunsets and the landscapes?' because I see beauty in the well-captured eyes of a street person or the artfully captured composition of strangers on a street or other public place.

I see beauty in this cook, smeared with wood smoke, and with his 'customer' his fingers and hands wrapped around that cup, with the lines of his fingers mirroring the circular pattern of rings from the barrel heating apparatus beside him -- just one of those things that one discovers when one looks carefully at photos that seem to be hard to put down for reasons that some times seem inexplicable.

Some captures are hard to make viewable for more than a fraction of a second or a second or two no matter how much Photoshopping or other image editing one applies.

Others, such as this, are more magnetic, and even if one is not attracted to the editing work I have done, among the thousands I took and image edited, it still (I think) has a sort of magnetism, because of its composition, and maybe the almost translucent and straightforward look of the cook which I found personally to be unique among my captures.

And of course, this photo also tells a minor story related to current events, and personalizes them -- they're not a headline, but a real honest-to-gosh story of a smoke-smeared cook and his hanger-on getting some very hot beverage on a cold day (see their winter clothes) after months of holding out for better and hopefully (for them) getting it. (maybe).

I'm not Robert Capa; I didn't swim ashore during D-Day then back to get photos, but then neither did Henri Cartier-Bresson although he was imprisoned by the Nazis and escaped three times, then worked undercover for the Free French with false documents, and at war's end commandeered from the Allies a film crew and did a documentary 'The Return' (Le Retour).

It's been my destiny to be near some major world events as they happened (campus riots from the first at Columbia College my Alma Mater, to Berkeley, San Francisco State, and Viet Nam before being hired to work side by side with Pulitzer prize winning greats at AP all before I went off and became a lawyer for almost two decades.

And I'm back in world events again, having anticipated ten years ago after living in Russia that Ukraine was the East/West pivot, though not anticipating at all the events that have recently happened.

I don't take sides; I have friends in Russia and Ukraine, and both have been hospitable to me, but I am anti-corruption.

I stay out of other people's fights, and true as best as I can to good photography, but sometimes I can find that on the way to the subway, in a McDonald's, or with pedestrians and street vendors.

I don't wish war on anyone.

You can get killed.

As many found out.

I've been shot and it hurts like hell.

And I've been followed and videoed by mysterious reps of 'those little green men' you hear so much about who mistake me for taking sides.

All so I can take some good photographs to share with you.

It's a high honor to have any photo, chosen for Photo of the Week. I thank those who commented; and as I have repeatedly noted for those who leave complimentary comments, those comments need NOT be complimentary if they are well-meaning and are meant to 'help me improve my photography.'

john

John (Crosley)

Moderator please delete (system error resulted in double post).

john

John C, I agree with Jim: good explanations! I also completely agree with you. One's views of one's own pics change as time passes, how many times do we look back and think "Why ever did I do it like that?" I am coming to the conclusion it is perhaps best to leave things alone as they were rather than try and "improve" them in the present.

My objection to the processing is that it completely overwhelms the strong composition and dominates as the photo's primary feature.

Regarding Robin Smith's comment above about not changing captures.

Long ago I was of the opinion that 'no photo editing' was best. That was in film days when my captures were being processed by giant Noritsu printing machines.

I did not then know that built into the giant Noritsu machines were computers that 'processed' the film captures, much like Photoshop, another image editing program or even today's more sophisticated cameras when they process a capture into a JPEG version, and thus my objections to 'processing' my 'film captures' (especially my color captures) were misplaced because of my lack of understanding of the process involved.

It was quite different for transparencies, which at one time magazines and stock agencies required, as there was almost NEVER any processing for those (absent some special circumstance). What you shot was what you got, and if you varied exposure beyond a narrow realm, you got exposure garbage in 'chromes' or 'transparencies'.

In my Google.com 'representative photos' for a long time was one photo in which a subject was completely screwed up by being fairly out of focus, but with some digital sharpening applied rather heavy handedly, I managed to bring that subject (a small part of the whole) into more acceptable focus, and for many years Google.com images showed it as one of my very best among more than 100 images.

In any case, some 'sharpening' at the very least is almost mandatory for digital captures, according to standard protocol to avoid 'digital grayness' and further, unless one has a superb capture, rendered superbly as, say, a JPEG, by one's camera, in general, it's going to require some tweaking and photo editing, even if not much.

Here is an example of a photo that was rendered wonderfully by my camera as a JPEG.

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17753738&size=lg

before any tweaking.

Tweaking made it better, although I darkened it just a little, which made it show 'worse' in thumbnail, but when shown full size, it shows better than the original camera JPEG.

Opinions vary, and even the size of a capture on the same venue such as Photo.net can affect such a simple thing as how much to lighten or darken a capture. Same, for the subject photo with regard to 'contrast' and how 'gritty' the man is made.

I felt his 'grittiness, aside from the composition, was THE message of the photo, and the composition enhanced and allowed one to view his grittiness (wood smoke mainly, I think), and that told the story of how long he had been there steadfastly . . . . . in effect the grittiness WAS THE STORY, and to emphasize it was the reason for the photo.

To make a good composition of it this particular time was not my first try --- he had wonderful colors, with a multi-colored reddish scarf around his neck, and with his sooty face, he was a photographer's wet dream, but to get a capture that emphasized his sootiness and in a good composition was a far greater challenge. I tried three or four times with that, and he became a nodding acquaintance, and a willing subject. (I tried to find him to point out this capture, but couldn't -- perhaps he had moved on finally.)

As pointed out above by one commenter, I can also be restrained -- it all depends, and part of it depends on the capture, the technical needs of the capture (is lots of sharpening or contrast needed just to make it viewable, for instance, etc.?), and the purpose of exposing the capture e.g., does it tell a story and does the capture demonstrate the story and further do any elements of the capture take away from the story that one proposes to tell.

In that vein, while I LOVE this photo as a color photo, the great colors tend to take away from the grittiness of this as a 'war' photo, plus I like 'classical black and white anyway' so the choice was made to present this as a black and white photo, but some day, some how, some where, it will appear as a color photo.

And that color photo will be processed quite differently, you can bet, not just because of your comments, although they are thoroughly taken to heart, but also because that photo will have a somewhat different meaning -- less about war and more about composition and harmony in color presentation.

These are my thoughts, and most were thought out before I posted, though not so articulately.

Thank you all again for very articulate comments; I learn from the vast number of highly informed comments that dedicated members leave under my photos, and often those comments inform the next time I go out as I compose a capture.

I am grateful for wonderful, helpful comments more than I can express.

john

John (Crosley)

John: The sorts of explanations you have provided have confirmed for me, and I am sure for everyone else, that your work - and the POTW is a paradigm case - should be evaluated on the basis of your own relationship with the content of the image. In this instance, you had developed meaningful connections with the subjects and you had strong feelings about the Ukrainian protests. It is no wonder, then, that the contrasts are so bold, that the image has the appearance of being oversharpened, and that the lines etched on the cook's face appear exaggerated. You had several points to make and you did so in your own way, perhaps discounting possible reactions on the part of others.

To me, it is almost an insult to congratulate you for the POTW. You should be congratulated for the courage and integrity you have displayed in creating it.

John is certainly to be congratulated for his body of work, his eye, and his graciousness in responding.

None of that and none of the stories he's related in any way affects my feelings about the post processing of this photo. Indeed, John was genuine in his approach and he processed this in a way that the experience and his vision motivated him. That doesn't make the processing viable or good or workable. Just because it is his vision doesn't mean it was a good choice. All of our "mistakes" were parts of our own visions at some time. Our own visions can improve, as can our skills and technique. When something looks bad to me, it doesn't really placate me to say, "ahh, but he's doing it his own way." If we consistently applied that rule, how could we ever actually be critical and how could anyone ever learn things? As a matter of fact, John has been generous enough to tell us how much he's learned from and appreciates our comments. Hopefully, that's because we've been constructive and he sees some merit to what we've said, even the negative things we've said. No matter how much I appreciate John's words and affability and best intentions, I'd encourage him to refine this type of post processing so he could do his extraordinary vision justice. I'm not against extreme visions and strong post processing by any means. As long as it looks OK, and somewhat organic to the content. Those two qualities are both lacking for me here.

_______________________________________

The thing is, there's really nothing terribly unique or personal about this sort of post processing. You see it all around. It reads to me simply as poor (or at least limited in ability) execution, not as expressive esoterica. I know because I've been there and sometimes my first attempts at doing strong post processing come out this way still. It's taken quite some time, work, and development of an eye to get skin and wrinkles to read strongly but more photogenically and organically. It's well worth the time and effort to nuance these skills. I sense the last thing John wanted to do was put a cartoonish spin on this. But that's what we've got here, no matter the intent or authenticity of the attempt.

"This actually works extremely well as a color photo, and it's one of those photos that works 'one way' as a color photo and 'another way' as a black and white capture -- each treatment somewhat or even more different than the other treatment."

"In processing a photo like this, the processing is idiosyncratic, sometimes to the moment, the feeling of the moment, the monitor being used (calibrated, viewing angle, ambient light, etc.).

Would I process it this way today? Possibly and possibly not."

"I was affected by the great hardship I saw and felt from interaction from this man, his lack of being washed because there was no running water, his determination to cook at a wheeled, mobile, military cook stove (one of several at the Maidan tent campground in what usually is the most pretty part of the center of all Ukraine in Kyiv), and this is my particular interpretation that particular day after having seen and met this man not once but several times."

Fred, I am grateful for your additional explanation. Indeed I understand the need for standards that are at least quasi-objective. The statements from John I quoted immediately above may explain why I said what I did.

In my opinion, when processing is so obvious as here, it is over the line. What might have been a realistic street scene is made into a caricature and it makes me start to lose faith in the history's realism and authenticity.

Michael Lindner, Fred G., Frode L. and other viewers:

I did not want to make excuses.

Certainly if I had an inkling this photo would ever be in contention for Photo of the Week, it would have received greater attention in post-processiong, and certainly would look different than what is shown above.

As it was, and not revealed is that I had a project I was working on, I had severe time pressure, I had chosen somewhere about 230 photos that were pretty strong, this was one of them but only one of them, I liked it, but I liked lots of them, and as much as I liked this, I liked the color version more, but it did not tell the same story -- the color muted the story-telling potential, but I emphasized the color version for submission to 'wherever it got submitted' for 'whatever purpose' that I chose not to reveal now.

In any case, as part of a project, under deadline, I eventually chose about 70 photos for 'submission' to this 'entity' and successfully so, and am right now in the process of re-photoshopping them, as the 'test' was successful, and those 70 plus or minus are to be my permanent record (remember that from those threats from your teacher at school) of the pre-killing and post-killing days at Maidan (there was some previous killing that I am excluding but not excusing just so you know that those killings were not insignificant and not forgotten.

Overall the 70 photos or the entire bunch of photos really documented the pre-killing protests, the post-killing protests, and the HUGE encampment that took over the center of Kyiv, Ukraine's ultrawide and parklike Kreshatyk street -- a street Stalin sent his best architects to design after Kyiv was razed by the Nazis in World War II (The Great Patriotic War) which is and remains the jewel of Ukraine. That street/boulevard literally bisects -- Maiden Nezelezhesty [Freedom 'Square' Park] -- a beautiful park, with one part built over a shopping center, (as is a similar park in the Kremlin, Moscow -- a model I think for this kind of building) and second park part built over a huge Metro interconnect and connecting to another shopping center and hotel, all surrounded by Soviet-style stately buildings, hotels, and the now fire-razed Trade Union Building, a multi-story building in which six or so died when forces acting on behalf of the now-fled president set it ablaze trapping some protesters inside their headquarters in that commandeered building.

Thankfully the fire deaths there were not so bad as later in Odessa on the Black Sea way south, where it was the reverse and pro-Ukraine protesters (and errant police, soccer hooligans and the like) chased rampaging pro-Russian separatists into a building of same or similar name (Trade Union Building) and in excess of 30 separatists died, cooked ,when it burned -- while other pro Russian protesters were shot and some died jumping to their death and even others were beaten when they tried to get away after escaping the burning building.

Fire is a non-discriminatory killer, and for the record, as some pro-Ukraine protesters in Odessa (and corrupt police and soccer hooligans) were taunting the trapped pro-Russian separatists, other pro-Ukraine forces were trying to move scaffolding into place to rescue the same trapped separatists (things are not always clear or so easily categorized.

A journalist at the scene who saw everything said 'we'll never know precisely how that building got burned as there were 'cocktails' being thrown 'every which way' (my paraphrase) by various parties for reasons that may never be known. Again paraphrased but accurately.

As I warned a British photographer of some skill before the major killings in Kyiv's Maidan 'there will soon be a day of reckoning and bloodshed as the pro-Administration riot police (berkut) try to clear out the tent city', and I told this photographer with expensive gear, 'you'd better be aware you could get killed,' after he remarked how friendly and non-threatening' the protesters were and how they welcomed him and there were no apparent opposing forces THEN.

My words came to fruition soon after.

My photos after the combat show mostly unshaven older men protesters, and these are the dwellers mainly of the tent city, older, unshaven in many cases, often unwashed and living out of the soup kitchens.

Unknown to most including most journalists is that a trip to the nearby McDonald's over time afterwards yielded a large number of conversations that started out innocuously as I shared a table and a Coke, and ended after twenty or thirty minutes innocuous conversation and after I became trusted, with the revelation that the youthful students (and their girlfriends often) sitting with me, often without whiskers enough to shave, let alone grow a bead, had been heaving those Molotov cocktails or passing paving stones to those who would heave them, then later being pinned down by live bullets when finally the provocateur-snipers started firing killing rounds.

The students just disappeared, to stay at friends or at their own flats, and were not 'seen' particularly by the 'press' or those who came to inspect the aftermath. But they were the heart of the combat -- they came out of apartments, dormitories, and from all over Kyiv, sometimes with girlfriends, and joined the fight, a fact that hitherto has not been reported.

They were not seeking glory, but their numbers were very large. They wee instrumental in the fight.

They heard the fight on the radio or television and just 'showed up' ready to fight, and did. Afterward, they just disappeared and sought no glory.

Who sent the riflemen provocateurs firing into the crowds of protesters is still unattributed, but I think I know who sent them. They started firing live rounds into the crowd, often right into protester heads, killing victims outright, as they shot from atop tall buildings (video revealed later showed a certain number of military-style men 'returning' after a 'day's work' to a certain Ukrainian 'agency' armed with rifles, according to well-placed media sources, which appear to be trustworthy . . . . but who gave the final orders to shoot live rounds?

Everybody involved denies that.

In any case, I took hundreds of photos, and while 'Protest Cook' here was one I thought strong, and strong enough to post, I was distracted by that other photo obligation, and that was to winnow my hundreds of preliminary selections down into 40 or so, and failing that ended up with '70' roughly Photoshopped selections, all on a tight time line, and submitted those successfully.

This is not the ordinary course of posting for me; I usually never have other distractions, and this photo and the other 69 photos were 'preliminary submissions' for that 'entity' with the rest now being re-photoshopped by me now for that same entity. I was acting well beyond my image editing capacity at the time.

I am taking to heart all your critiques, rest assured. I do mean it when I write the words asking for critical help to 'make me a better photographer', and part of that is in the post processing for sure.

Imagine how startled I was, not having received Cara's message (never got it), finding this photo marked 'Photo of the Week' and the beginning critical comments, when I never ever guessed this photo would be Photo of the Week, but had guessed another, taken shortly afterward, might have qualified based on technical/artistic merit as well as post-processing. [portrait of street person taken at 240 mm -- one of my best 'street portraits ever].

This is NOT an excuse; it's an explanation. Things were a bit outta hand for a while, and sanity appears about to render its soothing head again.

Many of my captures get loving treatment. A recent Saturday, I processed 11 captures and the process took me 11 hours, approx. Some were easy; some were hard, and several early in my career here might have been throwaways (or better, putaways until I got more skilled or hired a photoshopper which I once did for outside posting several years ago -- not for PN though -- against the rules).

Ansel Adams processed everything himself.

Cartier-Bresson hated processing, and after he set up Magnum hired a personal processor, and when he set off after WWII for the Far East he went three years without even seeing a contact sheet! From shortly after the end of WWII to his death, I don't think he processed any photos himself!

If I could, I'd hire a printer/image editor/photoshopper, but of course would give plenty of guidance and feedback.

I've long acknowledged the set of image editing skills is not my best, and worse, right now I don't even own one plug-in, which I find can be very helpful. However, as I process some of my best and most iconic captures to make them gallery/museum worthy, if plug-ins work is necessary it can be applied 'later' 'if need be' but not until the end, if an exhibitor thinks the capture needs the plug-in touch, for say 'smoothing or 'anti-noise' work.

This is by way of explanation --- not excuse.

It's my work.

It's got my name on it.

And as critical as so many of you are, it's also 'Photo of the Week' (which I know is not supposed to denote anything special, but a note I got in e-mail for 'Photo of the Day' the 19th says just the opposite -- it's an 'honor' for a different photo being chosen the May 19 'Photo of the Day', it says, so go figure.

Not having received Cara's notification, I don't know if PN's view on whether POW is an 'honor' or accolade or not is now PN policy or not. Before it was claimed not to be an honor necessarily, though it always has been treated as such.

In any case, there are two other Photos of the Week with my name on them; one has (I recall) no critical

Congratulations on yet another one, John. I like the tight composition myself, which forces the main subject into one's vision and thus into one's consciousness. I could argue for or against the processing chosen, but, either way, it remains a powerful statement of the stress and anguish that come with social change.

I hope that you are doing well, John. You have always had a way of being where the action was--and is.

--Lannie