Jump to content
© ©2016 John Crosley/Crosley Trust, All rights reserved, No reproduction or other use without express prior written permission from copyright holder

'Look Out!' (BW ed.)


johncrosley

Software: Adobe Photoshop CC 2015.5 (Windows)

Copyright

© ©2016 John Crosley/Crosley Trust, All rights reserved, No reproduction or other use without express prior written permission from copyright holder

From the category:

Street

· 125,155 images
  • 125,155 images
  • 442,922 image comments


Recommended Comments

This photo, taken a while ago and seen previously in color, was taken in the Paris

Metro, the home of some wild photo opportunities with its wonderful advertising posters

which change frequently. Your ratings, critiques and observations are invited and most

welcome. If you rate or critique harshly or wish to make a remark, please submit a

helpful and constructive comment; please share your photographic knowledge to help

improve my photography. Thanks! Enjoy! (I did!) john

Link to comment

Quite an interesting street shot -- good cheer on the part of all (unusual on the street!), immediacy (all sorts of fun and interesting things are about to happen) full contrast range, nice composition.  I like it.  Is the color in your portfolio? I'll give it a look as well. 

Link to comment

The center and right subjects in the color postings (which had its own listing in Google.com of this photo) showed these subjects as out of focus and no amount of tinkering with the raw original would allow this low shutter speed, telephoto, long distance, open aperture photo to sharpen those out of focus figures.

 

Now they're acceptably sharp, though no camera motion detectable.

 

The reason:  'Shake reduction', intended to reduce 'camera shake' ostensibly, but also good just as a sharpening tool for images that are cohesive but somewhat out of focus.

 

If you look up in  Crosley comment on Google.com the orignal link to the color version of this photo you can see the dramatic improvement.  Rather than repost the color version, which is redundant, why not post in black and white, as it's good in my view as a b&w photo too?

 

I hope you like it and also write about your experiences with 'shake reduction in Photoshop CC.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Link to comment

Here is a link to my home page here, which also is my portfolio of almost all color photos on the site ImageBrief.com.

 

That portfolio contains 1300+- photos just in the portfolio part plus the catalog of licensable photos (again, almost all color) numbers about 14,000.

 

I invite you to browse the portfolio -- there's 34 pages of 38 photos to the page, and the portfolio keeps getting rearranged and added to on an almost daily basis with new work appearing there almost as soon as it's Photoshopped.

 

Here's the link; you'll have to copy and paste into your browser, or just click on my 'home page' link.  Remember, that portfolio is dynamic -- e.g., it changes from day to day, or every other day, and if you are interested in my work much of which is not posted here or is posted here in B&W only, the mostly color work may be found there:

 

http://www.imagebrief.com/photographers/john-271#/portfolio

 

I hope you make the visit and enjoy.

 

If you want to enjoy the rest of the 13,000 -- 14,000 photos, you can join the site, but it's free for the signup.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment

Thank you for the kind comment.

 

This is what's called a 'dense' photo because of the vast amount of visual information and the various 'stories' or 'narratives' contained therein.

 

What about the falling woman?  If viewed literally, she's going to smash the guy's head -- literally 'crack' him open (if you get my meaning) before squashing him, and same with others nearby.

 

There's a center group to themselves and a far group, each in their own clique, but they are joined in a whole composition.

 

One can view this photo sartorially, starting with the almost obligatory  scarf around the leftmost man's neck and shoulders draped in a manner that is well known to Parisians.  Blacks predominate, which helps form a cohesive lower boundary and so forth.

 

In other words, there's much to analyze in this photo, but most of all, I hope it's just 'interesting' and 'fun' which is why it's posted.

 

Yours for 'fun on Photo.net'!

 

Thanks again, and best wishes Sandy.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Link to comment

John,

If your goal is "fun and interesting" you have succeeded in spades! We always enjoy your shots and the stories that go with them. We'll try to find some time to check out your "site"

As far as PS- I (G) still use PS 5 since I bought it and am not particularly enamored of the idea of having to shell out $10. a month for what I use it for - mainly a hobby. But the camera shake thing does sound useful.

Link to comment

Don't write too soon.

 

With the color version, you have to imagine the less sharp portions (people center and right) more sharp, as here, since I don't fool with my photos once posted as it will spoil the comments.

 

If I'm going to do a substantial workover, I'll try to convert to another view say here to b&w, and have another go if the composition holds up and the photo is not 'color dependant' and posted as a color photo, or if a b&w photo, if odd or irritating colors don't just spoil the photo and it can be displayed either way.

 

That way my portfolio doesn't become too redundant -- it's hard enough getting my nerve up to repost this as b&w.

 

Yet Google.com likes it; under Crosley comment, there's a list of photos (four) and more with usually (not always as they mix it u and sometimes it disappears altogether), and right now the color version of this photo is appearing as one of the four featured photos.  Then under 'more' below, there's links to anywhere from 14 to 54 more pages (not listings but pages) of my posts of posts referring to me.

 

(Of course, when I write this, it will disappear to make a liar out of me!!!).

 

Usually the folks at Google.com make pretty good choices, and my hat's off to them for their curating skills; and I just wonder if they do it by a person, a group or if it's just a very, very smart algorhythm.  I think it's people, myself, and if so, I thank them for making very good choices almost always.

 

Also, many times the discussions under the four chosen photos are interesting as well -- and I find myself rereading them.

 

So, Jim, have a look, do some imagining, and let me know, would you?

 

Thanks, my friend.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Link to comment

After years of using pirate Photoshop software after I was shut down in Odessa, Ukraine once when I had a Photoshop problem with my purchased version and couldn't start it up without an Internet connection (though I had paid full freight), I was stuck and unable to use Photoshop.

 

Photoshop, understandably upset with pirating, had made it so hard for me, a paid user to use it when it crashed on me, I couldn't restore it without an Internet connection; later they added telephone verification and install codes, but not soon enough for me.  I bought (to go with my paid version) a pirate version, so I would never get stuck in that problem again.

 

Things changed when Adobe offered its never ending subscription plan for $10.00 plus sales tax a month with its also neverending upgrades, including camera plug-ins and compatibility for the latest cameras which if you get a new camera sooner or later will drive you into the new Adobe camp.

 

Anti-shake or shake reduction has saved my 'most highly rated' photo on this site in the past three and one-half years from the rubbish where he had sat for eleven years, just too unsharp to be used or shown to anyone.

 

Shake reduction, used with practice, salvaged that photo, and now I'm working on one of five books, and it's on the cover of one of the two color books.  It's worth the $10.00 (plus tax) a month, plus you get Lightroom (not for me unfortunately).

 

I'm so glad this photo appeals to you; it's always a waste to post and keep posted a photo that's just dullsville and nobody really wants to click on.

 

Yet I've done it and almost never take down a photo - maybe one or two a year and some years I take down nothing, and always only if 'just posted', but never if already commented on unless there's some huge mistake.

 

I just found one of my very best photos EVER in some downloads from 2014 and just finished Photoshopping it.  It needed an interfering car tail light cloned out of the scene and same with part of an auto that was very dark and then this beach scene, with some cropping is just drop dead gorgeous, and framed perfectly.

 

It's a photo I can just stare at and know it'll always be among my very best (and my most simple).

 

And to think that I just passed it by; probably never even saw it, until I got to it in a patchy sort of download review, two or three downloads or even ten at a time for the almost 2,000 downloads I've had.  They started out with 6 megapixels and 1 gig cards and now are up to 64 gig cards, so now a single download can be very daunting to review, and sometimes a 'gold mine' of pretty good stuff.

 

It could keep me busy for half a decade to a decade with no more shooting if I were to chose, but I plan to keep on shooting.  It's what life is about.

 

Right, Greg?  (and Verena?)

 

Thanks for the nice comment.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Link to comment
Very nice shot, John, interesting people from the real world arranged against the cartoon backdrop. No one seems to notice that the falling character is about to squash them flat.
Link to comment

Astute comment.

 

You didn't mention that the guy with the very fashionable scarf worn a la Francaise was going to get 'cracked' by the petard of the falling woman.

 

How ignominious an end.

 

First to get 'cracked', then to get squashed.

 

I had a wonderful time, still do, shooting the Paris Metro; it's the first destination for me in Paris, and I can spend hours, even days, riding the trains, taking in the advertisements, then 'seeing what I can get' with compositions and juxtapositions.

 

However, in Paris, it's a state of seige . . . . cameras were 'forbidden' maybe (don't know for sure' in the Metro, but I shot right under the eyes of the flics and no one said anything.  Same with others, tourists. 

 

Now, I bet it's raise eyebrows.

 

Luckily my skin is light.

 

Kyiv used to be OK for that, though far from wonderful, but wartime has made Metro advertising somewhat slim; there are other places to put precious local currency (called the hryvnia and pronounced 'grivna').  Each one buys one-fifth what it bought ten years ago/half what it bought two years ago.

 

That's why in the USA the Federal Reserve is so careful about watching for inflation signs, but despite the Republicans who have been yelling 'inflation' for the almost eight years of Obama's term, none has been forthcoming.  You can read Paul Krugman of the NY Times to find out why that's so.

 

I would say whatever lifted this woman to her heights has finally let her down.

 

Perhaps she's a harbinger of the British economy after Brexit?

 

She'll fall down and crash all around her, rear end first, as will the Brits as the exit the EU, all because the Brits were worried about taking in immigrants (not saying they're unjustified, but even so, the EU is a 'house of cards' with no central government and pull out of one major government may cause the rest to fall).

 

Putin must be laughing all the way from the Kremlin to his mystery home few have ever seen where he keeps his mystery woman one only hears snippets about except that perhaps he'll marry her.

 

His favorite wish is to see the fall of the EU and of course NATO which one supposes would occur nearly simultaneously, leaving Ukraine and the Baltic countries undefended. (Ukraine is not a NATO country but has blessings from many NATO members.).

 

First comes Ukraine.  Let Ukraine go (the war's heating up hot now), then elect Putin's supporter Trump (with Putin's help?), and NATO starts to tear apart, opening the way for some more opportunism.

 

In idealogy Putin and Stalin are completely on opposite poles, or so it would seem, but operationally, that's another thing . . . . . and the result is poor photo shooting for poor me on the Ukraine Metro.

 

See, this is all about ME.

 

I've shot the Moscow Metro, right under the militia's noses, and no one then seemed to care under Yeltsin, but now, I'd probably be seen as a spy.

 

My favorite guy when I lived in Moscow was an admiral (retired) of submarines and his wife, the former librarian of the Kremlin (also retired) . . . . . two relatives by marriage.  

 

How strange then to have been related to one of Brezhnev's favorite people (the admiral).  I enjoyed Russia so much, and now feel like I can't go back.   Oh, and the admiral's son was one of Putin's aides, now gone. 

 

All that is over, sadly.

 

I really take no sides/I just take photos of people being themselves.

 

I look for human truths, not political ones.

 

The Russians individually are some of the warmest people on the planet when you meet with them personally . . . . . they'd be the first (well before Ukrainians) to take you into their homes and give you gifts of their most precious valuables even if they are trinkets or chachkes to a person from a wealthier nation).

 

I spent wonderful times in Russia, and wish I could do so again without worrying about a finger being pointed at me with life-threatening consequences.

 

Just for carrying a camera and maybe taking interesting pictures.

 

Because frankly taking interesting photos is my only noteworthy interest in life.

 

I'm a non-interventionist.

 

I just wish people could get along.

 

Like you and me?  

 

Even though we're a half world apart.  Sometimes more/sometimes less and sometimes this way and sometimes a different way . . . . . (depending on where I am).

 

Best wishes to you this new week, Jack.

 

And thanks.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Link to comment

My 'home page' portfolio has changed with addition of about 10 new photos since the above photo was posted here a few hours ago.

 

It's 'dynamic' meaning the portfolio changes daily or nearly so, with new photos being added on a most frequent basis, often daily, sometimes more so, with occasional lulls.

 

Have a look!  Link's in the first comments or on my bio page.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...