'The (Animated) Conversation'

Two men stop to talk on a parklike sidewalk on a cold day, and the conversation is

animated with at least one face very expressive. Your ratings,critiques and

observations are invited and most welcome. If you rate or critique harshly or very

critically, 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! john

Very engaging, great story! They just talk, that's just important. And your post work is also nicely blended into the story. Take care, vlad.

Cheers

PDE

I like the photo,expression,both 'characters'

John, I think the photo should be cropped more to eliminate a person's face in right top corner.Somehow is slightly distracting.That's just my thought.

Great capture,

BR,

They talk.  And How They Talk!

The guy, left, is one of the most expressive talkers since the days of the Maidan Revolution and the arguments in the street and Revolution Square that followed victory there, with people openly arguing 'what next?'

And then hands flew, mouths opened and gestures like this from normally restrained Ukrainian people were seen, but little since, until this photo.

What talking . . . . .!

Look at the detail in that hand . . . . . and his facial expression . . . . . for me it was a personal prize I wanted to share, and of all surprises (because I'm mostly fooled by posting) many viewers have a similar view.  I'm very pleased by your comment, and thank you so much.

Best wishes.

john

John (Crosley)

Over time, you have proved to be an excellent judge of photos, so when you have kind words for a particular photo, and in this case, very kind words, I take them well to heart.

Thank you from my heart's bottom.  This is a prize I worked hard for, working the subject from a distance with a telephoto, then up close with a shorter lens . . . . as I know this man and have a 'street friendship' with him, as does almost every other passerby who'll engage with him.  Look at that face!  Who can resist -- it's just made for a good photograph!

So I did what came naturally, but waited until that hand came out, the mouth twisted, and he was close to his interlocutor.

Best wishes, and thanks.

john

John (Crosley)

Thank you for the compliment on finding and capturing the faces (mainly the face on the man, left, I think).

As to your suggesting on cropping and the extraneous passerby's face, I would like you to consider this:

I looked at the capture, saw his face, it was very light, so I burned it in as the viewer's eye is attracted to very light objects, and that helped greatly take the viewer's eye off of him.

This is a 'street' capture, so it would be unnatural to remove traces of 'street' traffic from the scene, and he's quite out of focus (OOF), but in small view, he seems more clear than on a large screen.  Blurring him would have little effect the smaller the image in which he's seen -- blur has that unexpected effect.

As to cropping, this photo is full frame 2:3 aspect ratio which I value very much, and the subjects are placed just fine in the photo.  To artificially crop it to eliminate a 'distraction' as you call it, would be to throw off the aspect ratio which is favorable, in favor of eliminating what I see as a 'street' element that is both expected and places this scene in its proper surrounding . . . . and if it's distracting . . . so be it.

Personally, if it's a distraction, I can't think of any way around the dilemma short of removing the man's face or features, and as a former journalist, that is something I just won't do.  It's against my ethics.

I can fiddle around in Photoshop in a landscape with objects, or even an architectural shot made for artistic purposes, but NOT for a semi-documentary photo of two men conversing to document their conversation and 'WHO THEY ARE'.

I will not start removing people from scenes; that gets journalists fired - and even for far less.  I came from that tradition, though truth be told the 'retouch artists' did some of that at their desks at AP wirephoto NYC and no one complained much, but it NEVER changed the meaning or view of the photo or they never removed anybody from a photo -- that was forbidden.  However, negs were flipped routinely to put a 'hair part' on a 'better side' -- something I refused to do.  That's my background and my rationale, so you can see my reasoning, rather than just some conclusionary answer, and you can make your own choices on your own photos.

However at AP I also was a Photo Editor sometimes of the entire world, and my standards then were the AP world standards. so they had to be high, and they remain high.

Why mess up a good reputation . . . however long ago earned?

Good question, however.  I hope the answer does not put you off.

Best wishes.

john

John (Crosley)

Hi John,

The moment well caught! Thanks for your explanation of your philosophy of photo presentation- interesting, although you needn't defend your choice- everyone will see an image through their own lens. For us, the bg figure was, at first, not even noticed, but then upon further looking, it seems an integral part of the story as the "actors" will have an audience.

Intense talking as well as listening. Love it!

'Love It'

Sometimes that's all it takes for a photo to rise above the rest.

That's why this photo of the rest I took of these gentle people rose above the rest.

Specifically, it was the expression in its detail with both the face and hand/arm gesture that carried it for me, and caused me to say the rest were 'ok' but this one 'I loved', regardless or ratings, and views, which have surprised me.

I don't really have a good predictive track record of knowing how my images will be received, (at least most of them) so I post what pleases me and I wish to share.  I sometimes fall flat on my face, and other times, I'm surprised at the willingness and ability of others to see what impressed me enough to post.

I'm studying this art of not only 'what is acceptable or good' to the audience here' but also on other sites and universally.  

I'm not fond of taking cute kitten photos or mythical mountaintop landscapes either, so I'm kind of restricted to 'real life' in the photos I take, and hardly at all rely on Photoshop except to make reality viewable where the sensor does not do the best job.  

I thank you for your assessment; you both are always welcome here.

Best holiday wishes.

john

John (Crosley)

Emotional conversation!

Just walk down Khreshchatyk Street between McDonald's/Metro and Bessarabsyky, keep your eyes on the benches and those standing near them, and I"m sure you can meet the man left. It has been my good fortune to meet him several times, and to take in his great, photogenic face.

I think part of the 'art and craft' of taking good photos is the ability to spot 'interesting faces' as I did with this man, then wait around until they do something interesting with camera focused on them.  Sooner or later, a great face and a person engaged with something interesting it likely to lead to a good capture -- it's one of those 'secrets' of success.  It's not as though you 'see' a face you like, take a photo and walk on, but you 'see' the face, then if you can wait around, or return (if you know where it's to be found) and wait for the precise instant when THE PHOTO is to be captured.

I always appreciate it when you stop by to comment.

john

John (Crosley)

I'm a new photographer so don't feel I can supply an in depth analysis but what I can say is that I found the shot very interesting, it grabs the attention. Added it to my favourites. Keith 

What I look for more than anything in choosing shots to exhibit is whether or not I find them 'interesting' -- it can be a somewhat elusive search sometimes when confronted with tens of thousands of captures and a hit or miss sort of exercise.

You actually have hit the nail on the head.

Happy solstice holidays.

john

John (Crosley)

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year to you also, Svetlana, and in your culture that is THE major holiday of the year and precedes Christmas.

I will try to apprise you in the coming year (as a sort of New Year's continuing present) of various photo contests open to citizens worldwide, pro or amateur, that do not have entrance or application fees.

One upcoming very soon is the prestigious and generous Sony contest, which you can Google.com, and see.  

Be forewarned, anything posted before 2016 on Photo.net, Facebook, or anywhere else (even in the professional category) is ineligible for entry in the 2016 competition.  

That was clear for all the amateur categories, but there was an exception the image could be taken any time for 'professional entrants' If the image had not been 'published' so I inquired and found that an image that had been even on Social Media or a 'host site' such as Photo.net or Flickr.com before 2016 was ineligible even if not produced as part of a professional work otherwise -- news I was very sad to receive.

Regrettably 'social media' and Photo.net, Flickr.com, etc. count as publication.

Otherwise, I could have made  wonderful entry, but still will try.

Best for a wonderful New Year's 

John

John (Crosley)

Please see this link and click on it for a current list of photo contests and prizes upcoming, many or at least some with NO ENTRY FEE.   Please read the rules CAREFULLY, though.

Best wishes.

https://www.format.com/magazine/resources/photography/best-photography-contest-prizes-2016   

john

John (Crosley)

(Best of luck to you if you enter any -- we won't be competing with each other, and I'd be overjoyed if you win!)  jc