Waiting for the Metro (II)

Two men wait for their Metro train, all for a study in composition

Second in a series of two submitted today -- the other as

today's 'featured photo'.. Your ratings and critiques are invited and most

welcome. If you rate harshly or very critically, or just wish to make an

observation, please submit a helpful and constructive comment, please

share your photographic knowledge to help improve my photography.

Thanks! Enjoy! John

Study in composition: your leading lines are beautiful, your subject is good, with good interaction between the men. the light on the top right is well placed. I feel the left side of the photo does not contribute. The leading lines are all over. For these dynamic leading lines, you would want your subject to be off centre, so the dynamic is strengthened, while the central placement of your primary subject now contradicts this dynamic. You could simply crop the left side of the image, making it square, and you see what I mean.

While I understand your critique; I really do, I prefer to stay with this rendition.

 

It just pleases my eye, static as it is.

 

Some subjects, to me, are meant to be dynamic, and I frame them so; this is meant to be more centered and thus less dynamic in its framing, but what you call 'leading lines' actually add the element of 'action' that it needs, in my opinion, so I will keep it as it is.

 

I do thank you for your studious analysis of this photo.

 

On another photo, such advice might be something that would improve it in my eyes, and to others it might improve it still, but for my money, right now, I really like this rendition. I shoot instinctively and just like this as it is.

 

Maybe it's the balance of 'mass' or 'lights and darks' which you didn't take into account that is influencing me; yes, that's probably it. This photo has a sort of balance that your crop won't give it, and for that reason alone, I wouldn't touch it.

 

But some other of my photos I don't feel nearly as strongly about; in fact I hardly know why people like them and can use all the good advice people give me. I am always searching nonetheless and did try out your crop advice, because I am not single-minded, but it just didn't 'make it' in my view for what I see in this photo.

 

You may indeed 'see' something quite different, which is 'why they make chocolate and vanilla . . . and sometimes strawberry'.

 

;~)))))

 

Thanks for the skillful and well thought out critique; I know it was a lot of work and I AM most grateful.

 

Perhaps yours will stand the test of time, and my view will be more ephemeral. Who knows?

 

John (Crosley)

Also, cropping breaks up the name of the Metro stop.

 

While it is in Cyrillic and not complete, enough is shown so most Cyrillic readers may know what it says, and I prefer not to break up text in photos where it might contribute. For instance, I have viewers in Kyiv and in Ukraine, and they will know from what is shown where this Metro stop is, based on the letters shown, but not with your crop.

 

That's an often overlooked point in photography; try not to break up text, especially when viewers are native readers/speakers of a language depicted, and many of my viewers are Russian/Ukrainian/Cyrillic readers.

 

I suspect, as apparently a Western European, you might not have taken that into account for this photo. I know it may be a fine point, but it's the kind of thing I usually take into account in my photography at the more refined ends (and this is one of them).

 

That's when I do get picky.

 

John (Crosley)

 

P.S. If I'm going to be posting good enough photos (not rescuing otherwise unusable photos) in square format, I'll buy a Hasselblad or Rollei.

 

Unlike Helmut Newton who intended to crop almost everything, I compose in the viewfinder and hope to crop nothing.

 

So, if I hope to make a square composition, I'll buy a square format camera.

 

Otherwise, it's the magic aspect ratio that was pioneered by the 35 mm frame for me, which I like so much, as I very much dislike cropping, except to 'rescue' something or to keep something bothersome or distracting out of a frame.

 

It's a personal idiosyncrasy, but it's also a discipline, and you may 'judge' me or not depending on your point of view.

 

jc

The man is pointing rightward.

 

His arm is parallel to all the lines in the photo.

 

In a way his arm is an extension of the lines of this photo; a form of what I keep calling 'mirroring' but which others may know by some other name.

 

It has been suggested above, which I have rejected for other reasons, relating to mass of black and white, aspect ratio, etc., and personal idiosyncrasy, that I crop this left to make it a square format.

 

If one follows the lines, then sees this man's arm, left, as a continuation and a 'mirror' of these long lines, then a left crop probably would (to my way of thinking) help destroy that element of the photo.

 

Many times I am unaware of why I'll take a photo until after I analyze it, and now I am certain that his extended arm (he did it twice) is why I chose to take this photo, and another just like it, also with his arm extended.

 

I'm very much a naif about the why and how; it's very much 'inside me' why I do such things until someone challenges me or makes a suggestion and I have to truly analyze 'why' I like something the way I took it (and sometimes I do NOT like my photos the way I took them and really do want good suggestions and welcome change).

 

;~)))))

 

Others' views?

 

John (Crosley)