Connections

I'd like to view the photo thus: the connection between two people using the

phone booth, even though they are not talking to each other. The placement

of the phone facility in front of the ruins of a church connects the ages. A

story of connections at different levels. Many thanks for your constructive

comments.

It just might be the modern way of confessing.

PDE

Thinking while having supper:  The lead-motive of a good photograph is being attractive in (first) a visual way. Even if writing an article about your suggestion, your attending shot should be attractive..! Attract the eye. Does it..?! Otherwise we are laying smokescreens. It's often happening when "semi artstic talk" is used, in getting a clearly bad or unsuccessful photo on a "better" level. And different kind of talk is possible.. Samrat, with your invitation you are on the edge..! :) Olaf.  

@ Olaf: Many thanks for your continuous input on my recent photos. I do agree with you that it is primarily the photo (and quality thereof) that attracts the eye. How a photo is interpreted can vary according to the viewer. While I have simply provided my way of seeing a situation, I am happy (and interested) to know how others see it. Of course adding a posh thought to a rotten photo makes the effort look superficial. Equally, it is important to know what thoughts went into the photo. My providing a few lines of thought was just that. Regards.

@ Pierre: Thanks for your appreciation. Regards.

thanks for your further explanation..! Yes, soon the portfolio of course. :)

In grade (grammar) school examiantions, I almost always knew the answers, so the teachers knew to expect good answers from my examination answers, but when I didn't know something correctly, I just lapsed into illegibility . . . . my writing became indecipherable.

I figured the teachers would extrapolate and KNOW that it was just a matter of illegibility, not imagining I as unfamiliar or did not know the answer.

Boy was I wrong!  After trying that successfully a few times, I finally got nailed, again, and again.  Teaches circled the illegible parts, marked them down and I learned.  Illegibility does not obscure lack of decisiveness.

In a street photo, if you have a dark mood and want to convey that, that is your prerogative, but they're hard to understand or make sense of, and not inviting to the viewer.  They need to use a full range of tones/tonalities to invite the viewer.

Again, request from Meir Samel some samples and see if you can make your photos have some 'punch' OR decide, as Olaf has suggested, that you're expressing something in your artistic soul with your darknesses and muddinesses.

If so, you may have  pulled in the welcome mat except to aficionados; go look at the Magnum photos of Cartier-Bresson and compare the tonalities with those of yours and see the difference . . . . including his early work.

There's a world of difference, and he was a moody man, par excellence . . . . . but not afraid of stating his opinion, almost to anyone.

Photos are for statements, and in part this one is about somberness as well as 'seeing' well, and the two conflict.  It is you, the artist, to see if that conflict is or should be resolved.

I am not going to make, remake or shoot for you, or try to form your artistic sentiment into my own; that would be mistaken.  You express what you want, but you SHOULD at least know your media and your manipulative techniques minimally, even if you do not intend to use them more than minimally or at all.

Again, I hope this helps.

john

John (Crosley)

Excellent shot, good contrasts and well seen.