'Love Comes in All Sizes and Shapes'

Hi

Good image with strong message.6

Regards, Bogdan

This couple, apparently of Mexican extraction, in the Los

Angeles area, demonstrates that 'love comees in all sizs and

shapes', as they share a kiss for dessert after Chinese dinner.

Your ratings, critiques and observations are invited and most

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

remark, please submit a helpful and constructive comment;

thanks in advance for sharing your photographic knowledge to

help improve my photography. Enjoy! John

When one posts a photo of two people who are obviously not 'models' or the photo is more 'gritty' than most, one wonders whether the message will get through rather than whether people will 'judge' the  subjects.  I'm glad for you at least the message got through. 

Thanks Bogdan.

john

John (Crosley)

You are right.

I've noticed that a lot of photo.net users rate the models rather the images. It doesn't seem to matter if the photo itself is a pice of crap...if there is a naked hot chick sweting and penthing in it, it's an instant success.

Of course, there are alot of excellent images of gorgeous girls that should be apreciated, but people should also take in consideration the photos that actually SAY something. 

Regards, Bogdan

I generally don't rate nudes and photos of pretty women for just that reason; I'm tempted to rate my feelings for the model rather than the artist's skill.  I recently got criticized for posting a rather frank and nonchalant nude, who was attractive, but quite 'open' because somehow the bluenoses saw in her licentiousness, when actually it was just a nude depiction - it said much for the few critics' states of mind, I think.

I take LOTS of photos of subjects one newspaper photographer told me her newspaper would not allow her to take or publish, because they did not portray life as a little bit 'rosey' or 'attractive' - she could not publish a photo of someone considered ugly or even really unattractive or even 'fat'.

I publish photos that tell stories in many cases, or just that reflect the reality I encountered, whether or not it speaks for a reality I agree with or endorse.  I may have personal feelings at odds with what is depicted, but if it's a good job, I'll post it, just because I feel it's worthy.

Your comments I feel are very a pro pos, for which I thank you.

john

John (Crosley)

Great, loving image! Deep and powerful.

It's not your usual clichéd kissy, kissy, lovey dovey photo is it? 

Somehow you have to believe there's deep love within this couple and that somehow they are very well suited for each other; Eastern European women often express a belief, taken from Plato, I think, that each person has an ideal mate, they are separated and must search the earth to find that ideal person. 

I think this photo well expresses that.

Thanks for a very expressive comment; I value it highly, not so much because it's complimentary, but because it seeks to 'understand' the photo.

john

John (Crosley)

I took this photo while testing a new piece of equipment/a gift for a special friend, a camera that cost less than $290 and a lens that also cost less than $100, yet both were new or 'like new' Nikon DSLR equipment purchased from a dealer.

I was quite pleased at how quiet the shutter was of this 'consumer grade' but quality image producing camera -- a camera that had almost all functions of a large DSLR that one normally would use, but not the tremendous high ISO sensitivity that one hopes for. 

It takes longer to post-process such an image because of extra noise and the fact the subjects and background are mostly 'middle tones' not given to great contrast, and one is tempted when shooting 'raw' and 'jpeg' just to grab, resize and post the jpeg, which is what I almost did here, as I think it was slightly better than my 'raw' workup, especially in the 'bright' areas.

Six years ago such a camera without lens would have cost over $1,000, and would not have nearly the number of functions this remarkable little gem had.

I do not write reviews, so if you need to know the camera, write me -- address is on  my bio page -- and include please a subject line without the words 'teen' and/or' Viagara' or some misspelling of the latter ;~), lest your missive be filtered out with the spam.

john

John (Crosley)

A really beautiful shot with a very nice title, John!

Real people with real feelings,relaxed and totally oblivious to their surroundings.A moment of tenderness captured perfectly.

Regards,

Dave.

I hardly thought when I posted this that anyone would say 'beautiful shot', but I felt strongly about it.  I keep learning lessons; I post what I like and if people like it, so much the better, and if they don't maybe I do anyway. It's a rare case when I post something I don't feel much for,  unless I feel it's to popular taste anyway.

I also shot it with the absolute cheapest DSLR that Nikon makes, refurbished, just updated, with 10 mp, under very low light at night, so this is what the digital world has come to.  The lens (albeit with vibration reduction) has been hailed by a man that the people on Photo.net love to hate, whose initials start with K. R., who praises the lens, and I find it sharp enough and surprisingly contrasty. Its ability to hold a scene and 'lock on' with its V.R. has amazed me; V.R. should be standard on wide to normal/slightly tele lenses of all sort and the lack is profound.

(I often have found myself shooting in deepest, darkest night under streetlights not with a 17~55 f 2.8 but with a 24~120 f. 3.5~5.6 because the latter has decent V.R., though it was first generation . . . . I saw one refurbished (new but worked on and sold with guarantee) for about $349.99 at a major camera store and am tempted to buy a backup rather than the new (well over $1,000) version of the same lens with stronger V.R. and sharper glass (the older V.R. 24~120 has V.R. glass but is not pin-sharp as some and never will be a legend, but if you drop one, you won't dry for long, either.

While the 'kit' version (28~200 mm f. 3.5~5.6)  is no substitute for a f 2.8 which retails for over $1,200 or much more, with not too many bargains, this 'kit' version of the lens is more than serviceable for even someone like me with experience and some skill, and it's available as a reconditioned lens WITH V.R. (without V.R. unless you're shooting landscapes, I wouldn't want the lens, as its V.R. is a very valuable feature and Nikon makes both versions.

I took photos today with the 'el cheapo' outfit, portraits, and found I was holding steady focus at 1/3 of a second to 1/15 of a second in available winter room light in a relatively unlighted corner where my subject was seated/reclining, without the focus assist light (which I turn off by default then forget even where the 'on control' is, as who wants 'focus assist' light going off on the street in a ticklish situation, where one is shooting clandestinely or even at a philharmonic or opera, where it would be seen during a dark scene by the whole cotton picking concert hall audience AND performers (and ushers and security people). 

Advice:  Unless you're shooting cold and/or refrigerated bugs in low light, turn 'off' the focus assist lamp, unless you absolutely can't get by without it. 

If you can, find someone to take out  that lamp if it will not disable the camera if the hole can be plugged or just replaced with a burnt out bulb (saving the original for eventual resale).

Since this 'el cheapo' dslr camera/lens were a gift for my subject, the 'test' really showed its stuff.  And, rather than be upset that I paid absolutely lowest dollar for the 'refurbished' outfit, my friend is proud of my skills in buying . . . . . which I also am very proud of, as I don't hang with the sort of people who get pride because of the labels they wear.

The only label I have really been proud to wear beside Florsheim at one time, was Pendleton (Woolen Mills, Portland, Oregon) which made (and still makes) wonderful plaid, winter shirts of pure Oregon wool in amazing and unique patterns. 

They were the rage at school when I was a kid -- a fad if you will -- but have endured - showing that Oregonian kids (and the parents who bought such practical winter/cool weather shirts) had more than a big touch of practicality long ago.  Except for moths, most of those shirts may still be wearable  They cost $25 long ago, and have moved up in price, but last and wear forever; holes are so hard to make that they're 'badges of honor' in a Pendleton shirt.

It seems impossible to wear them out; just like an old Nikon manual focus camera or lens; you 'd just get tired of a Pendleton shirt and no longer wear it much, like people get 'tired' of older film cameras. 

These days, with digital cameras, it's different, but I think I no longer need always the 'latest and greatest' to get the captures I want.

I went out tonight and got amazing capture after amazing capture with a consumer (not prosumer) Nikon DSLR (but which takes pro quality photos), and a pro quality DX very wide angle zoom lens, and got GREAT shots . . . . and plenty of them.

Instead of eight (8) frames per second, I got four (4) and a fraction and a full buffer fast, which is 'H-Low' speed in frames per second if one compares today's second 'just lower than prosumer camera' to a Nikon D300 with a big EN-El4a battery in the Nikon battery pack/power booster which I prefer when I MUST get the shot. Eight frames a second is pretty damn fast, and I can make do with much less; it just requires a different shooting style, which is easily adapted.

And, I found I attracted a crowd of street artists [the kind with easels] -- real discriminating people who sell their work -- who know me as I walk among them and willingly pose, most seeming rather universally to praise my work. . . . . which makes me very happy, as they all are very good artists with charcoal, paint, pen, etc.

By contrast, and I can't even draw a door on the wall to exit with like the cartoon characters who are trapped in a doorless room (get it?).

I cherish my artist friends, whom I see regularly just in passing and who always treat me as an 'old friend' though I am not actually that, albeit I am friendly and may be 'old' enough.  (far older then many of them, much to their surprise because I often look far younger, or at least 'feel' far younger). 

;~))

Ruud, to get such praise from you for a photo (and its caption) is a special treat to me and most heartening.

Thank you.

john

John (Crosley)

Your kind, succinct praise is almost the written equivalent of this photo --  unpretentious but full of meaning (to me).

I never had such high hopes for a reaction among some viewers for this photo; most like photo subjects to look beautiful in the traditional sense. 

I saw a different kind of beauty, which I think you have recognized.  And I'm not some starry-eyed 'newly born' person who sees 'good' in everything and goes around blessing everyone; I am both tough and tender, and this scene moved me. 

I had to wait through my meal (and theirs) to get to this point, but it was worth it (and the food was nutritious and good tasting).

Thank you so much for passing on your views; I know it takes extra effort to write anything, and with thousands of photos competing for attention, getting a critique from anybody is a special treat.

john

John (Crosley)

An interesting shot of life! And the philosophical title!

That's a very sweet picture.

My only "gripe" is mostly opinion, but I feel the frame is a bit cramped, I would like to see it a bit wider...something strikes me as a bit awkward with all of her and only most of him. That is rather minor though. Overall I like the message of love and did a little "awww" to myself as I passed it in the gallery. A lovely and sweet moment captured!

Rated a 5. Thanks for sharing!

I learned through others that my 'pictures tell stories' almost to my amazement some few years back.

Now I hear from you that my title is philosophical.

Actually, if one looks at my photos (and their titles/captions) one may decide that I am a storyteller/philosopher/photographer, in no particular order except that I require (now) the medium of photographs to convey my stories, because we have turned into a visual society and there is little resistance to photographs/images when our minds filter ideas.  We all have 'gateways' that prevent forbidden or unpopular ideas from entering our conscious and/or subconscious, but somehow a good photograph sneaks around or underneath those gateways!

It's insidious in a way.

Thank you for causing me to think and for sharing your observation.

john

John (Crosley)

I am touched that you had that 'aw shucks' reaction to this photo; it's why I posted it of course.

I tend to be a tight cropper, but in appropriate circumstance will leave great areas around a subject if 'isolation' is called for or it's called for within the capture for compositional values.

When you see a subject 'crowded' like this, you can expect one of several things happened.  One I was photographing surreptitiously and I raised my camera and 'got what I could' without anybody spying me, then lowered it again, most often with camera preset - the process might take at most a second or two in raising the camera and firing unless I take several shots because the 'action' is progressing.

You also might expect that there are distracting elements outside where my frame is cropped.  If there is helpful or interesting things around, I probably will include them; if not I tend to crop them out.  It's just what I feel is my common sense.

I do not shoot in a studio or shoot only chosen subjects; I shoot what happens NOW and sometimes cannot wait because the 'magic moment' will be evanescent and disappear forever, so I take what I can get.  In this case it was framing as best I could do under the circumstance.  I hope that explains the 'issue' for you and how it often arises.

Thanks for the special praise; it is important to me that people understand and sympathize with this photo; not just a photo of the well-dressed, thin, model-like folks, as it speaks to an important point in the subject of sociology/human mating behavior.

Best to you and thanks.

john

John (Crosley)