"The 'Lines' of Men at Work"

Getting in close can be a challenge for a photo like this, in which men

at work and the 'lines' of their work can be used in the frame to help

create a composition. Your ratings, critiques and remarks are invited

and most welcome. If you rate harshly or very critically, please submit a

helpful and constructive comment; thank you in advance for sharing your

photographic knowledge to help improve my photography. Enjoy! John

When I first saw this photo as a thumbnail on your community page, I was struck by the geometry in the photo. I'm glad to find on reading your introduction that you have alluded to the same interplay of "lines".

The lines criss-cross at various levels, be it with the planks, on the ground or even on the window behind. Apart from the obvious triangle formed by the men in the foreground, I love the position of the rather stocky gent at the back and to the right, looking diametrically opposite to the two others loading/unloading the truck. That is a play of lines at a different level.

I'm not sure if I asked you this before; I notice that you have been using your wide angle to shoot street scenes. Works perfectly well in some situations to create drama (as in your "on the face" photos) and here to get the elements in frame. You have also used it in your "Four Pillars of Outdoor Relaxation". What guides your choice of this lens? Could not a prime lens be used in some of the photos? Regards.

When I first saw men who were picking up pieces of a demolishes restaurant plaza's long wooden boards and loading them into trucks, I said 'oh my gosh, wonderful, I'll be able to make a photo with long lines in them and possible make geometrical shapes from the lines.'  I knew what I wanted before I hot-footed it to the scene, though not the precise photo of course.

At the very least, I knew I could use the lines as compositional devices, and it would make my job easy, all I had to do was work my way in close.

A 'normal' lens would not have done in such a circumstance, where one has to include nearly all a long board such as this one here, which is the linchpin for this particular photo.

One can use a 'normal' lens for other photos, then stand back more distantly, as one has to do with such a lens - -one reason Cartier-Bresson was able to remain more anonymous.  He didn't have to use a 10-24 mm lens on a crop sensor, and if he had he might have found he was more 'revealed'.  Of course he dressed anomymously, moved anonymously, and except when doing portraits, did not make a point of his presence. 

He just observed and at the proper moment, up came his camera for a quick snap, then down again (I've seen rare videos of him at work.)

I resolved on coming to this scene to 'fire away', whenever I saw something possibly worthwhile, and shot a lot, as the action was much too fast to preplan much except to fire when I saw long lines such as this one, or other geometrical shapes emerge.  In one shot I saw a near perfect triangle of men holding three such long boards -- but in keeping with my 'post just one of each shooting circumstane' general rule, it won't be posted here.

You mention the ground, but don't mention the cross-hatching of the stone/brickwork on the ground . . . . it adds to the overall 'geometrical feel' of the photo.

This photo is almost guaranteed to draw viewers in - the eye is compelled to follow that long board to the man holding it, then to try to understand the background. 

There might have been a better or different background on a different day or different circumstance, and hence this might have evolved into a world class photo, particularly with an intersting expression on the man's face.

But no laments.  You take what you get on 'street' and good enough is good enough.

Thanks Samrat for the continuiong questions; I'm always happy to answer them.

john

John (Crosley)

Oh, I also shot the Mt. Rainier photo posted today from an airplane at 22,000 feet while climbing through its passenger window with the same very wide angle lens.  Each lens works its own 'magic', and the only thing is to be comfortable with what's on your camera and for 'street work' know what it will encompass before you bring it to your eye, so you don't spend a long time gazing through the lens and more time just observing, then drawing lens to eye for a 'quick snap' then 'down again'.  Not necessary for doing landscapes, studio or other work where a camera in hand is expected. 

jc

I like it a lot, and had to wait until the next day to offer a critique, because initially i could see nothing to improve upon in terms of post-processing.

When i come back to it today, i would darken the jacket slightly in the center, but leave the other highlites alone, and possibly add 'a touch' of fill light to compensate for darkening the jacket.

While there are certainly lots of angles, today i noticed the  'X' shape more, while yesterdaysviewing i saw the 'Z' shape and pure angle lines as more predominate. I think that lightening the jacket will help to empahize the 'Z' shapes and pure angle shaped a bit more. The X shape tends to stop the energy somewhat, while the Z keeps it flowing.

I like the 3 faces, the first being the man carrying the long piece of wood, then the lady, and then the man in the backround, with the last two each cut off slighltly on opposite sides of the wood. I think that capture gives it more of a mystique than if the faces were all in plain view.

The photo gives a nice feeling, a lot of harmony in an action scene - very nice.

Your is a wonderful, detailed analysis, and I'm very impressed by the study you have given this photo.

In my practice (philosophy also?) of mostly minimal Photoshopping, I am guided essentially by doing the utmost minimum to preserve and present the capture.

I might lighten or darken an area within the bounds of, say, color channels, by emphasizing one or another, when desaturating, and do some burning and dodging, but color replacement or cloning is something I just don't engage in except in the most extraordinary circumstance, and unless it's obvious or I all attention to it I feel pangs of guilt for a long time.

It's just that I shoot so darn much, I figure if I have to go to a lot of work to make something presentable, why not just go out and take several hundred more shots in a few hours and do something better?

So, for instance, these 'boards' were selected and contrasted and lightened somewhat; they were moldy and dark a little bit, but not much, or maybe (I don't recall) I made a brief pass or two with a dodge brush, though I'd almost certainly have 'selected' with the straight selection tool since it's such an easy job, and just make some shadow/highlight adjustments (mostly toward 'less' contrast' instead of more -- sort of counter intuitively and since it's grayscale, toward more 'brightness', I suppose, but don't specifically remember.

I recall looking at the bright jacket and thinking it could be dodged, but no cigar.  It just resulted in clipping -- it was almost blown and any work on it would give it that characteristic 'clipped' 'gray appearance' that is so distracting and says 'this person did a lousy job of Photoshopping.'

So, your idea is a good one, and one I might have pursued, but in this circumstance, without cloning some darkness into the jacket or doing a quick mask and fill (somehow if I could, because I don't DO quick mask or really understand how to do 'layers' well enough to use them), I could make it darker, but I'd do a lousy job and ruin the photo.

There are many simple things in Photoshop I cannot do, but I don't think I want to know; it keeps me out there shooting instead of sitting at a computer, composing adjustments to flawed shots.

Why not just go out and take a new, better and more wonderful photo?

That's the way I try to do it.

I just found a great photo from last summer I completely overlooked; two guys on a street, that I fee; is 'Life Magazine' worthy from 'Life' in its heyday or worthy of a dedicated photo book compendium of 'street'.

It took me less than 30 seconds to take and interact with the subjects, is one of a kind, and involved lots of exhaled smoke, but it's so great I whistled to myself when I reviewed this download download (for the first time apparently except for the one or two I expected to see just after the shooting) just for how striking it was.  It's a real stunner on my screen.  We'll see if Photo.netters share my opinion. 

Some will downrate it to the maximum because the subject is smoking -- REALLY! 

I'm adding some contrast, and you may expect to see that photo some day.

New, old, today's, yesterday's, I'm overwhelmed by sometimes wonderful many of which I recall I was 'going to get to but didn't' and though I can only get out every third or so days because of ambulatory problems, I shoot a lot, get GREAT raw material, do minimal photoshopping, am quick to spot a situation that has potential and some days come home with LOADS of great stuff (some days I get only one or two, but my 'yield' other days is amazing . . . . though seldom 'world class' which is what I'd like.

I'm really glad you liked this one so much it moved you to spend so much time on it; it speaks well of the photo.  I'd have made the same proposed change you suggested if my skills and the capture allowed it, and though it is possible to make the change, it involves too much manipulation for my taste and skill.

I'll just go out another day and take something I hope will be as good or better, and assuredly entirely different.  I hate repeating myself.

Maybe members will hate the new photo, but if I like it, that'll be good enough.

I really welcome your views of my photos and constructive suggestions -- yours is a complete winner here today.

john

John (Crosley)

Great environment, composition and use of wide angle lens!

PDE

Very succinct comment.

Thank you so much.

john

John (Crosley)

Interesting combination of lines on the background and the lines in the hands of men!

Thank you so much for sharing your observation.

john

John (Crosley)