'Waiting Overnight for the Early Morning Flight'

This couple arrived the night before for the very early morning flight. Your

ratings, critiques and remarks are invited and most welcome. If you rate

harshly, very critically or just wish to make an observation, please post

a helpful and constructive comment; please share your photographic

knowledge to help improve my photography. Thanks! Enjoy! John

This is one of your classics, which you propose now and then.

I still think it should be integrated into a conscious integrated visual project.

You photography seems, but correct me if I'm wrong, strongly random.

Cheers,

L.

This is a wonderful composition with fantastic contrast, the intimacy and closeness if absolutely fabulous!!! My kind of image that I will run to take.  Warm regards from Miami.

You are absolutely right.

Although I KNEW this was classic, few of the others I do.

Some of those I THINK should be classics - members turn their noses up at.

Sometimes I persist -- thinking different audiences will love them, or mabe I just love the particular shots as they resonate with me.

I couldn't predict the good reception this one would get; it's almost always a crap shoot with my postings.

(I have a 'presentation' being worked up.  I may send you a URL, provided you leave no comments and you can have a look).

Thanks once more.

john

John (Crosley)

Ain't it the truth?

In fact, in many captures, I aim to capture those little moments that are 'universal truths' which can be caught in an aesthetic and/or appealing way.

I think we agree this one succeeded (I can't always tell, and need raters' help, see above).

Thanks for the encouragement.

john

John (Crosley)

Thanks for the wonderful compliments. 

john

John (Crosley)

Easy to capture too.

They didn't move.

I did.

I just stopped for a moment, aimed and fired, then moved on.

Airport security and all that -- who wants to attract attention?  It's not wrong or forbidden, but try telling that to a security officer who wants you to delete.

john

John (Crosley)

Excellent John, excellent - well seen and captured. A 1st rate documentary shot, B&W perfect for this topic. Mind you, if original was colour, then it would make an interesting comparison. Take care, Andy M.

Thank you for the high compliments.

With all my digital captures (or almost all), they start as color and are desaturated, either in Adobe Photoshop (camera raw) or later 'desaturated' so they would retain full three colors and not end up as a grayscale image since Lightjets need a 3-color image to work properly when printing.

Although I don't print, the time will come.

Increasingly now, almost exclusively, I await desaturating in NIK Silver Efex Pro, which provides much more control. I don't recall how, though, I desaturated this one.  From now on, most will be in the NIK desaturate plug-in because of its controls.

Some photos are exclusively color -- color dependant - they don't show at all except for the color. 

Others are shown best or almost exclusively in black and white -- colors here and there may conflict with the message and/or the composition.

A few are mixed -- they can be shown as color or black and white, sometimes to the same effect -- sometimes to quite different effect.

While this would show OK in color, its primary 'points' are the 'form' or composition showing the 'arch' of the couples and their 'closeness'.

I don't have the color version in front of me but conflicting clothing colors would detract, as well as background colors which do not fit in well.

This is best shown as a black and white photo which emphasizes the (1) intimacy and (2) composition.

Color, if carefully harmonized, might do as well, but here it was not so helpful.

Some color photos are both showable in black and white, but do even better in color because the colors are so well harmonized.

See for instance:  http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=8267377

This would work as color and black and white, but it's far better in color because it's 'harmonized' in color.

Same with this shot:

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=8267377

But if this shot works at all, it must be in color:

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6840311

Finally, here's a shot that works wonderfully in color and black and white:

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3080536   Color, views >53,000 (old system and new)

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3120753   B&W, views > 81,000 (old system and new).

(and of course some don't work in black and white and color and maybe I should just take them down, but I am not ashamed so much of my lesser work, or maybe it has significance to me just because I'm stubborn and proud that I almost take nothing down -- really.    Of course the day will come.  ;~))

I hope that makes my point and helps assuage your curiosity without posting the color version.

Much of what is my old work you think was shot in black and white really is desaturated transparencies (some, not all) and the color parts have been lost, as well as the originals.  

I've long been comfortable shooting color and black and white.

Cartier-Bresson wasn't. 

I've seen his color work; it wasn't so good, nd he was probably correct in trying to destroy it.  It was his heritage, but it took away from his high standing.  He couldn't use color as well in his compositions; it was one of his weak points, and he knew it.

Good point; thanks for bringing it up.

john

John (Crosley)

This shot was meant to be linked in the comment next above as a strongly harmonized color shot which also would work well in black and white, but was stronger in color.

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6717545

(Apologies, my computer had a 'copy and paste' malfunction, now fixed).

john

John (Crosley)

PDE

Thank you.

john

John (Crosley)

John, the wider inclusion of the airport for context works to give breathing room to the drama (or lack of drama LOL)  well done ;-} dp

I'm instinctively a tight cropper, but it was essential to leave in part of the waiting room, the floor in front and part of the seats/bench in back and even the guy seated for the proper story.

Yes, you are right, this is a story best enhanced by the context.

I give up tight cropping in the proper context -- and even will leave vast areas empty around a subject if I feel the photo calls for it.

(I have to restrain my tight cropping instincts when I do, sometimes, but I can do so if I have to ;~)) )

Thanks for the comment.

John (Crosley)

John, this should have been shot in a like Nixon way. The jewel gets spoiled by the benches in back.

Yours is a refreshing and helpful comment.

I had not thought of holding camera overhead and shooting nearly blindly when there was a more clear alternative.  There was nothing to stand on, and attracting attention late at night/early morning in airports is the 'kiss of death' for attracting airport security officials who are long on time, full to overflowing with authority, short on patience, full of questions and have badges with the power of the state that grants them power to do just about anything with my poor, tired body, including throwing me into the hoosegow.

Also, taking such shots is rife with difficulties -- I prefer to view through the viewfinder; it's far more certain.

I can see your point, it might indeed have been a better 'jewel' if taken properly your way.

But see the comment 'next above'. 

There this photo was lauded for showing the context and not being presented in isolation. 

Who's right? 

We only have this photo to help us; I didn't think about your suggestion, or I might have tried it. 

Next time I may give it a try.

Thanks Olaf; a very helpful and novel suggestion.

john

John (Crosley)

The waiting time sometimes takes a long time

At first I thought you referred to the sometimes 'long' time it takes to take what may seem like a 'quick' photo.  Sometimes when I take ten seconds to 'set up' (prepare to take) a photo, it can seem like an eternity, especially if there are possible objectors around, like security people who do not understand that their job is to prevent criminals (kriminals) and not artists, and that in public everyone exposes themselves to many security cameras and camera phones/videophones every hour -- sometimes minute by minute in stores, airports, gasoline (petrol) stations, etc.

But now I realize you were referring to my subjects.

One way to make time go faster is to sleep, and that's what they did.

Often before a long journey, I have difficulty sleeping UNTIL I get on the airplane, then my tiredness sets in.  When I want to be awake, read the newspaper (often five to seven of them), I find myself drowsy, eyes shut and Morpheus sprinkles sleep dust in my eyes.

Fortunately on a 17 to 23 hour flight, I have time to sleep, read, awake, watch movies, then sleep again if my body demands, and still  arrive feeling like I had worked nonstop for several days I am so fatigued.

Thanks for a remark that was stated in a manner so interesting and full of double meaning, however unintentional it may have been.

john

John (Crosley)

I like it very much and as the comments perhaps it woud have been better to shoot at a diferent angle so as to eliminate the background. However, oupoin is well taken in that there are moments that that is not the best solution, therefore, it is still better to take a great shot rather than sacrificing it totally, which in the end may or may not have improved the image nor the feeling any better.

I like it. A universal moment in every airport in the world!

Regards, Marco

The airport was deserted in the wee hours, well before the bleary-eyed queue for the 5:30 a.m. first flight.

I was walking and spied this couple.

Airport police are neither friendly nor unfriendly but once told to put away my camera by one, that would become a binding edict for all time, or at least for that series of stays (more than a week).

Not being seen to take the photograph by police, though it was not illegal or offensive, was important for some police are ignorant and think people have 'rights' that do not exist anywhere.

This sleeping couple has no 'right' anywhere I know of not to be photographed, but once before in that same airport as I took similar shots,  I was told 'no more' and the same cop who told me that, could punish me severely if he felt I violated his order.

Even  if not 'law' a cop's orders sometimes are far above laws.

Best not to tempt, especially if one expects (as I did) to spend time in that place.

That's why one almost never sees unflattering photos from 'White House' photographers even from honest and detached press services.

If they publish too many that are taken as unflattering, their credentials sometimes come into question. For television network news people, who make millions or large fractions of a million per year, it is a huge risk to cause a credentials problem.

Here, that was a problem for me.

The other problem was I would have needed a stepladder to do a better job, and none was handy (not a scaffolding either).

This was simply the best shot possible without my growing a couple of feet in height, or crouching so low the cops would be alerted from a great distance, and the latter position probably would NOT have improved the photo.

Understand?

Good point, but you have to consider 'political reality' as well as just the plain mechanics of how you're going to make it better given the layout.  In this case, just the layout made it impossible to do as you suggest, so 'next time' maybe.

Thanks for the helping hand and promoting good exercise in discussion.

john

John (Crosley)