"Blockhead Commander to Blockhead Recruit: 'Just Go Out and Blend In -- No One Will Notice'"

The caption (title) says it all. Your ratings critiques, and observations

are invited and most welcome. If you rate harshly, very critically, or

wish to post a remark, please submit a helpful and constructive

comment; please share your photographic knowledge to help improve

my photography. Thanks! Enjoy! John

John, what an interesting capture; I'd love to know the story behind this scene.  I find it very interesting that there is not a single human face visible...obviously the main subject is hidden, but everyone else also has their face hidden or turned in various ways--plus none seem to even care about the guy in the blockhead!.  I think this is an intriguing element that adds yet another dimension to your story.  Techniquely, I wonder if the lights on the ceiling are bit clipped...but that is very minor and secondary when it comes to street (er, subway) photography.  Well done!

It's early, yours is the first comment, and I must say it's excellently written (and highly flattering to my photo, thank you).

I know part of the story, but not all of it, but right now, I'm gong to keep the mystery, so others can participate if they wish.  But I emphasize I don't know it all.

This is an authentic, original capture. 

The point you make so well about everybody looking in different directions, and not seeming to notice Mr. (or is it Ms.?) Blockhead, let's just say two things.

1.  I'm a really well prepared photo opportunist ready to spring into action when I 'see' something interesting, but I don't 'make up' photos.  This is a real person I never meet before on an actual Metro car between two (or three) stations, then I got off.

2.  I used to be a photo editor, and I'm pretty skilled at choosing photos; there's a good skill in that, and also I'm well exposed to a vast variety of different photography and art, worldwide, from galleries to publications to museums -- much well beyond the Photo.net fishbowl.  I know a little about 'art' -- enough to know when one spies a 'blockhead' on a Metro, it's time for a photo or two.

Some of this is a mystery even to me; other parts I MAY tell later.

Stay tuned.

And thank you for a well thought out comment.

(Even I have unanswered questions.)

john

John (Crosley)

Perhaps this photo has 'bigger' meaning than just an 'odd capture'.

Perhaps this is a metaphor for society.

How you say?

Well, did you ever feel you "'stuck out like a sore thumb'" and "everybody was looking"?

Well, than how do you explain THIS PHOTO and reconcile this photo with those feelings?

john

(feeling philosophical ;~)) )

John (Crosley)

No.

I just flew into action.

There was a whole pod of 'em.  Looked like an invasion of Martians or Venusians.  I haven't the faintest idea.

I may have spilled the beans on the next War of the Worlds' or 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers'.

But as later comments may reveal, I had a part in making it happen; I 'take advantage' of circumstances when dealt a good hand.  (I don't cheat, however).

Thanks!

john

John (Crosley)

I think the caption tells the "story"! There isn't a story I guess, not in the real scene which must have been without the box!

Other option, there was a blockhead recruit and nobody payed attention to him, the story (the idea) is the same, nobody takes care of anything...everything can pass speaking in general, IE in the real life, politics first of all, intelligence connected with it, commercials, film, art, crime...etc! Total indifference!

I'll come back to see was I right, ha!

Cheers John & company!

PDE

Rather than 'Great Life Photo', this is a comment where you have really shown you are a deeper thinker.

You have understood this photo's deeper meanings, and used it as a springboard for musing on its greater philosophical and social ramifications.

I am not so sure Mr. (or Ms.) Blockhead, for sure, understood that importance, but then I'm somewhat in the dark about the advent (and the raison d'etre) of the blockhead group which invaded that particular Metro car, though they were a friendly group.

(Was that just a guise, designed to lull me/us into complacency?)

I chose this photo to make a 'statement', but also made several other 'statements' and they aren't necessarily consistent statements.

You correctly understood that 'statement', but there are more and differing conclusions to be drawn from the other photos.

The question -- since I have no dearth of material to post -- is will I post any more photos featuring the blockhead(s)? 

I hate to see Photo.netters post the same subject time after time -- at most in months (maybe even a year or more), a second 'blockhead' or group of them may appear, when the impact of this one has diminished.

Or I sometimes post differing photos from the same group that are good on an alternative service (unnamed -- look in Google.com to find it).

Step to the head of the class, Pierre -- today for the first time, I learned your intellectuality, and am pleased -- you were able to take a small photo like this and extrapolate to the larger 'sense' in an admirable way.

Merci mon ami.

john

John (Crosley)

This photo is  relatively unedited; a rarity of the maybe 50 photos I took in the course of two or three Metro stations, after I got onto the same car as these 'blockheads' who were not then wearing their headgear on the platform. 

The platforms are very well patrolled by militia (police), and no one fools with Ukraine police.

But it's 'life and let live' unless one is a hardened criminal -- people avoid the police as best they can, and it seems police avoid them for the most part, just watching and observing unless on traffic patrol or working on 'crimes'.  There were no cops on this particular Metro coach and the headgear was really innocent (I think!).

Ukraine really is a pretty safe place for pedestrians . . . . and the militia (cops)  (not so highly regarded by the locals, they tell me) have pulled my bacon from the fire a couple of times, so I am the last to criticize.

And no one issues ultimata to me about my photography; at best a wag of a finger if I'm too obvious. I don't even know what the law is, but I try my best to be unobtrusive - Metros are a crowded place with trains often leaving less than 3 minutes apart, and they can't have photographers standing about blocking traffic. 

It's 'shoot and scram' to quote Cartier-Bresson quoting a famous photo subject -- and I do. 

I don't get in the way, and I seem to be tolerated.

And I think my work is 'one of a kind' for the biggest country (by land mass) in Europe.

In Kyiv it's quite civilized, though decidedly not rich in the main, at least now after the economic crisis. However, most people idealize Americans and desire to be 'middle class', even if economically they're a long way distant.

Things are a little more bucolic in the country, which is not so far away.

Just an hour and you're in the boondocks, and many farmers send their wives into the city's numerous produce bazaars, where I'm getting pretty well known at some of the bigger ones.

;~))

This group of photos was heck to work on because the 'white' of the blockhead 'headgear' was so white and the overhead lights so strong, in many photos (especially those showing the blockhead headgear tops) there were blowouts. 

Fortunately, blowouts do not show as blowouts when you desaturate using the in-camera feature of the newer series of Nikon cameras with in-camera editing. 

Instead, in those jpegs, the blowouts just show as whites.  It can be advantageous in working with a photo in which there are 'blowouts' to work from a large desaturated (monochrome) in-camera jpeg rather than struggling with trying to desturate and patch up a NEF (Nikon raw) version of the same photo in image editing (Photoshop or other program).

'Raw' is not always better, and sometimes 'in-camera' b&W conversions are better than what you can do in image editing.

john

John (Crosley)

If you had to name a Photo.net contributor who was most likely to end up traveling on a subway/Metro with a blockhead such as this, who would it be?

Honestly.

Right.

I live a most interesting life.

john

John (Crosley)

I think this is a man-advertising and on the other side of the box there is any company name or product name.

But for once, completely wrong.

I inspected or saw many of the boxes.

All were fabric with white fabric on all sides, top and even the bottom where it fits over the head.

I don't know if they were part of a 'performance art' piece, or what.

I didn't ask.

They got on at Theatralna and I got off one or two stops later, with a flash card full of images -- I made no secret I was taking photos.

An opportunity like this comes once in a lifetime, maybe, and I am an opportunist (see above).

No advertising -- maybe they were on their way to or from filming one?

Who knows?

Not me.

john

John (Crosley)

John, an excellent photo and some fantastic comments.

I do not know what more to add to all that has been written already. Of course the whole situation of none of the faces seen at that instant is what has made this the decisive moment.

You know I like metaphors, John, and I suppose this photo represents street photography on two levels. The man/photographer with the box/camera going about his job while the others barely notice. Take a step back, and this person (and the scene) becomes the subject of your candid photography.

A true HCB moment. My congratulations.

Your excellent comment carried this whole affair one step beyond even my most elaborate thinking.

This is at the start a simple photo of a man (or something resembling a man) with a 'block head' on a Metro, no one noticing.

By extrapolation, I suggested, above, that this photo may be a metaphor for life -- that those of us (or others) who think they stick up like sore thumbs in crowds because some aspect or other of theirs (probably imperfections) stand out, may be in for a surprise -- no one notice or cares.

(Another commenter suggested that this photo represented society's ills -- that we all essentially -- I interpret correctly -- 'look the other way'.

Now, you have carried it one further (a third interpretation or level), and suggested that the blockhead is a metaphor for the cameraman such as myself working the 'street' -- 'obvious' but 'unseen' -- sticking out 'like a sore thumb' in some ways, but in other ways often completely ignored.

The comments, like you said, already were superb, when you contributed, but yours carried it to a new level and of course, it's always a way to capture my heart to mention H C-B's name in favorable way in comparison to a photo of mine (though this is NOT the photo that is the decisive moment, certainly -- 'timing is not all' here, nor frankl is composition other than the lack of looks of others, which I did 'see' and plan for expressly when I tripped the shutter.

Thank you so much for your superior contribution.

john

John (Crosley)

...you are being too kind. I only say what occurs to me as I view the photo (and many other photos). While such comments may appear interesting, all I do is simply take the liberty to interpret the photo in my own way. For that is the beauty of photography.

To me, Daniel's comment is so much more observational. And on an entirely different level. Regards.

Several times in my life, work I've done for others has been singled out as being 'outstanding' and 'exceptional' and I've been asked then if I knew from those who engaged my services or who were the recipients of my work if I knew what I had been praised for, as the praise had been without reference to subject e.g, I was praised but without being told 'what for'.

In each of those instances the praise had been for things so unnoticeable to me as to be without regard at all; they were simply part of the way I did things, but apparently others did not see it that way.  

To them what I did and/or said was entirely noteworthy, and therein lies the lesson. 

In one case, I was made an example for an entire publishing organization for a story I had done about a man who had taken a new job in a giant corporation. 

I had been given a one or two paragraph press release about a man who took a new job and asked to write a story.  My editor in chief thought he'd get back a two paragraph re-write and instead got back a much bigger story.

The real story was why the job was vacant in the first place. 

I probed, and got the real story -- sales were suffering, and the previous man has been fired or sent elsewhere and a real veteran was brought in to stem the leaky sales at a major retail sales chain. 

The story was emblematic about the fortunes of this closed-mouth chain. 

I even got a yearly 'outstanding journalism' award for that small work.

Really, even in retrospect it sounds stupid considering I had a major output for that publishing firm, and literally was its anchor during the year I spent there as I wrote article after article daily and literally wrote  'millions' of published words just for them, and in the process became a recognized expert in the field of business they covered; I even  lectured a gigantic audience of thousands shortly after I left to resume my schooling.  (yes, thousands, in a major NYC hotel ballroom, who flew in from all over the world, and I was a headline speaker.  I was back to school.  I sandwiched in that major speech between classes 'back at school'.

In another case, long ago, later, and practicing law, I had a father-in-law (now long departed) I was close to.  He, on behalf of three family interests, was going to buy one square block about two blocks from the center of a major city for $10,000 or $15,000, from foreign buyers (Harvard graduates and doctors), who had sent an inspector to view the property and report back. 

The amount was almost impossibly low (almost pocket change then), but the foreign owners didn't want to be partners and wanted to dump their interest rather then develop it.  They were offered a chance to develop and/or be full partners or go to court and petition for a partition (to split up the property, which they refused.)

The property sale went through for such an impossibly low price, so three family branches (my wife's family, not mine) put together their interests and -- except for a sliver -- owned a square city block right next to a major metropolitan city center (one block away by that time and now inside the city center, a block or few from present Apple world headquarters at this time.

The city block, by then owned by wife's family interests, went for sale.

And for a price over a million, decades ago.

Two offers of 7 figures came in.

One was from a buyer who wanted to develop, and another was from a world famous trial lawyer who didn't reveal his plans, but surely he would hold and develop or develop right away.

I wrote my former father-in-law about how that trial lawyer had made his living suing anyone and everyone for just about anything and had few scruples (with numerous examples) about whom and how he sued. 

That trial lawyer played hard ball, I wrote,  or fought with gloves off, (and to mix metaphors further) took no prisoners.

The trial lawyer made the higher offer too, so there was a dilemma. 

Deal with a developer or deal with the trial lawyer who offered more but would sue for large money over small things, sometimes and without scruples. 

He had a big firm and a dozen or more lawyers to sue on his behalf, and frequently did sue. 

Defending a suit could be expensive, I suggested, and time consuming as well as upsetting, even though dealings would be 'clean' and 'clear'.

The question was whether to take the much higher offer, and I brought to my wife's family representative the possible travails attendant with accepting the higher offer when the choice came.

A very long time later, after I penned a that late night letter at some length, (and for free) I got unexpected praise for 'the outstanding job I'd done and the 'great advice I'd given'' yet had forgotten any job that I'd done or advice I'd given. 

In fact, I had given NO advice, just pointed out some salient facts.

The 'facts' about the trial lawyer had apparently been very sanguine and caused the family to turn down the trial lawyer's much higher offer, because of associated risks of being wrongly sued. 

Suing was that trial lawyer's business.  He made a fortune suing people, and often for things that seemed inconsequential.  He also got big verdicts, or people settled sometimes just to avoid seeing him in trial.

I had just dashed off a very long (wordy  I thought) note to my former father-in-law because it was too late in the evening to call him because he went to bed early, then I completely forgot about it.

I was somewhat embarrassed to be singled out for such praise too; I had thought nothing of it when I wrote the long, rambling note to him -- stream of conscious style.

He thought highly of it.

Moral:  Sometimes what seems obvious and inconsequential to us can seem full of insight to others who did not think of such things like we do.

What may seem obvious or clear to us, may be entirely obscure to others who at times may be greatly thankful for having their consciousness raised.

This is not often the case, as good advice often is disregarded, but for a few who appreciate good advice/analysis, what we say can be well rewarded by praise, even if embarrassing because what is being praised comes so easily to us.

You are one of those people who have 'the magic touch' in explaining things and looking beyond the obvious to different and more complex levels.

You single out Daniel Joder for his observational analysis, and so did I; it was very good.  I said to him 'wait until later'. I didn't want to try to say everything I thought up front, for fear I might spoil the discussion, and that in retrospect turned out to have been a good idea.

Yet you took it further; almost quantum leaps even beyond what I might have said.

I know you are a student, a scientist by definition.

And to get where you are, working long hours, trying to sandwich in a 'life' and a little photography, in between your studies/work as a beginning student doctor, you had to have had great achievement and intelligence.

I am willing to bet that now you have to dispense much advice, often to patients and family unwilling to take that advice or often unable even to fathom its importance (despite clear, dire warnings) how important that advice is to their well being . . . . and even their life. 

Sometimes they cannot hear even the most clearly worded advice and other times they just care too much about their ingrained lifestyle to change unhealthy ways even though it may mean impending disability and/or death.

And there you often are, trying to save lives or improve them,  people sometimes (often?) disregard you, and now in contrast today you make a 'small' comment on a forum, [Photo.net], under my photo, and you are singled out for praise by me, a veteran.

But you deserve that praise.  You raised my consciousness in a way I think no one else would have. If I write, and write about that photo, your observation will be part of the photo analysis, almost surely.

My guess is your patients should probably praise you more too.

And I'm willing to bet that if I f0ollowed you through your training in your hospital, you give off so much more than the minimum or even the standard required advice and in such a clear and well understood way, that if your advice was taken it would in fact improve and/or prolong those lives, even though much of what you say as advice may often be disregarded by many of those you treat -- to their detriment.

Not here.

I can read fast, but I also can read slowly (and carefully).

Your single idea about the photographer being the man in the box was an idea that never would have occurred to me; it rolled off your keyboard and probably you just forgot about it.

Not so fast.  It's stunning in its clarity of thought and originality.

I try to give credit where credit is due.

I have problematic relations with one member here, whom I needn't name, but when he taught me something important, I not only thanked him profusely several times publicly, I also named him expressly and sent him others to learn the same lesson. 

You were one.

If I read you correctly, you are so intelligent you are not even capable of knowing when your thoughts become so deep, because such thought is so standard to you.

For those of you who find my caption (title) unexpected, two things:

I once wrote captions as part of my work as an international photo editor for wire photos sent world wide. 

The object of a caption is to capture the interest of viewers to cause them to look at the photo, and possibly to understand its importance, but surely to stop them from turning the page if possible.

The second thing is that I'm a fan of Gary Larson, author of 'The Far Side' comic strip in which creatures, lower life forms and maybe even inanimate objects take on human qualities.  Thus the man with a cube becomes a 'blockhead recruit' for a 'blockhead commander' and is told to 'just blend in -- no one will notice.'

Larson's influence was shown early on in the caption of a photo showing a man and his mostly obscured child walking past a blue building with a school of salmon painted on the side to the rear of the man apparently behind him.

'Don't look back, I think we're being followed' was my caption.  It had looked like the salmon were 'following' the man and child.

In another, two women are seated at a table in a European airport with a thick school of tuna plastered on the wall, all in blue (again).

The caption:  'I don't know why, but I feel like having fish today'. (seemingly oblivious of maybe a hundred or so tuna plastered on the wall in a huge school, behind, around and above her as she was seated.  (subliminal influence?)

Thank you Gary Larson; you have enriched my life and I hope have helped me write better, more intelligent and I hope more subtly humorous captions. 

'Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.'

This one above a little less clear cut, but it's from the Larson inspired school of caption writing.

john

John (Crosley)

Gary Larson - 'Just Go Out ....................'

I like to think that if Larson were a photographer or saw my photos, he'd approve.

Thanks for the comment, my friend.

john

John (Crosley)