Three Men

Hmmm! You are the fourth man not seen in this shot.

Three men; related by sight, or rather, lack of it. The only person capable

of looking at the camera is the reader; he is too engrossed. The statue

"looks" away but it is the man on the magazine who "looks" straight at the

camera/viewer. Thank you for your constructive comments on the photo.

Fine street shot,and a clever title.

Thank you for your input. I think once you explain a photo, viewers can see what the thought process behind the effort was. They can then agree, disagree and/or hopefully constructively critique/discuss.

in the case of your image ,I think your title have added a value to the image,and directs the viewers to your point of view ,and that is here a quite successful.

I think sometimes a foreword or an explanation can indeed help the casual observer appreciate the image, and sometimes tells a more comprehensive story than the image alone. I like the composition here, the added bonus of great architecture complimenting a finely observed street shot.

Best Regards

Alf

Thank you both for your interest. I think the photographer's view should be incorporated while submitting a photograph to enable others to see/view the image in the same light. Probably easier said than done, and I have been guilty of just uploading photos without any relevant explanation.

I take your personal view seriously. However I got curious now while (still) thinking about it. Would you also have shot if the paper man had been a lady or forinstance a cow..?! Yes, inclusive the chanching of the title.

Interesting point. It is easy for me to say that I've just presented what I had in front of me. However, I'll attempt to answer your question.

A lady may still have made it. It would have presented me with a different angle; something like the way the male and female sex sees things (differently). However, if it were an animal, things would have been trickier and I admit I do not have an explanation for such a situation.

Without the caption, I'd have missed the man in the newspaper, I think, on more casual glance.

Note the top of the column seemingly over the statue's head as a kind of overhead adornment, now look at the seated man and look at his head -- there's kind of a bent metal affair that appears to be sticking out of his head in a 'U' shape but upside down.   That interested me, but obviously was NOT the point . . . . still it caught my attention.

All in all, Samrat's photos are getting far more sophisticated and he's getting much more 'in the groove' -- I can feel, as he starts to 'see things' and make important correlations between and among things and potential subjects within his sight.

Once he perfects or better, masters, that vision, it will become almost impossible to turn it off, except by failing to shoot for long periods.

;~))

It don't go away, Samrat and it gets into your blood. I fear if it gets into your blood, you're hooked, and if you're not now, you'll be carrying your camera every day, everywhere, like a hunter after the prey always looking to capture that important moment and immortallize it for others to remark how wonderful it was that you caught it and preserved it for the rest of humanity to admire . . . . and ask 'why does Samrat see so many things like that when we do not?'

And less you think I 'gild the lillly' remember my promise 'just honest to gosh genuine opinion earned by the quality of your photos', which have improved markedly.

john

John (Crosley)