'White and Black'

Or 'Black and White' whichever you prefer. This 'street' photo needs

no explanation for those who 'get it'. Your ratings, critiques and

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

critically, or just 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

No special photoshop trickery was needed to make the blackboard appear black.

It was this was exactly in the exposure.

No trickery or tomfoolery needed.  No 'channels' or anything during desaturation. 

It's the same color in black and white, with some faint light writing on it.

That's all.

Life's good sometimes.

john

John (Crosley)

Entirely candid, not posed.

My regular viewers know that, but if you are new, maybe you didn't suspect.

Now you know.

;~))

john

John (Crosley)

(she had no idea)

This is in your long tradition of real street photos. I like her unusual posture - it doesn't look like she is there to exercise. Her profile suggests that she got bored or disappointed waiting for someone and decided to stretch a bit...

I also like the whole composition: very well thought for a street capture. I'm not sure you had the time to think or it was just your instinct and long life experience.

A great candid shot that reminds me of the good old days of B/W film. Just because of this, I would reduce the contrast and flatten the tones to make it look more like "newspaper" photo. Maybe not to your taste or... on the contrary! I attached my minimalistic alteration for your review. I'd like to know your opinion.

Like with other of your photos, my first intention was to keep looking for something else to spend few moments. But there is something in your real life captures that attracts me and makes me stay longer imagining a story or at least a reason to happen...

Thank you for sharing...

I like very much that such a really 'simple' photo with its obvious contrast and play on figures causes you to ponder and think of stories.

Yes, perhaps the girl has a partner who has overstayed or stood her up, or she's just passing the time and is 'bored'.

I seldom pass such judgments unless I'm waiting too and I have to figure out the endurance of my possible subjects and how long they'll assume a position. 

This position reminds me of an IQ test, where one has to compare figures and decide which is similar and which is dissimilar only one is given three figures to compare.  Which one is similar and which one is not is the question posed and the correct answer is to find the dissimilar figure and if you're smart you can find out the dissimilar figure.

And as the tests get tougher and tougher the the figures get more and more complex.  This is a very simple one, and they get more and more complex.

I'm not in love with newspaper reproduction -- it's the very lowest common denominator, designed for instant obsolescence and for bird cage bottoms . . . .I prefer archival and would wish I could process for that.

Thanks for stopping by again and commenting, Stefen.

john

John (Crosley)

If you are to be believed, this now is my worst photo posted ever.

I disagree.

It is one of my best seen, there often is great collective wisdom in rating.

But sometimes with 'street' there are great exceptions -- Stefan Poli above has seen the difference, as noted above.

Often I agree with raters.

This time I respectfully disagree.

john

John (Crosley)

John, 

Up until recently I was not that much present on PN for quite a long time, nevertheless when I glimpsed this photo the day you posted it, even without having look at the name of the photographer, I did have a feeling it is yours. And since I remembered your photos were always about something, with sometimes more that just one possible story in it, I did have a careful look at this one.

Frankly, I did not get it. Yes, there was something in the picture, yet I did not manage to decode what that was supposed to be. The moment? Perhaps. There is may be something freakish - "Arbus-like" - in the posture. But still, some time spent with this photo, I did not feel much "in the picture".

Even with your additional remark about the blackboard ("No special photoshop trickery"), I did not get it.

Perhaps I did not get it (and perhaps that is the problem of some others) because - do whatever I can - I do not see what is on the blackboard! I admit, my LCD is not calibrated (will be rectified soon), but is bright (may be even too much) - and I see almost nothing there: it is black, it seems there might be some people on it, but I do not see enough to recognize anything, let alone see it clearly enough to be able to connect it with what is happening in the foreground.

Regards.

Mj

You used many words (that usually is my domain) to emphasize what is frequently my domain -- explaining.

The blackboard basically is BLACK with some old erased scribbling to confuse matters just a little.

It is BLACK surrounded by WHITE.

The girl has a WHITE top and WHITE shoes but her pants are BLACK.

There is organization in this.

This is a 'compare and contrast' photo, and to me it was obvious from the start, I think just as it was to Mr. Poli, though he did in his version bring out some of the erasure -- I suppose I could have cloned or burned the blackboard/or just board to mostly pure black so more would 'get it'.  I guess the faintest erasures have confused people way too much. I may have to do just that -- burn it more black so more can try to 'get it'.

That's why the comparison to the IQ tests in which they use comparison figures to determine intelligence (but those figures don't have confusing areas of whiteness in them -- more like the CAPTCHA figures which web forms use to try to screen out REAL PEOPLE from the robots who might be used to fill out their web forms and cause havoc.  Those CAPTCHA forms (trade name I think) use elongated, smudged, smeared and traced through (and otherwise deformed letters, numbers and figures to try to confuse computer and optical readers, and usually end up confusing me too, so sometimes I can never successfully fill out the confirmation letters to prove I am not a robot.

'I ROBOT', (apologies to Isaac Asimov) as far as CAPTCHA verification forms are concerned, when I cannot successfully figure out what the skillfully designed CAPTCHA letters and numbers are. 

They're designed to confuse optical readers/scanners and computers with sophisticated software, but most often they deter ME.

Now, the small whiteness in the board's blackness may have confused you into thinking there was real writing there, and that I simply reproduced it badly.

No such thing. I merely reproduced the smudges in their smudginess. They say nothing, and it's nothing in Spanish erasures yet.

The board was erased or simply almost completely black with some leftover whiteness (not unlike a CAPTCHA set of letters, undecipherable with great effort.)

You got confused, because I dislike altering my photos and thought to myself 'this is a great capture, everyone (like Mr. Poli above) will see it:  a play on blacks and whites in the two figures.

The board in black surrounded by white and the girl clad in white top with black pants but white shoes.

It all seemed so simple and obvious to me - it hardly seemed worth explaining to me.

Two large figures in black and white dominate the scene and nothing else matters - a play on figures in black and white and their geometric forms, much like the forms in an IQ test.

But it seems I should have tried to explain or blacken the board some more and assume less on behalf of my audience.

For me:  GREAT CAPTURE -- a FIND!

For others: WHO KNOWS how many are confused and how many just don't like it, but did 'GET IT' and rejected it.

I've lost the chance to know now.

All for want of burning in the black on the board.  I left in a confusion I might have eliminated.

I hope I can be forgiven.

Please.

Get it now?

Thanks for cluing me in to a deficiency I did not recognize.

Welcome back!

john

John (Crosley)

Michal,

For comparing the two white/black figures, here's a clue.

The rearmost figure is a rectangle (what else?).

She is an upside down 'Y'.

See it?

I saw it immediately.

I just supposed others would too and get the great delight I would in seeing the play of both figures in black and white.

Live and learn.

Maybe this is a photo for a different set of viewers than I imagined.

I have learned something, and why after ten ratings this got a straight 3 rating.

For what I felt was one of my 'best seen' street photos.

;~))

A humbled john.

Thanks for teaching me a lesson.

john

John (Crosley)

John

When I think about it all again, it is probably not only the blackboard itself that causes problem, it is the weird posture (or weird angle from which it was taken) and the look of that girl that attract too much attention and carries too much weight that does not let me (I have no idea about others, both those who "got it" and those who didn't - it is pitty that there are no more views or ideas available) to look freely further, explore the frame and see the whole picture.

To sum it up - from my perspective, both main points of interest in the picture contain distracting elements that makes them disconnected, not working in tandem. There might be many voices that would disagree with me, they might be right, I might be wrong. What does it matter? Experiencing a photo is a personal - non-objective affair, exactly as taking the picture is a personal effort.

But ok, you have now kindly shed so much light on what the picture is all about, that just about everybody, including myself, can see it. Well, I can see it, black and white, shapes..., and that is all. Somehow it doesn't work for me, it doesn't agree with me. This happens.

I am just trying to convey my reaction to this particular picture. I do not claim anything more. You asked for "helpful and constructive comments" - that is what I was trying to do.

Regards.

Mj

This whole affair is something you are to be congratulated for.

Instead of some boring, meandering discussion, this is a more learned one bordering on what one might expect in some artist's or literary salon of yore, where famous literary/artistic figures gathered to discuss the merits and/or lack of merits of others' work as well as discuss other less important but nonetheless absorbing things such as gossip, the weather and who was sleeping with whom.

The photo doesn't appeal to you, and you are to be congratulated for telling me why; I will be less a booster for this shot, which heretofore I thought had been obvious.

Stefan (misspelled once above) Poli was enthusiastic about it, but it's not really clear he got my impression of it either, come to re-read his comment.

Maybe I'm alone, since he did bring out the writing on the black board which I clearly noted in my notes/caption/introduction was 'black'.

Only he can tell us, but then again, for him the photo appealed to him, and that again is entirely subjective.

I like it still, but if others are turned off by it, I like it less since it is less obvious and universal than I thought, and that is essential for communicating, which is an important part of this 'art'.

I now know I explained myself almost ad infinitum, and like a joke that must be explained in detail, it lost much in the telling . . . . and just for that it suffers.

It must be obvious, as it was to me from the first moment, or it is a lost cause . . . . it is so hard to 'explain' such a photo -- as you say it's entirely subjective -- one 'gets it' and it appeals or one doesn't 'get it' or if one marginally 'gets it' it still may not appeal.

There are 1688 (PN's first count) other photos in my portfolio including two uploaded the day the day after plus this one, but the count given to me when I upload is well over 1800 photos. (no accounting for why the count is disparate, and I'm not about to ask.)

Perhaps in another of those photos, you'll find one or several that do really strike your fancy . . . . and needn't be explained and we can both agree are good, 'street','aerial', portrait, landscape, or whatnot.

I take 'em all.

Or almost all, and even some genres I don't post.

Yes, there are even a few aerial photos in there, and ones with good, high ratings including one a reader said was worthy of 'National Geographic' which is highest praise, as well as many from my first love, 'street'.

And lots of faces, faces, faces.

I'm sure that there's something - perhaps lots - that will please you.

Come back again (and again) as the fancy strikes you.

I'll treat you royally, perhaps just for enduring my lengthy explanation of why I think this particular photo is good and for enduring that explanation, and to show you I respect highly your opinion of why it is not.

Respect is the name of the game here.

Because, as you state, it's all subjective, especially when it comes to the hard to judge 'street' variety of photos.

(you might have a look at the Metro photo I posted earlier today, with the man clutching his woman's leg in the Metro vestibule doorway, a gritty photo which requires NO explanation, I think, and if that doesn't catch your fancy I've got some more nudes of the highly acclaimed 'Rita' and a model Kristina I've been working up from years ago, since I've had a little time to develop new Photoshop techniques and older captures were perfect for them and just never got worked on.

I've always got plenty of material.

Come back now, y'all hear? 

You're always welcome.

john

John (Crosley)

You are right John, I probably misinterpreted your work. Does it matter that much?

How many of us really understand Picasso or Dali (and others as well)? This doesn't mean we have to ignore their work and look for something we think we understand. In the end, the story that develop in our minds is more important than the real story behind the photo: a good photo artist (or a painter) make us stop, watch and think. And this is good.

On the other hand, don't let your ego get in the way of communicating with people in a real way. We may not get it right, but we don't ignore your work for sure. As a photographer (not necessarily as an artist) I'm grateful when someone stops for few moments and criticize my work (even when I think I exposed what I had best). I feel much worse when no one gives a damn...

From what you said in this discussion, I can see that you love this capture. For others things may look entirely different. For me your photo was a trigger to my imagination -- just being that trigger in a world of millions of images is probably some minor accomplishment anyway.

I hope you will continue sharing your work with us. No matter what others may say, your images are anything but boring: I really enjoy trying to figure out the stories behind your captures even if they (i.e. the stories) are wrong.

You didn't MISINTERPRET my photo.

You INTERPRETED it differently than I anticipated.

Foolish me for being so narrow minded.

This is turning out really to be more like a literary/artistic salon like days or yore, like I wrote before -- a place for exchange of learned ideas (and who is sleeping with whom?)

I'm glad my photos inspire the examination you give them, and that you put them in such symbolic company as Dali, et al.  Wait while my chest deflates, please.

There.

It didn't take long, as the critique forum with a series of 3s is a very ego-depleting experience, as this still is my lowest rated photo to date.

I'm so glad for your contribution, and for your kind appraisal of my work -- it makes me proud (one of the seven deadly sins?)

Ah well.  We all gotta have our sins, and I've got few others.

Thanks Stefan.

john

John (Crosley)