SEEN BETTER DAYS by GERRY GENTRY

I like this a lot! 6

great portrait...regards....David

Definitely a winner . . .  I almost wish that the sky was not quite so dramatic; it risks taking attention away from the subject, whose features and character you have captured so well.

My best,

michael

Wonderful portrait. Excellent work on the post processing. I like this a lot. Regards.

Please note the following:

• This image has been selected for discussion. It is not necessarily the "best" picture the Elves have seen this week, nor is it a contest.
• Discussion of photo.net policy, including the choice of Photograph of the Week should not take place here, but in the Help & Questions Forum.
• The About Photograph of the Week page tells you more about this feature of photo.net.
• Before writing a contribution to this thread, please consider our reason for having this forum: to help people learn about photography. Visitors have browsed the gallery, found a few striking images and want to know things like why is it a good picture, why does it work? Or, indeed, why doesn't it work, or how could it be improved? Try to answer such questions with your contribution.

The processing turns a potentially very real moment into a storybook illustration, overly mythologized, hyperbolized emotional pablum, IMO. The title is obnoxious. This is what we think old age is . . . must have seen better days (because old age couldn't possibly be OK, right?) and then we portray it with exaggerated wrinkles and tossled hair. We elicit the most false pathos out of our images of old people and create a self-fulfilling prophecy of the so-called ravages of age. Maybe it is up to US to have a less myopic view of someone of advanced years. If we stop looking for "decline" we may stop finding it, or better yet, we may stop creating it. This photo creates a stereotype. It is a fabrication of a mindset, is illustrative of a prejudice, it does not seek to discover or understand, but merely exploits for emotional gimmickry.

The Hobbits have chosen well this week and the dramatic sky and almost over-processed nature of the nature of the composition elevates itself from a competent image to something that is animated and without a doubt, worth looking at. For me it is the perspective that makes it worth that second look. Having the old woman at the edge of the frame and in perfect focus makes the viewer assume as if we are sharing this view with her and that it is a gaze into her paralysed world.

When I first saw the thumbnail for this, I thought someone had photographed some sort of elaborate stone sculpture or something. This takes monochromatic to a new level...a lower level, I might add.

I agree with everything Fred said, and add my own little comment: I think this is simply awful.

Oh dear. What Fred said.
And maybe extend a bit on "This photo creates a stereotype"... to me, worse, it creates a stereotype and a caricature of the model (not sure whether this photo was shot in passing on the street, or staged). To me, the photo shows little affinity for the scene (and the title continues that suggestion; note that the way it is edited could be the cause of this impression); the lady seems to responds with a look that reveals lilttle respect for the photographer. It's not a comfortable photo - and in a bad way: I feel sorry for the woman being depicted like this. That's not a great message to send out, I think.

The extreme amount of sharpening runs through the entire portofolio; I am no fan of it, but I know some people will like this treatment. For me, it adds nothing to the photo, and does nothing to enhance the message of the photo. It only emphasises itself this way in being something graphical. Again, caricature comes to mind.
And I'd be OK if it was a full-on real caricature. But it doesn't seem to be. And that's ultimately what is leaving me disliking this photo.

And for what it's worth, the bus stop structure in the background hasn't seen better days. It's lovely. But that too might well be a personal preference.

Honestly, I saw this less as a portrait of age but more just another shot of a homeless person--but regardless the title tells me it was another exploitative image.

"Seen Better Days", seriously? Shows how insensitive one can be and unaware. Many of these people have no awareness of better days and getting cameras poked in their face doesn't make it better--but maybe, on second thought, that does make the title more appropriate here.

Well, back to the photograph. Forgetting the subject for a moment, this image displays many of the reasons I have never warmed to HDR and also the reason I think it is popular. This over processed look has application in the commercial world as do many faddish images. They can make people look and they certainly can have some curb appeal to those who aren't yet tired of them. But, then the technique gets old and things move on.

Looking at some of the other images in the stream, there were some that did have a bit more substantial feel to them, where the technique almost worked to move away from the fad/illustrative quality. The technique can have its place when used with some finesse and sophistication but most don't recognize its use in those cases--as it should be.

In any case, an unfortunate case here, this image, where technique and subject just worked together to show that some will justify the end by any means...

I agree with Fred G. The title sucks. This is an okay photograph that has been over processed. But even imagining it without the picturialist botching, it is still a problematic image. The old lady is stuffed into the left hand bottom corner and is competing with that weird structure and the sky.

I am wondering if all those elements were slapped together in Photoshop.

Anyway, this is a photograph that proves true the old adage that less is more. This image is overkill on steroids.

My mother is very upset at your comments. The SEEN BETTER DAYS refers to the unkept sea front shelter not my mother. Which just goes to show who has the prejudice, the people who automatically assume that I meant the elderly lady ( my mother ) She posed for this picture, it was her favourite place when she was a little girl, and it was her that said "THIS PLACE HAS SEEN BETTER DAYS" she has a copy of the print on her wall at home.
HDR. Just because you have not moved forward with your ideas on photography,does not make it a bad process. The first HDR photograph was shown in 1850. The best photographer, people say, Ansel Adams used HDR in his pictures. It seems to me the the people who have made comments as far need to chill out. By the way the picture has won 20 awards.

If you can't tell the difference between Ansel Adams's use of HDR and your own hamfisted and overblown use of it, you're not looking, or not seeing. I'm not a big fan of Adams but I certainly recognize the organic nature of his post processing and the refined uses he chose for it.

If the title is meant to refer to the seafront, then you haven't captured what your mother was talking about, since your processing makes its "demise" (as your mother may perceive it) indistinguishable. It doesn't look in disrepair at all. A case where the photographing and processing is NOT bringing out what you were thinking or what your mom was feeling. This is how bad stylistics trumps genuine emotion and vision. You used technique and style not to advance what was being felt but instead of it.

Well I feel better now. I've just looked at the galleries of all the people who have just posted comments on my picture. One of them has never posted any pictures of has own. One of them only takes pictures of his dog, and the rest take snap shots. Even my mother is laughing.

Hi Fred, I've just looked at your pictures on your gallery. It's a pity you can't bring out your feelings in your own photographs instead of just insulting other peoples. You have said nothing constructive, just a moan because you don't like a style of photography.

Gerry, I must say, you deal with critiques very well. My apologies to your mom, though it won't change what I wrote earlier. I reflect on your photo, as it is presented. I did not, and could not, know your emotional ties to this photo. And neither would I need to, because the photo is put up for discussion. The discussion is not about you, nor about your ideas of what you think modern photography is. Many great current day photographers (those big enough to not need to win awards anymore, like nearly all of the Magnum photographers) can do without HDR. But I guess they're all wrong too?

Thanks for taking a look at my snapshots, though (must be, since I do not have a dog).

Gerry, we can't know all of the details when we comment on an image and even after I commented, I realized that I was also making a lot of assumptions. But the title, which I generally ignore, did resonate a bit with others that were not as personal as your image here, My apologies.

But that doesn't change my opinion of the process. And, no, HDR was not used in earlier years as this is a reference to digital processes. (by the way, I don't have anything posted but I do have a link to my website)

What Ansel did was not HDR but rather a sophisticated process of manipulation of the film and development that didn't create something different but managed the process organically. If one actually understands those processes, as I do, then it is easy to recognize that comparing it to HDR, particularly as you use it, but also in general is apples and oranges. For many of us who understand the process, we have learned to use the digital darkroom in ways similar to wet darkroom process to "compress" in a more organic way, the dynamic range of an image.

Now, that said, HDR isn't always a bad process, but when you look at an image and the first thing that strikes you is that it is HDR, then the process has become more dominant than the subject/intent. It becomes more gimmick like rather than substance. As I said, I think some of your images do start to move away from the gimmick-ness to something more refined.

I can tell you honestly, from experience, that these over the top uses of digital capabilities are not new or limited to HDR. I have created images for major commercial clients, back in the 90's, with PS that I would never want to claim authorship for today. It was cool then and made an impact in the arena used, but today I look at it in horror. Even some organic processes that I still find attractive for what they were and the visual they created, have been abandoned.

In any case, as I said, over time it is the refinement of the use of some of these processes that survives because they allow us to express ourselves more effectively but it is when they don't take center stage and become integral to the intent that they become timeless and most effective.

purposeful face and presence --- a strong model with much to offer a better photographer.

i think HDR has its place as well as photoshop. however those are just software apps. it doesnt take any skill or talent to use them, unlike a true photograpner who before he processes the shot understands good composition, subject matter and how the modes of a camera really function with the least bit of manipulation as possible during the post processing period. i like the photo but it would have been better if it didnt appear so manipulated and over processed.it seems artificial in some ways to me. even with that being said it is still a cut above a lot of the photography we see here. my best stephanie

A woman of great strength and character. In my personal view she has not been well served by the title - I was quite surprised to read that it (the title) referred to the fancy structure behind her. Gerry should change it. I am not particularly a fan of HDR and know pretty little about it, but from what I've seen of them I've begun to feel that people are best not shown close-up in HDR images.

Gerry, I think you're being very unfair to some viewers of your photograph. You've positioned an elderly woman (now known to be your mother, but not until you told us) close to the camera and looking at the camera such that she appears to many (including myself) as the main subject in the photograph. Then you gave a title to your photograph and expected viewers to know that "Seen Better Days" was referring not to the elderly woman but rather to the shelter behind her. That's simply expecting too much from your viewers. From my point of view, I initially was struck by the physical appearance of the woman IN CONTRAST to the ornately constructed shelter behind her, contrary to your now-stated purpose.

I have a slightly different point of view regarding the title, assuming as many did that the title referred to the elderly woman. I can see a point to Gerry's title if it referred to the woman. She is physically disabled (or "challenged" to be more politically correct), she does not have the strength of physical abilities she once had as a young girl or young woman (I assume; it's possible she has been in a wheelchair all of her life), and many older people (myself included) joke about what they were once able to do relative to their present abilities. I say all of this from the point of view of someone who has also been disabled since my late 20s.

On the other hand, many people who are elderly and/or disabled simply take that as a new reality and seldom view or evaluate their current state relative to their former selves. The title "Seen Better Days" as applied to an elderly/disabled person would usually be offensive to that person, simply because that's not how people live and think. We're about the present, and the past consist only of fleeting thoughts, often seen in good humor. In fact, being elderly and/or disabled may bring about an awareness regarding important aspects of life, and the person finds that awareness very valuable. No longer is walking without difficulty or pain taken for granted as it is with most people, and the same can be said for sight, hearing, independence, and other physical and mental abilities. When we don't take those for granted, when we are consciously aware and thankful that we have them or even had them in the past, we become appreciative and thankful for some of the everyday things that many others never even think about. The state of being aware and thankful often enhances an appreciation for the present moment in that person's life. In that sense, "Seen Better Days" is shortsighted, limited, and misses what is often more important to the person. There is nothing like conscious awareness to enhance a person's appreciation for the privilege of being alive. [Note: I have little objective evidence to back up these statements; they are based more on my life experiences, and therefore they are certainly open to challenge.]

Yes, she may have seen better days, just as I've seen better days. But that misses the point that there is nothing like being present today, being mindful of what the day might offer, and being thankful for what we might give to the day and to those in our lives. That's why I would find the title, as applied to the main subject in the photograph, offensive and short-sighted.

Critiques of the POW apply to THIS photograph, not to the photographs of those who are commenting. You have to take them at face value, especially by putting yourself in the shoes of the viewer who knows nothing about this woman, this structure, or your photographic intentions.

The HDR work is not bothering me very much. I'm not sure how HDR affects B&W photographs of people; I assume it can go from the extreme of flat lighting to exaggerated features. But the HDR effects on the woman don't stand out to my eye. Where I can see it is in the shelter, but even here I don't find it excessively processed. Not knowing how the clouds looked that day, I can't even say anything about HDR effects here, which is where I often see them appear. So I can't say that the photograph looks overly processed to my eye.

Bottom line for me is that your photographic intention hasn't been realized except for you and your mother; it has largely missed those who will view your photograph. It becomes a good photograph for your personal album, and little more. Most viewers will find the title offensive and short-sighted because of what appears to be the main subject of your photograph.

I like the photograph and the technique used on this one, I also note that it is in keeping with your style of photography. As for the

title, I don't agree with using titles, I like the images to speak for themselves without guidance or misguidance from a title.

I think most of the comments are harsh and misplaced. I also agree that they to come from places of prejudice . The expression on

the ladies face ( your mother ) is not one of a person who has seen better days, she has a tongue in cheek look in her eyes, and

having read your replies Gerry, the expression is in keeping with that expression. Perhaps a narrative would have given better

context. I am not a huge fan of HDR however it does have it's place, and when done well for the purpose of expression it can be

good. In this instance it is good. The image is dynamic, the composition well thought out and the use of HDR here to give the image

grit works. Other tea jakes may have worked better however, I am not the artist, just a viewer.

As for awards! Awards have a place, they provide competition, and with competition comes the striving for excellence, a lot who

criticize awards are those who have never one any or those who fear entering for fear of being judged poorly, or they are just not

interested. I can see how this image would have won awards, it is a long way from the garbage we see here day in day out, one

image blending into the next. This image stands out, this image pushes the bounds, this image has been well thought out and

presented, the hobbits (elves) have chosen well. The mere fact that it has created controversy shows and demonstrates that it is an

image of substance.

How is the viewer to know that the sea front shelter is unkept? To me it looks fine. I have no way of knowing whether the sea front shelter is young or old, kept or unkept. An unkept old car, I know what it looked like new, but not a sea front shelter. I didn't even know the sea front shelter was a sea front shelter. Oddly placed for a fancy bus stop bench, but hey, that is Europe, how would I know?

When my father was older, we went and looked for and found the rural house in which he was born. He remembered it as a lively, warm place with wonderful memories. The day we found it, that house was being used as a barn, all windows busted and bursting hay, no paint in years, beyond unkept. My camera with me, what a wonderful juxtaposition had I had the sensitivity or sense to have taken the picture! (Actually, my Dad was feeling pretty sad, and it would have been insensitive of me to snap his picture). Had I taken the picture, it would have been only a personal treasure because no viewer outside the family would be able to guess Dad was born in that house. It would have just been a picture of an old guy looking at a hay filled house. The viewer would wonder why the old guy put hay in his house. Was he crazy? Those unappreciative thoughts of the viewer would have bothered me. But really, there would be no way they could have understood, the picture not fair to them, and not fair to me, to others trivial, to me, deeply personal.

Alas, Dad was old, but had I titled the picture "Seen Better Days" there would still be a question in the viewer's mind as to WHO had seen better days, my Dad, or the house. In truth, both, but Seen Better Days is often a horrible and crass thing to say of a PERSON in any context. It is unforgivable to say it about an older woman, and your subjects aren't clearly separated enough for it to be even remotely clear to a viewer that you don't intend it being said of your mother, no less.