new -- color & b&w 'Trouble Letting Go'

At evening's end, the Metro car with his date races toward the end of

the platform, and the man runs alongside, his hand on the just-closed

door, a huge but reluctant smile on his face memorializing their just

finished activities together. Your ratings, critiques and observations

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

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

comment; please share your photographic knowledge to help

improve my photography. Thanks! Enjoy! john

If you're looking and judging photos by 'sharpness', with this photo you're missing the point I think. 

This is a photo about expression, about an almost unique situation in life, and about a man's love shown through chase for his girl that compels him to run alongside and outside a moving Metro train showing his fatuous smile through the dirty window of the Metro coach door.

The colors of the inside of the Metro coach (yellow) making an interesting contrast with his shirt (purple) which helps this and compels it to be presented as a color photo rather than black and white.

This is NOT a photo where one is going to find or expect or one should even consider a score for 'sharpness' highly, in my opinion.  

In fact in my view, if this photo were pin-point sharp it might even detract from its strength -- the focus on that fatuous smile and his slightly absurd situation.

There is a tendency in this service to grade 'sharp' photos highly just because of their sharpness, and that may be good for certain kinds of photographs, particularly certain landscapes and nature photographs where detail is important.

However (to borrow a psychiatric term), this is a photo that offers a 'gestalt' and is purposely presented as less than sharp -- for to be overall 'greatly sharp' I feel would detract from the photo and even might have made it unpresentable.

These differences are understood by some members who are familiar with the 'arts' especially including some veteran members of this service and not well understood by many of those who are not well established here or are new to the arts and not highly educated in them.

In Impressionism, mere dabs (or in the case of pointillism, dots) of color when viewed up close seem to mean almost nothing but when the viewer stands back, the whole presents itself.

This is a photo not meant to be examined with a microscope or a magnifying glass or even viewed 'up close or in detail', but to be viewed and 'taken in' as a whole and not deconstructed into individual parts.

Not all photos admittedly are like that, but this photo is one such, I feel.

Maybe I'm all wet, and if so, you can tell me about it below.

And why.

john

John (Crosley)

This is a photo about love and its irrationalities that cause people 'in love' to do things they would never do in their 'normal' lives.

In a way, this is almost like a scene from some 'romcom' (romantic comedy) movie, where the madcap lover wildly chases his lovely young miss to her great amusement after a successful date. 

We NEVER see such things in real life, do we?  But we do know that when a man's 'in love' he can be moved to such end, and we endlessly enjoy depictions of such moments on the silver screen and on HBO, because we recognize the truthfulness in them.   

We are greatly amused at that recognition of how such a person can be completely, insanely, head-over-heels overtaken by love, and thus will forget for that time just how foolish he may look to others in his tunnel vision on his love and his loved one.

Well, I captured that man, head-over-heels in love acting in his madcap way, and here he is --not on some movie set dreamed up by a set of highly paid Hollywood writers, directors and actors, but in 'real life' chasing alongside the Metro coach in which I was riding, with this lover's  fatuous smile beaming to his beloved 'I had a great time, I'm having a hard time detaching, and I'll breathlessly await the next time I see you.'

Agree?

I was there.  That's what I saw and experienced.   

I hope I captured that in my gestaltist way.

john

John (Crosley)

Without your introduction,I would have speculated on the motivation of this man to be glued to the Metro car.Instinctively,my first thought would have been that this man had made a run for the closing door and just missed getting on and was in a "oh schuk" state.Or,that this man that knew you had spotted you getting on and made a run to sort of tell you to wait at the next station and then,there is the real reason which you have explained.....You  had to be standing,maybe sitting so close to that girl to seize that right into the lense look for this most excellent image.Yes,the colors are great and the blurr confirms the moving car.BRAVO!

Meilleures salutations-Laurent

I don't know what is better - your photo or elaboration! but in both ways excellently beautiful!

All the best!!!!!

I saw the first five raters understood this photo -- PN stalwarts who didn't require 'sharpness'.  They rated 5.4 immediately, but afterwards the ratings went on a downward spiral, so I felt a comment was in order about 'sharpness'.  I hate to do such things, but this is a service for some experienced/older and a great number always of newer/less experienced members, many new to photography who mistake 'sharpness' for 'greatness'.

I hadn't realized quite so much how his gestures were ambiguous, but felt moved to write the story, and now I'm glad I did, as it obviated much colloquy and 'fleshed' out the photo.  Some photos require NO explanation (this photo included at bare bones), but some are aided by some elaboration, and this photo's meaning was greatly helped by some words that were easy to pen.

Thanks for the very helpful feedback.  I'm glad this pleased you when you finally got the point.

john

John (Crosley)

There's no clock on the wall to indicate 'late hour' or calendar to indicate 'date night', so I felt that with this guy's smile and his goofy behavior, an explanation for his unusual, running stance and his fatuous smile was in order.

Sometimes photos, even good ones, are not always self-explanatory -- and although that may detract from them as being super prize winners, it doesn't make them bad photos at all - it places them somewhat more in the 'documentary' category, but what a documentary . . . .  madcap ways of man in love!.

Thanks for the highly prized double compliment.

john

John (Crosley)

When I first viewed your photo,it had your explanatory notes and I was pleased mine was the first comment not the lease bit influenced by what others might have seen.As per my usual,I only rate photos I have commented and it is only after I have commented that I go to the rating option;in this case,I don't exactly recall the average the photo was carrying but for what it's worth,I remember it was lower than the 6 I rated.

Salutations-Laurent

Alas, you miss the point.

He and she parted by design; he just could not 'let go' so he followed her and her train down the platform.

She kept going.

He stayed on the platform.

End of story for that particular night.

Sorry to rain on your optimistic parade.  (I was there.)

;~))

Best wishes and thanks for contributing.

john

John (Crosley)

While I am grateful to receive a '6' rating, I cannot thank you for it, no more than I can complain about a '3' score for someone who honestly believes a photo deserves a '3' -- and there are some here that do.

I can thank you for honestly rating my photos, which I do know is the truth, and also for explaining the process to me, which I value highly.

Thanking for high ratings (or really complaining about honestly-derived low ratings) is not my style - I am only against ill-conceived ratings, and even then mostly the ratings system works pretty well in two regards.

1.  The absolute number of ratings tends to measure the relative popularity or INTEREST a photo has generated -- good or bad.

2.  The absolute value of the rating tends over time with some prominent exceptions, to be a rather good predictor of the 'VALUE REDUCED TO A NUMBER [NUMERICAL SCORE]' of a photo -- again measured over time, but again there are some substantial exceptions and qualifications.

Gallery art (photos that might be part of a gallery exhibit as part of a 'concept' often would do very poorly on Photo.net if exhibited individually and not as an artist's whole genre, and often that work is much more sophisticated than the Photo.net audience can digest - even many of the raters, and so one would expect for such pieces either low ratings or confused ratings.

I have looked over some images I still classify as really some of my best and a few struggle with ratings in the mid '4's, but that's just vagaries of the ratings system and those mid '4's were generated when ratings were dispensed much more generously.

I saw things (and still do) in those photos others did not then.  I rank them very highly, but those low ratings give me a warning that those photos may be viewed ambiguously even by photographers with some experience, not just the general public still wet behind the ears.

All in all, ratings do work after a fashion, unless you're taking super sharp bird shots with super teles, when one would expect with some skill to generate super ratings if one just kept snapping away, after filling the frame with interesting bird behavior.  Same for some other things, including heavily saturated and Photoshopped landscapes, and so forth.

'Street' work suffers some of the worst difficulty because it's so eclectic and in part because of the street work I submnit so much is in black and white and there is a ratings bias (I think) against black and white.

I note my color, all time best, folder, which I do not presently contribute to, still outranks my all time best black and white folder though the latter has (to my mind) my very best work, and I think the difference is one is color and therefore more palatable to those looking for a gentle viewing experience rather than being 'challenged' a little.

It's kind of like the difference between watching a romantic comedy, maybe, versus a drama --- one requires more work and may not be for everybody, but the reward for watching one may be higher for those attuned to like, say, dramas.

Anyway, to each his/her own.

I only dislike dishonest ratings, and do not form alliances for ratings -- do not congratulate high raters or shun slow raters, and have built a record of honesty for not pulling my photos in consequence of getting low ratings.  I may pull 1 to 3 photos a year for other reasons -- not for ratings issues -- just maybe because of reproduction quality issues or maybe issues of inadvertent duplication.

For that I am rewarded by attracting raters like you who know that you are welcome to give my photos any rating you wish and you don't have to feel bad about it, so long as the rating is honest.

I joined Photo.net in the days of mate-rating alliances, but refused to rate so no one would be tempted to ask me to join their alliance --- I rated sparely and seldom rate now -- almost never.

It keeps me honest -- and respectful of those who do rate.

Laurent, I always appreciate our colloquy.

Very much.

john

John (Crosley)

Sorry to rain on your optimistic parade.

Please do not be at all.

If they are both to be meant for each other ,then this incident will increase their passion for this very same night ,or the next one,if they are not meant to be for each other ,each may find the one he seeks ,he in the station , and she in the train,we are the pawns of the destiny in a game of kings.

P.S,I just missed the "his date" in my first round.

Stay well and fine .

Saad.

John , A very clever shot. I liked it straight away, than reading what you wrote made me appriciate it even more.

Thank you so very much for such a kind compliment.

john

John (Crosley)

I had wondered how you came to the conclusion you did.

Mystery answered.

I am not afraid to speak my mind, and am not dedicated to flattering those who comment; I'll say what is on my mind, hopefully not abrasively.

I believe those who comment for the vast majority are quite reasonable people making quite reasonable comments that fit contextually and had wondered how you had come to your prior conclusion.  Two words, unread by you, completely explain it for me, now.

You also be well.

john

John (Crosley)

Dear Mr Crosly:

You said : Two words, unread by you,

That is quite right, for a simple reason,it is quite difficult for me to follow and understand your most of the times detailed long comments and replies ,how about following all the comments in the page ?

the subject for me is a photo,a photographer ,and single viewer ,if the circle is to be increased I will be lost ,please do consider the language barrier between us,among many other barriers.

As you could see ,I missed "his date" in the first round and interpret it as an appointment .

This is neither the first time I do misunderstood a subject of an image , nor I have been misunderstood by other photographer whom I comment for their images,and it took me effort in squeezing my mind to prepare the proper words and a lot of on-line dictionaries ,and that is not easy for me,the only and sole reason behind this is the fact that I want to learn,to communicate ,and to be opened to all schools that are completely absent in my locality.

You asked:I had wondered how you came to the conclusion you did.

I do not came to that as a personal conclusion,my personal expertise is completely devoid of any knowledge of the American life,what I have concluded is a mere reflection from Hollywood movies ,my only window to the American life ,Hollywood as you might know have great impact not only upon me ,but I guess allover the world in giving impressions,styles,ideas,and principles of your country to all over the world,and to me as a person,I know for sure (also inflicted by Hollywood) it is a movies and may or might not reflect the true American life but it is what I have got ,all what I have done,is to state what is reflected to me from the greatest American industry into your image .

Please ,do not take it as a granted personal opinion rather than a reflected idea from one who knows the American life as one frame from a series of a whole movie.

I think Mr Crosley a better compromise for me is to restrict myself from commenting on a serious photographers on PN, though I will deny myself the pleasure of getting in their fine knowledge ,and getting in their world ,and stay on the safety side of those comments of Fine and beautiful image ,light or whatever.

Stay well and fine .

Saad Salem.

You have just written an excellent reason for you TO CONTINUE TO COMMENT on photos on Photo.net, including mine, and your comments are very welcome.

For a while I got very cryptic comments from a photographer and critic, Drew Bayless; I found them hard to understand.  Only later did he inform me he had a stroke and it was hard to type words easily with his paralysis affecting his typing even with an aide, so he wrote mostly with exclamation points and other punctuation.

Since his explanation of his difficulty, we have become friendly (even friend), and I look forward to his comments.   There is no communication problem between us now, and I am pleased to receive his opinions and also pleased to find his photography is singularly quite good and unique -- a rarity of Photo.net contributors.

You may be surprised to learn this particular photo was not taken in the United States and represents nothing specifically about United States life or life depicted in American movies 'per se' (meaning specifically in the American movies).  It was taken in Kyiv, Ukraine (see details).

On the other hand, this photo represents a universal theme that one is apt to find in American movies, British movies, and possibly now maybe in future Soviet, Parisian or Brazilian movies -- anywhere there is a Metro and filmmaking going on to depict a lover being whisked far away from a chasing lover at evening's end.

I invite you to keep on your endeavor, for I sense that you are going to great extremes to try to understand, and far from criticizing you, I will try to understand, and far from criticizing your efforts, think of my follow up questions as a sort of 'help' to hone your skills and point out deficiencies you cannot get when you make a linguistic error that distorts your meaning (whether that error is one of perception or one of expression).

I sense you are an extremely bright and very ambitious person intellectually, and there is no reason to bind yourself to simplistic comments . . . . . as far as I am concerned.

And you will find especially since you have no explained the burden under which you labor, I will be patient when I see a comment with your name (just as I was when I began to see cryptic comments with the name Drew Bayless until I finally understood his mode of expression).

So, I suggest, don't retreat - move on ahead, overcome this obstacle, and continue to learn.

Errors and mistakes in communication are part of what it takes to learn in this multi-lingual, multi-cultural world, and I am willing to do my part and also discount any errors I see on your part, and if those errors seem to effect meaning, point them out and ask for clarification.

There is no shame in that, but instead it's a mutual collaboration process between you and me.  I might be able to help you with your process of understanding and prevent you from hiding your promising intellect under a shell.

Please understand that this is an invitation to keep participating . . . . and not be driven away by any questions, and to regard them as part of collaboration.

Best to you.

john

John (Crosley)