'A Tragic View of Life'

Dramatists and actors historically have divided their views of life's drama

into 'comedy' and 'tragedy'. There is no doubt into which view this little

drama fits into, taken on the steps to an underground shopping complex,

underground subway connecting entrances to a giant plaza, and a Metro

entrance. 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

I couldn't believe my fortune when unexpectedly I came upon this scene.

Then the woman, foreground, held on the bottom step for the longest time, ultimately turning to reverse direction and never stepping to the bottom from that step.

Maybe it was calisthenics for her, or she was just forgetful?

In any case, I had time for the dog to move about so I could 'place' the dog somewhat in his wanderings for best effect!

I agree!!!!

But it's mostly (my) good fortune.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

john

John (Crosley)

This one makes me sad and ever amazed at human perseverance. The inclusion and placement of the dog adds to the bitter-sweetness of this piece. As a dog lover, I so much appreciate their gentle spirits and the patience they have with us humans.

Amy

Youre onto something here. Photo first: I like your black and white conversion - it suits the image and theme. The diagonal lines works really well - i would however, try to find a way to get rid of the triangular top of the stairs to the right.

The story: Theres tragedy on a personal and on a society level. In your image i find mostly the personal tragedy of am ill fated person in the foreground. One might find the indifference of the man in the background tragic too - but thats not that obvious. I would loose the dog, as it does not add anything to either the composition or the story.

I think i do follow your intention - and theres a need for documenting the poverty following the current crisis. Try looking up "American Pictures" by Jacob Holdt.

I once did (and still display) a Presentation on "'Threes' in My Photography" which you are free to look at, as I consider the use of three things (construed liberally) to be an invitation to make a more interesting photo.

Here's the rationale: As a structural element, the triangle, which consists of three joints, is considered the most stable structure in the architect's and builder's arsenal, but for viewing purposes, three points defines a triangle, if one imaginarily connects the three points together.

So with three points of anything, including subjects, the eye involuntarily often tries to connect the points and ends up defining a triangle -- but why is that interesting?

Well, a straight line is static. A square is static, but a diagonal is quite dynamic if just taken alone, and a triangle is composed of nothing but diagonals (generally), depending of course on the arrangement of the points and the kind of triangle.

The eye involuntarily defines the triangle from the points, and voila, an element of 'dynamism' when one includes three points that the eye can connect. So, here if I included the old woman and the bum and all the parallel lines from the steps, it is inherently less interesting than if one adds the dog -- the third point.

I had a few seconds and took a few photos as the dog crossed my path, and waited deliberately for the dog to get in the most interesting position that he might get in, given the circumstances (instead of just his hind end when I saw him first), and I was rewarded.

Voila, more dynamism, and a more interesting photo.

Two elements themselves might have made for a somewhat interesting photo, but the inclusion of the dog made it more 'geometric' or compositionally interesting, in my view, and I think viewers have regarded it so too, by their clicking, probably not knowing why.

I've given this issue a great deal of study, and it's one of the ways I guide myself when I'm shooting, when I can. I often try to define triangles -- even if only to let a diagonal bisect my frame -- thus dividing the frame into two triangles to add dynamism to an otherwise static structure -- the rectangular (or square) frame.

That's really how I think now, but at first for a long time it was just inchoate -- I could 'see' it and 'do' it, but hadn't thought it through. But over time, I did think it through, early on here on PN.

This is a sad scene, but sometimes it's very happy at the same place, with students, educators, young people, business people, and more affluent people teeming down (or up) those steps.

This was late at night, when all the rest had gone home (or were kissing on the plaza above the steps).

I'm glad you liked it. I have done a great deal of work with steps, partly because with their parallel lines, I find them interesting geometrically and compositionally, and I think you can see why here.

Of course, steps in the abstract are less interesting than the reason they're there -- to convey people from one level to another, and the people on them are the subjects, aided by all those parallel lines, and taken from an angle, each such line may also often forms a diagonal to the frame and thus also defines its own triangle!

I really have thought this through . . . . but one needn't engage in such an intellectual exercise to take an interesting photo -- I just wondered at one time why they were interesting, and thought it through.

This is the result.

I'm writing it here, because I have lots of readers, and they often ask me for lessons and instructions, so I tell them 'turn to the comments', and why repeat myself?

Thanks for the kind comment.

Best to you.

john

John (Crosley)

Hi,

Thanks for the helpful remarks.

I did toy with the idea of cropping the top with the 'triangular' area you write about, but it left) confused, given the subjects, and crowded them.  If there had been more room, I would have cropped as suggested, and instead I darkened and decreased contrast in image editing, as it was quite light from street and business lights.

As to the dog, please see the remark above.  I differ from you, and I think the dog is essential for my interpretation.

I agree with you about the societal implications of this; which of course is one reason I took it, but then I take everything from the rich to the poor, and don't have an agenda, except I don't turn away from anything (except Ukrainian politics which I don't touch).

;~))

Thanks for the kind, thoughtful, and helpful comment.

john

John (Crosley)

Thanks for sharing your years of experience and the knowledge that you have gained. It does help to think through not only that a photo works, but why it works.

Amy

Made me look, think and feel.  I think I started following your art after seeing “Lines and Eyes”.  Such an image with so powerful an architecture/composition and human statement done so quickly (as most street images are) belies innate talent or genius or such cultivated by prolonged study and attention to craft.  It is first, the speed which we must bring knowledge, intuition and sense of design and meaning together and second, the effort to process and present the image in a way others can sense meaning and appreciate the aesthetics that make street photography one of the most prized and difficult kind of art.  You do these things brilliantly.  I would rate this image a 6 as opposed to a 7 possibly because the steps do not hold meaning for me as they do for you and hence don’t bridge the sense of space I feel in the image – I think my eyes leap over the steps to the other elements they find poignant.  Sorry that I don’t explain this so well.  Probably because I don’t understand it so well.   Excellent work, John

Thank you so much Amy.

When I joined this site and was a newbie, the competition was fierce and secrets were zealously guarded about 'how' to make this or that photograph.  Sharing was NOT the order of the day.

Right away, I started sharing, and gained a reputation for that, and also did not rate, so no one could accuse me of the game of the time -- mate rating.

I commented plenty, and was known for it, but rating I left to others., but for my photos, I explained what I knew and anything anybody asked almost without exception.  Some took umbrage, for it upset their apple cart, but others welcomed it, by about 9:1.  It's been that way ever since.

I think now with some experience and some reputation, (as opposed to before), no one's going to steal my style even if I reveal ALL my secrets, nor is anyone going to look down at my photography because I reveal some of the 'tricks and secrets' of how I obtain them, where there are tricks (none here, however).

Thank you again for such a nice comment; you made my day.

john

John (Crosley)

From my very first roll of film, I was taking photos that equaled this.

One, Staten Island Ferry (three men, one on bench) is posted here, in its own folder, entitled, From My First Roll of Film.  There was lots of junk on that roll and the second roll too, but I got a lifetime keeper.  No genius, just something I was born with, or my mother's gamble subscribing to all those magazines during my youth, including Life, Look, National Geographic, etc., paid off well, as I knew from the start how a good photo should look and had a well developed sense of photography from even before I took my first photo.  Again, no genius, just a sense of geometry together with some luck in parenting I think.

I've done quite a bit with steps, especially when I have been from time to time in Kyiv or Moscow because so much is underground in those cities in which the Metros are well developed, dominate, and there is substantial underground commerce to escape the elements during the cold weather which predominates nearly half of the year, and don't forget insufferably hot and humid summers too, especially in Kyiv which is humid all year around.

With underground transit and commerce comes steps and escalators, so you take photos of what you see, and I see tunnels, steps, escalators and some such when I'm in those cities, and have a very large portfolio (Paris even) of work related just to such things, and thus an aesthetic honed for the sight of steps and the Underground and/or Metro.

If it doesn't resonate with you, I'm sad, because step photos surely resonate with me and with many other viewers (see my step photos from inside the La Defense office complex outside of Paris' west area with a girl sitting there forlornly, then her and a guy.  Those photos attracted a huge numbers of clicks.

Thanks for the accolade and the compliments.  I cherish them.  I post a lot of so-so work that please (mostly) only me judging by the ratings, but so what?

From time to time I get one that please many beside myself.  This is one such.

Sometimes I post one I'm sure is a 'winner' only to get sucker punched by the ratings.  Oh well, I don't pull them down and just learn,, and perhaps wonder what's wrong with the raters, but then mostly the raters 'get it right' as a whole (though they make mistakes as a group too, but not often.)

Best to you, this coming fall.

john

John (Crosley)

the dog and the man at the back seem to be locked into their own confabulation, neither concerned with the hapless figure...

That word seems to mean distorted memories or perceptions most often coming from 'dementia', and this dog probably is scavenging for food, which is normal for almost any dog, and far from any sign of dementia. In fact, looking for food is a dog's primary mission in life aside from raising young for the bitch.

The man, rear, may suffer from confabulation -- but who's to say?

As to the woman, I cannot know, but she is certainly deteriorated physically.  Confabulation is a GREAT word, but I think you need to look up its definition this one time only - I think you missed the mark.

But you write great critiques, so don't let this minor element throw you off, my friend.

;~))

Thanks for weighing in.

john

John (Crosley)

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/confabulate

John.  I like this photograph and appreciate the explanation you gave about having three elements in a photograph.  I will remember that and credit you when I can.  However, I think the reason that I like this image is each player has an expectancy (if that is a word), as if they are sizing up one another and it makes for a wonderful tableau.  Dana...

As you can see, I'm never fearful of speaking truth to friendship.

I think it breeds respect, especially from people with intellect like you who respect the truth.

Thanks for taking things in good humor.

john

John (Crosley)

About the two words:  'Tableau' and 'expectancy'.

I think 'tableau' is a remarkable word to describe this scene.  It's certainly not Leonardo's 'Last Supper' although the 'expectancy' of this dog certainly might be to find some scrap in his/her wanderings.

Same thing for the beggar who hopes I think for some coins to fuel his probably alcohol-induced stupor . . . . if I recall right.

As to the aged/disabled woman, right, if she had an expectancy of reaching the bottom of the steps, she didn't make it.  She turned on the last step where she's standing and started back up on her slow ascent.  Perhaps her 'expectancy' was in climbing back 'to the top' which in the 'stair sense' perhaps she'll make, but in a life sense, she'll never accomplish.

In a 'spiritual sense', who knows without reaching into or reading her soul?

Good, insightful and helpful critique who set me thinking.

More on composition soon.

john

John (Crosley)

I have stated how if one connects the 'dots' one can visually or mentally define a 'dynamic' triangle from the three figures of the woman, the dog and the beggar man.

So, there's a triangle.

Now, consider that this triangle is superimposed on what would ordinarily be a parallelogram.

However, because of some lens and optical distortion, this parallelogram, defined by the steps and rails/ramp at the right, becomes somewhat of a trapezoid, but mostly for our purposes a parallelogram.

So, one compositional feature of this photo is that it defines a triangle (for those who connect the dots), over a four-sided figure defined by the stairs which we call a parallelogram, and not only one parallelogram, but one defined by the bottom run, the sides and EACH of the various steps to the mid-level break in risers.  Thus there is a multiplicity of parallelograms -- oe for each stair/riser.

In that way, this is compositionally and geometrically a rather complex photo, and that may account in part for its allure.  If you take away these geometrical features and just put an old woman, a dog and a beggar on a plane, I think you wouldn't have much of a photo, but adding these features elevates this to a somewhat higher plane in my view.

I wonder how long it took the woman, right, to get to the top?

I certainly didn't have the patience or inclination to stick around to find out.

;~))

john

John (Crosley)

(oh, by the way, I don't just take photos of old people, indigents, beggars, bums and others . . . . I take photos of beautiful people, nudes, beautiful vegetables, landscapes, animals and others . . . . for those who would put me in one category by what I post).

jc

If one wants to take the old woman's feet as one point and her head as another and instead of defining a triangle, then one can use her head and feet to define a trapezoid with the dog and the beggar, left.

In that case, what you have here is not a triangle within a parallelogram/trapezoid, but a trapezoid within a trapezoid, but of different dimensions -- clear?

It's discovered things like that, enunciated, that help make analyzing what is found in 'street' photos 'fun' in my view, helped by some of the most able commenters a photographer ever has had the help of, here on Photo.net and elsewhere, including one Lucie Award winner.

john

John (Crosley)

Wonderful street scene very well captured ... great work !!

I'm always pleased to accept a fine compliment from a helpful and discerning critic such as you.  You also can pick things apart though and needn't feel compelled just to comment on the thing you think are 'good' . . . . just to keep things 'honest'.  ;~))

I can take it, of course . . . . and usually am aware more than my critics of defects in my own presentations, but occasionally get big surprises.

Best to you my friend.

john

John (Crosley)

As Cartier Bresson said, "If the geometry is correct, the subject matter doesn't matter so much."

Great geometry in this photo John and great subject matter too.

When these things combine, special things happen.

Thanks for sharing

Oh, I LOVE your comment, and especially the attribution.

This special man is the man who talked me out of my photographic career, personally in 1969, not based on my talent (or lack thereof) but on sheer economics, in a casual conversation we had at an exhibition of his in San Francisco when I did not really know who he was, and had not yet seen his museum full of wonderful photos which I promptly fell in love with FOR A LIFETIME.

His has been the greatest photographic influence on me, as my early photos were compared to his ('they remind me of my friend Henry's,' said an Associated Press writer/colleague, when I had just been hired by Associated Press [Jimmy White],  a man who worked with HCB in China, side by side (as much as that was possible) during the fall of the Kuomintang and the invasion of the Communists. 

I hadn't realized what high praise that was until long after I joined Photo.net, nor did I even remember those words for decades until one evening while thinking, they rushed forward in my memory, but they are not inventions -- just long unthought memories from distant times.

So, Cartier-Bresson never saw my photos and doubtlessly would have disdained them as he did almost every other photographer's photos that were placed before him for evaluation; I'm lucky it didn't happen.  I gave up photography before my first AP assignment and was converted to become a writer though, I had no journalism school, and I had never written a story, even -- boy were they generous to me and wanted me 'on staff'.

Promptly my stories (next day even) were on front pages and even worldwide (yes, it's true).

I never had a photo lesson, and the only photo book I truly prized was 'The World of Henry Cartier-Bresson' which I bought at the De Young Museum where 'Henry' was exhibiting his photos (San Francisco's most prestigious and largest museum, which he had taken over with his giant exhibition, which I remember photo by photo to this day for their greatness, a greatness I knew I never could achieve, and which he had already done by the hundreds, alas.

You touched my heart with your comment.

Thank you from my heart's bottom.

john

John (Crosley)