'Oblivious'

This young woman walks while searching through her purse,

seemingly oblivious to and unaware of her positioning vis a vis the

wonderful and whimsical giant mural next to her which appeared one

day not long ago. 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

Here's the evidence.

 

Look at the lower right of the mural for the signature of the street artist who put up this probably stenciled mural.

 

It seems hard to read but is elaborate.

 

I looked up in Google.com signatures for famous London-based but LA habitué Banksy, probably the most famous 'street' artist in the world and in times past a man who frequently adormed walls and other 'spaces' that could be decorated in the Los Angeles area.

 

Usually for simpler works, his signature is rather simple, but included in the Google.com search of his signature are some more elaborate signatures, and the signature for this work on examination appears to match his more elaborate signature samples.

 

I can't be certain - you be the judge, if you know who he is and care.

 

His distinctive voice (not image, as he is somewhat reclusive) is featured as a critic and narrator.commentator about one opportunistic LA 'street' artist who put on a very lucrative exhibition documented in the movie 'Exit Through the Gift Shop' which I recommend, if you have an interest in 'street art' and/or Banksy, which I have. 

 

I assume his voice was not altered for that movie, but can't be certain . . . . as he is known to shun the media while equally teasing his audience through the media . . . . . as he feeds off media attention about his work and its sudden appearancs to get his work 'noticed' more and more, as shown in New York recently where he baldly proclaimed he'd put up one work a day and almost made it, except for one day when officials interfered (or so I am informed).  He always runs the risk criminal offenses for 'defacing public property, although reputedly one owner of a wall Banksy put his art on, apparently tore down the building, kept the wall and sold the wall and Banksy's art for about $1 million.

 

Banksy has had exhibitions, but in general his work is dedicated to the public.  (Thanks Banksy!)

 

This would (if it is a Banksy) be one of his more elaborate works.

 

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

A quick search in Google.com reveals that using John Crosley and Banksy as search terms, it took Google.com 28 minutes to index this.

 

Interesting. 

 

 

Almost nothing goes unnoticed these days.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Wonderful capture! Everything about this falls exactly in place and in particular the stance of the girl and how she fits perfectly in the void left by the creature and its catch.Now,I just imagine you had visualized this shot and were waiting for the right candidate to fill the frame...and maybe shot a few more which you discarded.Whatever,excellent image!

Meilleures salutations-Laurent

Your analysis is 100% accurate.

 

I previsualized, though I could not have hoped a woman would have walked buy examining her purse's contents, oblivious to the wonderful street art beside her, but you get the point.  I did hope for some pedestrian who would harmonize in some way with the poster, and left it to chance and my itchy shutter finger plus 'C' continuous drive, which I used sparingly.

 

You seem to have an inherent understanding of how I work, so I feel a brotherhood with you because of that, and wish to share with others what you have said, and endorse your comment enthusiastically.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Peak moment.

I must say, John, you are really outdoing yourself lately, to my mind a step up in level. I've always considered you an excellent photographer but in the past I sometimes found individual photos a little cluttered or self-conscious. There is a clarity and focus to these latest photos that seems to mark a personal evolution of some sort, whether personally or photographically I don't know - perhaps a little bit of both. No art director could stage this photo as well as you have done here in a well-considered instant. Regards, Jack

Traffic was heavy, pedestrians were few, and I was shooting from across the street.  It seemed every time I got close to a good shot there was a Mercedes or Toyota grill or body in the shot, causing me to delete a few and keep a few others just as reminders of how difficult such shooting is when not on a holiday Sunday.

 

You are right about 'peak moment' I think.  I aimed for that, and despite travails, I think I caught it.  Thanks for the recognition.  Making such a shot is far different than just capturing a pedestrian, any pedestrian, in juxtaposition with the wall graphic, but integrating it into a 'story' with the graphic, which I hope this does (e.g. 'oblivious' seems to be the story here, as I've titled it). 

 

I can hardly restrain myself when I see such a wonderful graphic and people are somewhere around or they promise to come by, as you by now surely can imagine after seeing so many of my works.  Thanks also (probably) to presumed artist Banksy for his generous contribution to the walls of LA where women like this can 'ignore' his wonderful treasures . . . . I never forget his contribution,  and give him full credit for how great this photo may be or become (like a previous wonderful one taken just up the street, the graphic now gone by several weeks --- who knows where?)

 

I always appreciate seeing your comments, Jim.  Thanks.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

I've always  been able to take photographs at the level I'm taking them now, but lacked the ability or the inclination to sift through the vast amount of photos I take to separate those you might find pleasing (as you note and of a 'higher level') from the lesser chaff, since I find something interesting in almost every photo I post but anticipate that many in the past would not pass muster with the raters (and many have not).

 

I've just taken a conscious interest in trying to clarify what I post, since I started an account on FLICKR.COM to post and sift through some of my best and most popular, and post what now there in Photostream about 138 of my very best.

 

Double posting on Photo.net, lack of attention to Presentations here, and the lack of software and promotion to Presentations prevents me from using this service for creating a 'best of the best' (street) portfolio on this service or I might have just taken 138 or so of my best and created a separate listing here.

 

I suggest you go over to FLICKR.Com and have a look at my Photostream to see what has become a distillation of the best of my best (street -- generally) and omits generally some (not all) of my very good portraits, landscapes and other, miscellaneous shot which may defy categorization or for which I don't have enough to create a following. 

 

Nudes is one instance in which I've posted a few good shots, but not enough to create a following, yet one (and several unclothed 'porno' convention shots,' have made it into my Flickr.com portfolio.

 

I had this style in me from my very first roll, but frankly I did not pay much attention to how it was received as a whole, but rather posted what I would, studying reactions to each photo on Photo.net and learned some extremely valuable lessons about the PN audience rating reaction as well as viewer response as signified by number of viewers for certain photos.

 

Sometimes viewer reaction still baffles me, and sometimes the reaction of PN vs. what seems to be a pretty sophisticated (but mute) response on Flickr.com where number of viewers for me determines popularity has been instructive as the two are not always congruent.

 

In general, what is popular on one service is popular on the other, but with some few big differences, including one recent photo rated 6.0 on this service and called by one view ''best B&W of the month', which has trouble drawing in viewers in Flickr.com (probably because they don't  have their attention drawn to the important writing on the billboard -- it's the photo of the shrouded woman and the movie poster at a bus stop in case you want to compare).

 

And, unlike those who are extremely popular on Flickr.com, I post there largely to have a place to say 'this is the best of my best (street), or at least the most popular of my most popular, and of which I am proud, without seeking to become a major part of the Flickr.com community . . . . . which accounts for a relatively low viewership there, which has just started to grow.

 

Posting those good ones there and culling through my vast portfolio here measuring rates and views here, just to find 'the best' (or most popular at least) has given me a new impetus to find 'just the best' in my vast daily shooting and be more careful about what I post, whereas before I didn't much give a damn, so long as I liked a photo and thought I'd like to see how the PN community reacted -- positive or negative.

 

I think that is the quality you have commented and focused on, rather than any increase in my abilities, though that has grown over time too to where I can create better ones more frequently than before, but none better, I think, than some of my early best.  (Have a look, compare and see -- if you have interest).

 

Thanks for an interesting comment; You're a good observer and your comment is well on the mark for catching a 'change' that may have been slightly more complex than one might have guessed.

 

I'm also skipping over posting a lot of very good stuff that may fall outside what I feel may be pretty acceptable and postworthy, in my search for 'best of the best', and my output is not suffering, as I'm on a tear . . . . my studies of critiques (made by worthy critics such as yourself) seems to be paying off, not in necessarily better photos but in a bigger payload of good to very best photos as a percent of what I shoot. 

 

In other words, my good stuff is a far higher per cent of my output now, as I can previsualize better, armed with the mental input of so much criticism which I have internalized into my shooting.

 

(See, all those critiques have paid off, Jack and viewers and have been very valuable to me!!!!)

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Great B&W capture!

Thanks for such a wonderful compliment.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Spot on John... wow just wow.

I missed your comment before, so pardon my delay in responding.  (oh, it was just posted, pardon me for my assumption . . . . from now on I'll read comment posting time/dates.)

 

I have this in color and it's spectacular, but I'm emphasizing 'street' as black and white for now.   If a photo shows well in black and white and color, I'll post the black and white now generally and save the color for later, for elsewhere or for archives, as black and white is classical 'street'.

 

On the other hand, some 'street' only works as color, and to desaturate just defenestrates the work, so it must be posted in color.  Such are the vagaries of posting and saturation/desaturation.

 

I have another wonderful (or in your case 'equally wonderful' but somewhat different view of this same artwork, same framing, with woman passing in different direction but in the exact same location where the 'thing' appears to be giving her the 'brushoff' as she passes with the thing's three-fingered, gloved, cartoon hand.

 

I read that the 'reclusive' Banksy, famed street artist, who really feeds off his 'anonymity' and his peek-a-boo with the media and his public, is a guy named Gunningham, educated in public school, according to an exhaustive year-long British newspaper report, complete with photograph of Gunningham/Banksie taken four or so years ago in Jamaica, as well as Gunningham as a youthful student.

 

Is it true?  Who cares?

 

The wonderfulness is to go past a street where one expected nothing and find something like this, then park a few minutes (not hours in a prolonged stakeout but no more than 20 minutes) and getting stunning photos that are publishable of reactions -- or better -- non-reactions to people walking by such works, which photos themselves are new and publishable especially when together the pedestrian and the artwork tell a 'story' such as especially the nonpublished photo view I write about above -- which works in black and white and is more spectacular in color).

 

It will appear some day, but why post similar photos, even if very, very good, so close together in time and for sure why on the same site?  

 

I like to mix it up and keep viewers guessing and clicking!

 

And, Gordon, I love your work.

 

(in case you didn't know . . . . or I didn't say so explicitly before).

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

I didn't say so expressly, but thanks from the bottom of my heart for such praise.

 

 

Considering the source, your praise has special meaning to me.  You have extremely high standards, and to meet them is a sure sign that my photo has merit which makes me feel warm and fuzzy (I don't drink so that's as close as I get to nirvana, photographically speaking).  [no moral upset against drinkers; I just don't, though I can without ill effects.  Drinking just doesn't show me as much pleasure as a perfectly framed photo taken on the street -- a true 'high'.]

 

Thanks again to a member whose opinion truly does matter to me.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)

Apology for the misspelling above.  Editing window had closed when I discovered it.

 

john

 

John (Crosley)