Entrance

I like the blackness that fills the fame - negative space that sets up the scene nicely.

Just the feets are show which is intriguing and the lone pedestrian with in the circle

Black and white - yea

Chris,

Many thanks for your comment. Highly appreciated.

Tony,

Thank you very much for stopping by. Thank you for using the word "intriguing", as this is also the feeling I have.

What I find interesting is the void in the middle of the "O" showing the world on the other side. The man's torso is invisible, which suggests that he is being transported into another world. Also, please notice the pedestrian in the middle of the "O".

Although I like this version as well, and it makes clearer the other pedestrian visible through the "O", I think the uncropped, larger version, is more effective in its impact.  But that is just my opinion. 

It would only be fair for me to try to explain why it has that impact on me:

In the larger version, more of the environment is seen, and it places more emphasis on those "disappearing legs".  (By the way, the slight blur on the back leg is wonderful in that it imparts a sense of movement, while still allowing us to distinguish the legs visually.)  In the larger photograph, my eyes first take in the large letters and the surrounding environment, and then are startled by the realization of the disappearing legs.  Those legs "make" the photo.  (Imagine how "ho-hum" the photo would be without them.)  "Why is the photographer showing me this?  Oh!  There it is!"  It's odd and quirky, and that quirkiness gives the photograph its punch.  The distant figure seen in the circle of the "O" is barely noticeable in the larger version.  And in the cropped version, I don't think the figure appears large enough to work as an effective visual counterpoint to the legs.  If the front part of someone's body, or a head, appeared coming from the opposite direction on the same plane as the person with the disappearing legs, it would be effective in that it would imply an impending collision or meeting.  But appearing off in the distance as a tiny figure I don't think it  makes that much of a visual impact and, in fact, may be pulling away from (or "muddying") the impact of the legs.  That is why I prefer the larger version and think it is a much more effective photograph than the crop.