Fisherman portrait (Enlarge)

Your c/c are welcome!

He just has to look at a fish to scare it to death:) excellent shot.

The stare says it all, it is a rough life to be fisherman, well done.

strong detailed beautiful

Expressive portrait!

Gregory and Verena, George, Stephanie and Svetlana: thanks for your visit and kind comments!

(P.S: maybe I found the real Neptune...)

There's a lot of hard work and character in that face.  Well done... Mike

Thanks Mike!

I like that he neither smiles nor quite looks me in the eye. He tolerates me, he endures my look, but he also withholds. He does not obey.

I wish the face were not on dead center. It kills the dynamics of the composition.

A strong portrait, of which the centering seems part of its unflinching nature adding, I think, to the sense Julie mentions of the fisherman being in charge. This portrait feels both humanly and photographically genuine, not overthought and not mannered. The nautical element on the left effectively intrudes upon the geometry of the composition while providing a strong narrative clue. The eyes pierce even from out of the shadows without the typical artificial enhancement that can seem de rigueur these days. The hand humanizes and the unkempt locks of hair give personality. For me, much of the dynamic of this photo comes from the photographer's chosen perspective and the fisherman's wearing character on his sleeve, not to mention the contrast and yet haunting harmony of the delicate sky to his more weathered, textured face.

Not a contrived portrait, this image seems more photojournalistic to me. If the out-of-focus boat detail on the left had been consciously employed in some better way, or had the head of the subject been moved off-center it would have improved technical elements, but perhaps lost the spontaneity of this version. Subject, side lighting and B&W treatment make it for me. It's not an image I'd hang on the wall, but it will hang around in my memory for some time.

"...the fisherman's wearing character on his sleeve ..." +1, Fred.

This does not work for me. The light is very strong and buries his eyes and the lower half in shade. The centered, landscape composition is uninspiring, and the only hint of his occupation is a small sliver of boat on the left.

It's interesting how shadows and uncombed hair can give an impression that I think in this case is is not mirrored in the subject's expression. His mouth is key. It is neither aggressive or smiling, but simply expressing content that he is the subject (he is hunched over in that anticipation and not in any attempt to threaten the photographer). The centring is for me very agreeable, as it is balanced by the important secondary subject to his left that gives a hint to the man's activity. An agreeable portrait.

My first reaction was that this type of photo, of a weathered, craggy, unkempt person is a saturated formula, so to speak. Interesting perhaps, but, you know what I mean.

Steve, I do know what you mean but disagree with you. There are, in fact, people who look like this. I would not rule out photographing older people who have a weathered look and are somewhat unkempt because of what some exasperating photographers do to them. What will offend me are when those features are so exaggerated by the photographer (often in post processing) so as to make it seem like that's all there is to them. Many photographers create caricatures in the name of "pathos." While the things you mention are features of this man, I think the photo features his character, something deeper about him than these things, and it comes across as genuine. There's also a lightness to this as opposed to the darkness so often portrayed in the types of portraits you're talking about. So many of the portraits I think you're talking about try to elicit a very false sense of pathos and do so in a very superficial way. To me, this photo doesn't do that. It doesn't elicit sympathy or that kind of false sense of longing that ruin porn (which I think is very similar to what some portraitists do to their older subjects) elicits. He seems very much alive, very much himself, very authentically portrayed, and he just happens to have the features and look he has, in part due to his being out at sea. At least as I see it.

This is a case where a little knowledge of context can go a long ways towards understanding. This image is one of several Joao made of fishermen launching/landing and securing their boats through the surf and onto the beach at Fonte da Telha, Portugal. The images as a group are interesting and informative of a strenuous, physically demanding occupation. This portrait is a very apropos vignette within the larger theme, and the character portrayed is both authentic and compelling. Every detail is essential to the story being told: The angle of the sun is that of late afternoon, with the fishing boats returning after a day's work on the water. The fisherman's skin is evidence of a life spent on the open sea plying his trade. His hair reflects the reality of his environment. His clothing is that of a working waterman. And, his posture is that of fatigue after strenuous exertion, working his nets/lines all day, and then fighting his boat ashore through the surf and up the beach. (He's not pathetic. Just tired after a very hard day's work.) The background visible over his shoulder is the sea, a key (if hazy) component of the story. In total, I find this a very successful and honest treatment, with the veracity of an excellent documentary combined with the artistry of effective storytelling. There is little, if anything, I would change.

Fred, I could see this as a part of a series it would seem less "pathos" driven than my initial reaction. But, that was my initial reaction. There are so many photos like you so aptly describe: "caricatures in the name of "pathos."

Steve, it's not that it's part of a series that makes it appear less pathos-driven to me. It's the look of the photo itself. Or at least how I'm seeing it.

That said, it's interesting to note our disagreement, not simply because we disagree (it obviously isn't that unusual for people to disagree in these threads) but because it makes me think a little more about the kinds of things people disagree on when looking at photos.

Last week, there was a lot of disagreement about why the man should be included and whether it would be better without him and what type of story the picture was telling people or what genre the photo was coming from (architectural, abstract, theatrical are three I recall). But I did get the impression that we were all seeing the photo relatively the same way and yet reacting to what we were seeing in a variety of ways or wanting different things from the photo.

The disagreement you and I are having seems more fundamental (which is, of course, OK). I'm not saying this to suggest one of us has to be right and the other wrong. But I think it's an interesting case where we're looking at the same picture but seeing two different pictures. You see that offensive pathos-ridden treatment of older people that we both object to and I don't. So I think this is a case where we aren't interpreting the photo differently so much as actually seeing differently. Last week, people seemed to want different things from that photo. This week, you and I seem to want the same thing (a non-pathos-eploiting portrait) but one thinks he's getting it and one doesn't.

I agree Fred, and its interesting. I was thinking after I made my comments that maybe my "pathos meter" is a bit more hair trigger than a lot of people's for some reason. After all, some people love that sort of thing! If we all liked the exactly same things, there wouldn't be much variety in the world of photography.

An old sea warrior, maybe even an old Viking or pirate for sure. Good shot, the light the expression, excellent, you can almost hear his gravel voice.

nice portrait