Dick and Pat Nixon, Intimacy in the Crowd, Powell Street, San Francisco (Emphasis on Faces and...

I was just getting my darkroom training days started with the Army.

In PS, mess with the curves to take the muddy skin tones on the Prez. The dodge tool will work on the skin tones also. Contrast is good. The burn tool, set on Medium 4-8% opacity can help the blown out areas. Sometimes even the best cameraman needs help in the darkroom. ;-)

 

Superb photo. Pat Nixon clinging on to her husband. Great facial expressions by everyone--sense of drama!

Oh my! All these faces and moves - superb! And the facts that its Nixon adds a cool touch to it.

Nixon decided he wanted to go for a cable car ride while he was staying in San Francisco and didn't clear it with the Secret Service in advance. He got off the cable car several blocks up the street from his hotel to walk back to the hotel through the growing crowd. One of the first things he encountered was one of those sidewalk elevators that rise from a basement below the sidewalk, rising in front of him, a workman in overalls on it, and the workman easily could have been a terrorist or an assassin. The workman stretched out his hand and Nixon shook it (I photographed it). The Secret Service actually carried me down the sidewalk by my armpits as they rushed Nixon down Powell Street. This is the scene in front of Nixon's hotel shortly afterward. My camera is atop my outstretched hands behind where my head should be, and my head is ducking, down and to the left. Nixon's hands actually are reaching around my body -- his left hand is actually touching my right side. Capturing all this was possible with a manual stop-down Soligor 28mm (then considered a VERY wide angle lens) bought in Hong Kong for $28.00. Wide angle and a setting of f 11 or f 16 allowed almost infinite depth of field.

 

John

Great story!

When the sidewalk elevator suddenly rose with a workman in overalls with outstretched hand in front of Nixon, and Nixon graciously reached down to shake the slowing rising workman's hands, the nation's history might easily have changed that day. (Sidewalk elevators are those things with two metal 'doors' that open up vertically from beneath the sidewalk and carry freight into a downtown store's basement from the street front sidewalk) This is the exact same place where one of Manson's followers took a potshot at Reagan, and who knows WHO might have been on that sidewalk elevator instead of a friendly and hapless worker. Nowadays, when a President comes to town anywhere, the Secret Service and local police inspect a motorcade route, and they WELD all manhole covers well in advance after inspecting inside, just to prevent unpleasant surprises. Times were simpler then. (Source: Seattle Times)

 

John

This is a new scan. It still may be replaced by a higher quality scan as work is continuing. In the meantime, if your browser previously has displayed this image, even for a second, it may have stored it in cache and to view the new scan, you may need to "refresh" your browser. :~))

 

John

Commentators and experts, this image is almost completely untouched by Photoshop. It is scanned by an Epson 1640 XL Graphic Arts Scanner in Professional Mode with histograms, but is presently posted without burning, dodging, etc. I am open to suggestions. Of course, the scanning process for this image was quite sophisticated and resolved some of the "problems" but I welcome suggestions and especially those of Dennis Jones above.

 

John

Great photo. People now sure don't dress as well as people did back then. Nixon's suit is perfect as well as the fellow's to the rear left.

Nixon was an impeccable dresser, as were most presidents. The usual choice was a blue or grey suit and a white shirt and the only color choice was a tie. Nixon actually was not a large man at all. Here, I, at 5'10"-11" took this photo by holding my camera over my head, snapped blindly, and ducked my head as he reached around me.

 

Still, my head ducked, I almost looked him in the eye (albeit sideways) as I clicked the shutter.

 

(Think how strange looking that was to me through my eyes . . . .)

 

I took this on my own -- my writer's shift with AP hadn't started out that day yet -- and AP had two photographers from 'Washington' following Nixon, yet I was the one who got published that day, (front page) with photo of Nixon greeting workman coming out of sidewalk elevator right in front of him (above).

 

I literally was 'walking to work' when I came upon this whole shebang and was not 'on the clock'. To this day AP has never paid me for publishing a companion photo that ran 'on the wire' or reimbursed me in any way. They just appropriated it, though it ran on many front pages. (maybe they assumed I waas working 24 hour shifts despite rigid union rules about time . . . and it was clear I was 'off duty' when I took this and moreover at the time I was NOT a photographer and shooting with my own equipment . . . .which make the whole shot (and the other also) mine and solely mine.

 

John

Hi John

 

This is an absolutely stunning capture! ...like greatest photos of the twentieth century quality. Sorry about the negative damage.

 

To repair, first of all, I think you should be able to get a better scan than this. There should be either more shadow detail or highlights on the negative. However if time has taken its toll, PS can go a long way toward bringing it back to its original condition. Basically everything that Dennis said, that's about all it will take. This is a quick hack I did on the jpeg, you should get a lot better results working on the master file. But if possible, see if you can get another scan. Best regards.

You have posted only a few photos, but each of your images is just about perfect. This is very far from perfect -- in effect, pretty 'busy', but it does capture a moment of both 'busy-ness' and 'intimacy' at the same time: i.e. How to be President and have your (alcoholic) wife hang onto you in the process as you and the crowd sweep along Powell Street in front of your hotel -- the one with the cable cars that pass along in front.

 

I deny vehemently (and I think you have tongue in cheek when you praise so highly) such high merits, but I like the image nonetheless, and I am highly flattered by your re-work of the image into a new jpeg.

 

I don't have the negative, and this was scanned from a very contrasty, but show quality print, and I didn't manipulate it at all.

 

I looked at your rendition, and it wasn't 'dark' or contrasty enough for my tastes, here looking at my superlaptop with the wonderful screen -- many posts show darker on other computer screens but this screen is very 'true', and I wonder if your monitor has been adjusted for brightness?

 

You are right, I should adjust down the contrast. When I scanned this, it was literally untouched for contrast and brightness and posted as scanned, albeit by my Epson Expressions 1640 XL Graphic Arts scanner, which was the best of the bunch.

 

But a rework with PhotoShop is in order. I can see that now, that I have some basic PhotoShop skills -- learned because I now have a digital camera and to make the da . . n thing produce acceptable results you HAVE to know Photoshop.

 

Before I could just pick up prints from a photofinisher (and not know that their photofinishing machine contained a computer that matched Photoshop by adjusting for contrast, brightness, flesh tones, etc., etc., etc. and I could try to pass myself off as 'no adjustments made in PhotoShop' kind of guy, truly believing it, since I did not open Photoshop (the photofinisher's computer had essentially done it for me, but I didn't know it.)

 

Now, with a digital camera, I have to do those adjustments in Photoshop, and I am more aware of the functions of Photoshop.

A digital camera is indeed more work, but it saves beaucoup bucks.

 

I am most appreciative for your rendition of this image, your (maybe overly) effusive praise, and even for your attention.

 

And I congratulate you for having what may be the smallest, but most perfect portfolio of 'most viewed photos' on Photo.net

 

John

John, my praise was sincere. I spend an inordinate amount of time cropping my images, in order to make the uninteresting interesting. An image like this one requires no cropping at all because every pixel triggers the imagination. There are probably only a dozen such photos on all of Photo.net.

Dave, I'm a little red cheeked . . . now that I realize that you were being sincere. This image was stored loose in a box after printed and before that, negatives were stored in various envelopes, kicked around from move to move for 20 years before.

 

Now, negatives gone, there's only the superb digital (archival) file and the print(s) (2) to keep, and the various hard drive and disks the digital files are stored on.

 

I wanted to start a web site to get this and others like it in this portfolio to the public, but Photo.net has solved that for me.

 

Nevertheless, I'd love the idea of a coffee table book someday.

 

But Photo.Net has some standout artists, who are truly deserving of such books, and the name Doug Hawks of the Los Angeles area who is a wonderful photographer mainly of B&W comes to mind. I invite you to peruse his portfolio and see how he makes inanimate features and buildings 'talk'.

 

I'm an admirer of his.

 

John

In terms of gamma/brightness and or contrast, any choice you make would be fine. The problem here is there is a stain in the middle of this photo that is noticeably distracting. To correct, all the white shirts in direct sunlight must be of the same brightness and brighter than the skin tones in direct sunlight. All the Caucasian faces should be approximately the same tone and Nixon's suit left should approximately match his suit right. This can be fixed in Photoshop in a number of different ways. I'm not going to say it's easy, but I feel you're up to the task. I've only been using Photoshop a year now, and some things are already getting easier, though I still have a lot to learn.

 

John, I honestly get the feeling that you don't fully realize what you have captured here. Busy is a term used to describe wallpaper. Take a look at this photo again and just for a moment let's forget that this is a photo of the President of the United States. Without any famous people in it, this picture is a masterpiece. Just look at the facial expressions. No, forget the faces. Just look at the hand gestures:

 

(counterclockwise) the man fiddling with the ciroflex, the mother reaching in toward the President?s hand, the boy with the instamatic in one hand the other poised in a missed handshake, the presidents reluctant hand (this one is absolutely classic!), then there's what appears to be the hand of the secret service or somebody reaching around - protecting the President from inadvertent contact, the first lady's white gloved hand clinging to the president (another classic). And there is still one more pair of barely visible hands between the presidents left arm and the first lady's left arm in the lower right hand corner. Not sure, but this gentlemen appears to be wearing white gloves and reaching for something in his suit jacket.

 

Now lets look at the faces. Every single one has a unique expression, yet all the faces in the crowd are in stark contrast to that of the Nixons. The distress in their expression creates the tension in this photograph. Lost in the crowd they have become isolated. Together they are apart. And the handshake gesture bears witness to this drama.

 

But this isn't just a photo of anybody. It is a photo of President Richard M. Nixon and his wife Pat, and the isolation and distress we see here aren't just characteristic of an afternoon in San Francisco. They are characteristic of the final days of his administration. They are characteristic of the entire rest of his and Pat's life together. The are characteristic of his legacy. She stayed with him through it all. Together, they remained apart from the rest of society till his death.

 

All of that is what makes this photo so great. I don't think there's another Nixon photo that comes close.

 

You have taught me something. Sincere thanks.

 

I attempted to interest the Nixon library in this image, and they turned me down flat; they didn't even want to see it.

 

They thought they had 'seen it all' with thousands of images of Nixon. I thought I had captured a special moment. Maybe that factors into my self-denigration.

 

Like you, I think they are wrong.

 

I thank you for going to the effort to open my eyes and -- in a kind way -- share your thoughts. If they are shared by the PN viewers, it would be very pleasing.

 

I am, of course, particularly pleased with Pat and 'Tricky Dick' caught in a simple, touching moment amid the hubbub, and at the same time, aware of the momma and her child, left with the camera and the fingertip handshake of the young boy who later can grow up to say he 'shook the hand' of the only President who resigned under grave scandal before he could be impeached.

 

But this was a happy time; Nixon at the peak of his popularity, riding high.

 

And, of course, there's Nixon here also the hypocrite.

 

Personally a racist who spoke commonly and very disparagingly of blacks, he was followed here by a decorated black military man with a chestful of theatre and combat ribbons; a calculated political move that exactly contradicted his personal feelings about blacks in general.

 

(At least one gets the idea that Bush, however much he feels superior to the idea of "blacks" in general, just feels superior to "poor and middle class blacks" -- not those of great character or education and bearing, and that he genuinely has respect for Condaleeza Rice and at least political respect for Colin Powell.

 

Like my father who personally felt that blacks were 'inferior' as a race, but who would never, never allow the use of pejoratives about blacks in the house or demeaning comments about race, and who would never allow a demeaning or prejudicial comment and who treated minorities all as genuine people deserving of great respect despite his intellectual prejudice, I think Bush is somewhat of a hypocrite -- who genuinely feels that -- in general and overall -- Blacks are inferior, but that's a statistical thing, that can be overcome by a few stellar standouts -- the Colin Powells, the Condaleeza Rices, and the Craig McCaws (McCaw Cellular formerly) of this world, despite the odds against it happening.

 

(John)

 

(Sent into musing by your thoughtful and thought-provoking comment)

 

And I am genuinely thankful for your eye-opener; I'll try to overcome my own prejudice against my own image -- I like it -- even very much -- but there are early simpler B&W images which I have taken that I feel capture the essence of fine photography.

 

Perhaps they should be evaluated separately and not compared.

 

John (musing)

This is an important photograph. It is one of the best photographs I've seen of Nixon. It is so because it is ad hoc. It is really quite a brilliant photograph when you look at it closely. Pat's hand is around Dick's waist. Her other hand is gesturing to someone. There is that crowd around him--the press with their cameras, the kids with their Instamatics. It is all so delightfully unstaged. Nixon looks half-way human. I can see why the Nixon Library refused this. Nixon looks like just another joe blow in the crowd and Pat Nixon just like any other Jane blow.

 

Exactly right there. An epiphany.

An 'epiphany' -- kind words indeed.

 

The Nixon library didn't know what they were refusing as they never saw the photo. They were of the opinion, 'We have tens (or hundreds) of thousands of photos -- we have enough -- don't bother us, (or send it to us free).

 

Thank you for exceptionally kind words.

 

John

I was a 'writer' for AP when I took this, having been hired as a photographer, but working as a writer, and was on my way to work on the afternoon shift when I took this (in the capacity as a 'freelancer') and the AP White House photography staff was there, and when Nixon went walking, I scooped them all, but not with this photo -- with a photo of Nixon coming toward me down a sidewalk, a sidewalk elevator suddenly arising in front of him and a workman on it, hand outstretched for a handshake (could have been an assassin, but the walk was unannounced and no assassin would have been 'lucky' enough to have stumbled onto the proper sidewalk elevator -- now they weld such things shut.

 

Thanks for the nice compliment.

 

John

It is clear to me now that this photo must be reworked in Photoshop and reposted to make the most of it, and that, as Dave Collopy, (and others) have said, it is a masterpiece, in the sense, say of a Breughel in which everybody in a medievel town was doing their own thing while there was a central theme -- say, a wedding. A boy chasing a dog, somebody bringing victuals, etc.

 

Here the central character is Nixon and Pat with minor themes in the hands and faces of the surrounding characters, caught as one commentator said 'ad hoc'.

 

This photo has one of the highest-level commentaries of all appended to it in terms of pure intellectual/artistic discussion in my entire portfolio, and for that I'm entirely thankful for all who contributed, as I think about it from time to time.

 

I'm not entirely happy with Dave Collopy's B&W rendition of this scene, as perhaps it deserves to be quite contrasty, as it is here, but it deserves some cleaning up and I will attempt to find the original scan and do so now that I have greater skill with Photoshop.

 

Watch this space.

 

John (Crosley)

 

With special thanks to my commentators above. (and no, I'm not Breughel, but this reminded me of his 'style'.)

John, you are a true pro, in the best sense of the word. You are always where you have to be, and you always seem to get the shot. The other photographer's smile is all the applause you need. He saw you duck and stick up the camera, and I think that he not only appreciated your effort, but I suspect that he knew that you had nailed it. I'll stay silent on the Photoshop issue on this one, except to say that I like the contrast as it is. But should you dodge and burn? Who cares? You got the shot.

 

--Lannie

I think you're right about the other photographer, probably from the Examiner or the Chronicle. AP also had two photographers assigned to the White House there, but I got the front page with another shot (guy on sidewalk elevator rising right in front Nixon -- could as easily had an Uzi as a smile and outstretched hand), and aced my own wire service's pro photogs, and this one was never published.

 

I always had good instincts, and interestingly enough this was taken before my shift as a 'writer' (newsmen and photographers carried the same designation -- 'newsman' for wire service purposes both for pay scale and hiring purposes, though photographers seldom could write their way out of a paper bag.)

 

So I took this actually as a 'stringer' on my own time, and just took it in before my shift as a writer, after they converted me from photographer hire to practicing writer, later editor, later world service photo editor in New York City world headquarters.

 

I'm trying to get my hands on the earlier, published photo which is in AP's archives (wrongly), since they never paid me for it, and distributed it worldwide. It's a piece of history about presidential security, and why presidents need to check before going galavanting about. When I get it I'll post it.

 

I did't take many photos for 3 decades after this -- just a few here and there, separated by a decade even.

 

I have a simple philosophy now which I practiced then but didn't put to words: Get all the good stuff in the frame and keep all the bad stuff out. Simple as that.

 

All the rest is sweat and hard work.

 

I'm happy to see you've been browsing and like this. Thanks for the Photoshopping hint, as I now have some skills in that regard, which I didn't when it was posted.

 

John (Crosley)

 

 

This photo was taken with a manual stopdown lens, a 28 mm wide angle Nikon mount Soligor prime lens that did not have the ability to stop down as the photo was taken.

 

One had to 'meter' the photo by actually moving the aperture ring closed for the reading, then open for focusing, and closed again for taking the photo.

 

Viewing through the lens (TTL) was practically impossible with the use of 400 ASA (ISO) Tri-X, which I used routinely, as the 'sunny 16' rule often called for 1000/sec at f 11, which resulted in a very dim image in the viewfinder or 500 at f8 under cloudy skies in summer daytime. Very hard to view through unless one 'opened up the aperture' for viewing and focusing, then 'stopped it down' manually again.

 

Some of my earlier lenses were like that, though the best Nikon ones (and cameras) got replaced (and eventually stolen, then replaced thankfully), but never used, practically for going onto decades, so my equipment was just shiny new with no rub marks or anything for decades except where a strap wore against a camera, say an F2AS or two, pro black, or a Leica (without rub marks or any marks at all and the lenses spotless and markless), as I also shot Leica, though not much as rangefinder viewing is terribly difficult and is an art in itself -- it's best left to the tiny viewfinder one finds sometimes on top of an old IIIc of IIIf camera which outlines the frame and one just stops down the lens, points and shoots the Leica -- to heck with superimposed focusing, as it's just soooo hard, especially in the old III models.

 

So, this particular lens, was sold new in Hong Kong to me on my way back from Viet Nam for $28.00, all I had left from the Vietnamese Piasters (a fortune in Piasters actually, but worth nothing on the world/Hong Kong market), and I desperately wanted just one 28 mm lens which then was considered VERY wide angle.

 

And it WAS wide angle.

 

Nixon's left hand actually is touching a hand that is touching my right side/leg I recall -- all viewed from my overhead camera view (imagine that this photo was shot blindly -- all true -- my head somewhere to the left, leaning wildly and probably amazingly, which is why the cameraman with his huge strobe is laughing -- the kid with the camera overhead looks like a goofball, all contorted to get his shot.

 

But I did 'get' the shot.

 

Which is the ultimate lesson and reward.

 

Sometimes you have to contort yourself in life to get what will be worthwhile and lasting.

 

This is just one of those moments.

 

John (Crosley)

what a tremendous photograph

I was just a 'kid' with a camera -- trying to act like one of the 'big boys' -- imititating them, in reality and hoping I would not be 'found out'.

 

I had a 'press pass', but at about that moment, somebody actually 'ripped it off' and it disappeared forever. I had to get a new one. The California Highway Patrol issued them, and mine was practically new, and that may have been one reason I was not molested, though I was officially by then a 'writer' but what's the difference if you're a writer and you have a camera?

 

Thanks for the nice comment.

 

John (Crosley)