Manifold Depth -- More Than Meets the Eye At First Glance** *

The old hag has her hand on a cloth bag, but what about the teens,

background left, and especially that outstretched arm, far left and

that unusual posture? click and find out . . . maybe Your ratings

and critiques are invited and most welcome. If you rate harshly or

very critically, please submit a helpful and constructive comment.

Please share your superior knowledge to help improve my photographic

skills. Thanks! enjoy! John

This image is quite difficult to comment or critique for me.

The scene is quite busy or even messy. The focus is obviously on the woman in the foreground (she seems quite old, not wealthy, quite serious in her expression) and the contrast with the funny joyful boys in the background is a bit disturbing for my eyes.

The indifferent man on the right completes this scene of ordinary urban indifference.

I don't know what were your intentions when you took this picture, it would be interesting for me to know your ideas about this scene.

Regards,

Marco

I might have called this one 'The Gleaner' with the idea that the woman's sole occupation so far as I can tell is to clean up tossed beer bottles for their deposits (I think they have deposits -- maybe she just gets poundage for the glass), which she places in her cloth fiber bags, foreground, after every day's drinking in the central square of Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine (population between 1 and 2 million people, as remote from ordinary Western knowledge as Perth, Australia is from geographical proximity to other places -- in fact Ukraine outside of Odessa and Kiev are pretty divorced in some ways from 21st century civilization, though some cities have McDonald's, which like '50s Ameica was the heart of social life, and that is the way in Dneprv\opectrorvsk, although big name designers have outlects, which a seclect few can afford (others eat potatoes).

My idea? compare and contrast, of course. (The kids and the old woman -- their youth vs. age, and so forth until you're out of categories.)

John (crosley)

Where was I to get this angle?

'-))

John (Crosley)

This isn't it, but I actually untied and tied a shoe, to get a low angle of a woman sitting on a ledge below a mural contrasting her lifestyle -- the camera was about a foot off the ground, and there I was right in front of her with no one else around, taking her photo and she never even realized it. My equipmemt at the time: Two D200s with Battery packs, a nikkor 17~55 DX (huge) on one and a 70~200 also monstrous) on the other, and she had even glanced at me, but she never had clue she had been photographed as I finished tying my shoe (after untying it first).

So, now, how did I get this low angle?

John (Crosley)

You hanged your camera without kneeling...

Don't know :-)

I just sat at the huge fountain at the side of which she parked her reinforced fabric/plastic bags (the standard in Russia/Ukraine -- cheap and sturdy) and looked tired and haggard (true) and then waited as she went around her bottle-gathering rounds, and when she came back each time pretended to focus and survey with my camera elsewhere, each time capturing her, and one time capturing the scene thusly.

Such are the 'tricks of the trade' of the 'street photographer'.

Often people write 'how do you get those natural expressions?' or how do you fit into the background, or even 'do you ask permission before you take a photo?' and I don't even speak her language or even know if she speaks . . . so at least the last question is answered.

She is very single-minded about her bottle-gathering, lest someone else get a bottle destined for her bags.

Gee, I'm glad you thought to task ;-)

John (Crosley)

I thank you John because is so rare to exchange opinions, ideas or simple smalltalks on Photo.net.

Keep on posting.

Regards,

Marco

Your ideas may be formed from watching other' pages, but not mine.

Mine are full of everything from poetry to cosmology and yes, even small talk and many, many opinions.

'Street' photography is about social commentary many times (not always), and sometimes it even falsely portrays its subjects (which I try to note), but it is fertile ground for discussion (or even a springboard) for all sorts of discussions into myriad, wide-ranging subjects.

We have a lot of fun in these sometimes, depending on who drops by and the tenor of the participants.

If you go back and view the discussions under many of my highest-commented photographs, you may find that many members come here at least in part for the high level of discussion (as well as for the opportunity to trade a jest from time to time.)

In part you commented on the universality of this photo in your beginning analysis, noting the sort of ordinariness of everyday life and its disconnectedness, one from the other, with the old lady collecting bottles (you didn't know she was doing that, of course), and the teens, background, having a high time), while the man(men) right were pretty unconnected -- 'messy' was the term you described this 'mish-mosh' of a composition (and rightly so).

(I do read everything).

Welcome.

John (Crosley)

I am entitled.

I met her

She's more than a little unbalanced.

She may not appear it here, but she's not really a normal person. With life going on around her, she talks to no one. If someone puts down a beer bottle, she heads to it in a beeline. That's all she appears to do in life. She is essentially 'invisible' to those around her, a sort of 'nebbish' in life in this city, yet an essential element of city center life.

A 'hag' -- yes, as that term is commonly used, though fairly well-dressed.

She's not a rag-picker or a gleaner, but of the same class, but without communication skills. There'a a place for her and people respect that, but she certainly is not a regular person.

But your defense of her I am sure comes from a good place and has apparent justifiction within the four corners of the photo, as it does not reveal the true situation. I used to work with those with deficits and she certainly has several.

Hag is as good a word as any, regrettably.

But your comment is certainly welcome if only to allow me to explain an otherwise ambiguous statement.

John (Crosley)

 This is a 'sneaky photo' meaning  it  can sneak up on you, and you can even pass it by without recognizing what's the subject (or one its most interesting subjects) and its primary reason for posting, until you happen to linger on the photo -- or unless you read my caption and happen to be alerted to the partially hidden but most interesting content.

I wish I had a sponsor and once again a curator, as formerly; the curator would be asked to go through my half million or so photos to look for those photos where the action is in the background, partially hidden and/or not so readily apparent but which once found really sucks the viewer's attention in.

This is one; there are a couple of others of note: one in the background has a man driving his bike off a small ledge, out of control.

In another a person is leaning over a guard rail above a pond and appears so out of balance that the person is going to fall in.

;~))

You have to pay careful attention to some photos I shoot -- not all but a few.

Some are not so apparent.

Look for the photo in  black and white that says in big words 'VIDEO' on the side of a building.

Them look to the right at the street entrance where a child is being shocked by a sibling on this Halloween afternoon shoot as the sibling comes out of the video store (poppa's) wearing a 'SCREAM! mask. 

Ever so small in thumbnail, Blown up big, it would be great on a gallery wall.

It was taken in LA's South Central ethnic district in a Spanish speaking part where I like to shoot when I'm in LA.

LA can have great street shooting, but a car is most helpful for getting around, though taking the bus and trains is not impossible.  Buses have some pretty 'not wealthy' people on them . . . .and lots of 'food stamp recipients' to say it kindly.

And I am not putting down food stamp recipients at all -- they're very necessary for almost all who get them and for many, not enough for decent eating, especially if there's not stove, microwave or refrigerator (or bed).

And maybe not even an old hulk car to sleep in.

I've been there, so I don't turn my nose up at my subjects; I've been a millionaire and penniless. 

More than once.

The former is far more comfortable, believe me and it's no wonder the richer people live longer;' they have less anxiety about a bed to sleep in, the next meal, or even paying for a doctor for necessary treatment and the medications to treat their pain instead of getting drunk to try to kill it or using street drugs.

(I never used either, though, thank God)

I understand you have difficulty writing more than your short approvals and let my viewers know that too, in case they think I respond too much; you communicated that privately through a helper, and I'm passing that on so viewers who read these things know I am responding appropriately, despite the brevity of your comment.

john

John (Crosley)

Why "Hag"?

Merriam-Webster defines Hag as an ugly, slatternly, evil looking old woman.

So?

I could smell her and saw her very close up.  Also, her teeth, what she had of them, were 'holy' (holes) and gaps where teeth had been.  She did not speak or communicate - people were very much afraid of her.  Her only function in life was when someone put down a bottle she immediately chased that bottle and put it in her bag.  Other than that, she communicated with no one, but youths of Dnipropetrovsk considered her a witch for her odd and bizarre behavior and looks.

I am extremely careful in what I write; when I make a mistake, I try to correct it.

Not here.

It is an appropriate caption and statement.

John (Crosley)

None of which (hag and comment above) are in the photograph.

The photograph elevates the woman;  gives her dignity; humanizes her; tells me about her, as it should (that is a compliment).  Your inventions -hag, smell, holy teeth, witch etc.- degrade her.

Dignify not degrade is what photography is all about and the photographer's opinion is irrelevant.  Allow people to see without prejudice what is in the photograph, not what you want them to see.

How many times have we been through this?

Her "function" in life is not as you say to chase bottles. She is trying to survive and working hard at it at that. כול הכבוד all the honor to her.

You are correct. You are not mistaken. Mistakes are inadvertent. 

That, Meir, is not a tenet of photography, or even good photography.

Where you got that, I' am not sure, but it is not something that is important to photography or even good photography.   It is a good way to photography with blinders.

Sorry Charlie, a 'slogan' does not cut it with me.

However good sounding.

Life is as life is, and if you chose to pick a nit with a word I have chosen and I give reasons, don't then choose further nits with my explanations from personal experience.

Nice troll, but this is the end of the discussion.

john

John (Crosley)

If you allow me John to get philosophical (I am doing it anyway), what I wrote above is not only a tenant of photography; it is a tenant of life itself. One’s art, thoughts, words and actions are a footprint on one’s character.

There is no one who disagrees including the following, and therefore you must have misunderstood me.

"Photography is to put in the same line of sight the head, the eye and the heart." -Henri Cartier-Bresson

"The whole corpus of our work becomes a portrait of ourselves."- Marilyn Silverstone

“What I like very much: they are always very respectful and humane portraits” -Tamarah Tamarah

If the beautiful were not in us, how would we ever recognize it?" -Yousuf Karsh

“…when we see another person, we see a mirror image of ourselves." -Zolton Buki Curator Trenton Museum

There is no beauty in a work of art (or photography) per se (if there was then a dog would marvel at Beethoven’s 5th or a Monet). The beauty lies in the emotions it evokes in us which is the same as saying if our photographs degrade we in fact degrade ourselves.

It should not be “end of discussion”; it is a worthy discussion.

The quotes you scurried to round up do not back up your proposition that the purpose of photography is to dignify the subject.

They are interesting quotes, and some are well known - others are not well known at all and seem to be rounded up (at least one) from these pages.

In any case, none stand for the proposition of yours I have rebutted. 

Let's just leave it at that.

Now please go use your energies to find peace in Gaza - don't stir up more trouble here, please.

John Crosley

It is of little moment, but the word is 'tenet', not 'tenant'.

John Crosley

Yes I should. I am not your counselor or therapist.

Meir, your last comment was a 'non sequitur' in that it appears not to apply to the colloquy.

I have asked you to 'give it a rest' and I mean it.  At the very least, your comment if not 'sclerotic' which I am sure you will argue it was not, was argumentative, off topic (even of many topics) and I took took it as rude to me. 

I am giving a polite warning

This is the end of this colloquy on this photo by you.

Period.

John Crosley

Photo.net member