alt.street The Little Piggies . . . (and Other Scenes)

Submitted under nudes for those who filter, this is a true

documentary/journalism/street shot of the Las Vegas Adult Expo in

January. Note the tongue of the woman, right, and the the female

breasts on the shirt of the man passing by.

 

Your ratings and critiques are invited and most welcome. Color

correction was not attempted because 'garish (red light district)

red' was deemed most appropriate for the circumstances. If you rate

harshly or very critically, please submit a helpful and constructive

comment; please share your superior photographic knowledge to help

improve my photography. Thanks! (Be Edified if you cannot enjoy!)

John (And please rate the photographic skill in bringing you this as

a photo and a composition and not make this a plebiscite on the

subject matter of pornography -- I would appreciate that. JC ;-))

Your cautionary word almost says " give only good ratings, because I had a purpose anyway, and you don't know anything anyway ! ".

But I'll give it an honest try : the poster "Ten little piggies" is obviously the central part of the photo ( it takes almost 50 % of the space and is the title of the photo, so I guess it's an indication ). Then you feel you had to draw our attention to the only other elements in the photo :

a. the guy walking by with his shirt... he obviously is in a rush and has his eyes shut. Now framed otherwise with just this guy and the way he passes ignoring the poster could make an interesting / funny statement : so much is on display in these shows that most things are ignored. By the way, his shirt is really not that exciting... I've seen that way back in 1976 worn by a punk girl.

b. the girl in the front " with her tongue " is fairly uninteresting. You can't see what she's looking at, she has clearly no connection with the photo main subject and as far as her tongue is concerned, it doesn't look like she's licking her lips in eager / lustfull anticipation of something, but rather mechanically humidifying her lips. Her stare is more distracted than focused or interested.

So the picture is rather confusing and uninteresting.

Did I mention the distracting plastic cup in the bottom left corner? IMHO

I'll put you down as a negative responder.

 

I found it interesting, though certainly far from my best work.

 

It is the combination of all these things and their exact relationship that I found interesting . . . maybe others did or not.

 

John (Crosley)

so a negative response qualifies me as a " negative responder " ???? For failing to see the connection and hidden story I'd rather have you call me stupid or blind than negative. Hopefully other people will have more insight than me. I just tried to explain what I failed to see. To me you have much more interesting work in your portfolio... like the b&w "Adult enters the mainstream" or " Loneliness ( with hope ) " or " Aliens Among Us " or " Lent with Mother Child and Priest " or ... the list goes on. I really think this photo does not do you justice. But then again, what do I know ?

Now I'll put you down as a positive responder.

 

You yourself described your prior response as 'negative' and instead of picking at it, I accepted it. I did not attempt to derogate it, but simply to state my point of view. It ia agreed that this is a 'lesser work' but it may be interesting to some as well.

 

I did want it to be shown, if only because it is interesting; it is not meant to be a great photograph.

 

I am greatly pleased that the other photographs you mentioned represent some of those I consider some of my 'great' photographs -- some of the many that show my skills off well.

 

I have a sense of the absurd, which is why I posted this; for others who have a similar sense to see this; by no means did I expect others to see 'genius' in this, but instead to see an 'absurd' scene.

 

If the woman is 'hydrating' her lips, she is in a sexual situation and it can be seen that she is looking 'sexual' and that is somewhat ambiguous (especially if she's 'showing off' for a photo or photographer with her tongue as others were doing -- we don't know.

 

One can take photographs of 'scenes' but this is a highly unusual 'scene' -- as unlikely a scene as one is to confront, I think, and just for that, I wanted to post that.

 

Plus it has 'threes' from the woman in the poster on her back (wearing a bikini bottom, it seems (though this is posted as a 'nude' just to help the Administration), the man with female breasts, which I had not seen before, and the curled tongue -- a sort of axis of evil, to use Bushian trialectic. (excuse the expression, if you will . . . also for coining a new word.)

 

You chose your examples well, and I hold your choices to my heart.

 

Your second response, I'll put down as highly postive.

 

John (Crosley)

 

;~)

 

 

the attempt at explanation is more distracting to me than anything in the photo per se. As a documentary piece, I think its solid, although more of a random snapshot than anything artistic or memorable.

 

Reference to why you put it in nudes I find a bit confusing. The obvious reason would be the poster. The breast shirt is comical, but a hair hard to "read." The woman's tounge drove me nuts (no pun intended) mostly because I couldn't tell why it would earn it a place in "nudes." Originally, I thought maybe she had some sort of erotic stud or vibrator on her tounge, but it looks like she's just licking her lips absent-mindedly. . .

 

To me, the "interesting" bit of the image is the almost complete complacent distraction of the people in contrast to the attempt of the poster girl to engage them in gleeful eroticism. The numbing impact of advertising and commercialization, etc.

 

I do agree that some of your other photos have more dynamism and journalistic impact. The red lighting idea works, but its not overt.

 

Have to admit, I didn't see the cup until it was mentioned and I had to look close.

 

B.S.

John-- I have no quarrel with a photographer, especially in a critique forum, explaining and discussing elements of his photos, whether they be related to symbolism, theme, structure, emotion, whatever. I would, however, question actually pointing out visible details in the photo in advance as you have done. (Explaining them if they are commented on is one thing or even pointing them out if missed by a particular viewer seems a more effective approach.) A good photo, which this is,--if not great as seems to be agreed upon by all--should reveal itself--certainly its own physical details--and shouldn't need the photographer beginning by pointing out what he has already captured visually. It would be one thing to point us in the direction of some kind of emotion or expression verbally (say, with a title or a short accompanying statement), but it's another matter to appear to underestimate one's audience and/or one's own skill as a photographer by listing those things present in the photograph. That being said, I think it's a very good documentary or street photograph. I also like it. For starters, it's a compelling image. It also captures motion effectively. There is irony in the eye-catching poster seemingly being ignored by the passersby and bystander. The abounding red colors and lighting ties it together (although I might quibble with the strong reddish shadow on the woman's face up front). I agree with your thoughts about the tongue and, sexual or not, it seems suitable and shows how context in a photo or in life for that matter can provide a quality to a gesture that may not have been intended by the one making the gesture and may not be read the same way if set in a different environment or surrounding. If nothing else, stimulating such a discussion about the tongue and context in general could be reward enough for having posted an intriguing photo. Kudos. --Fred