'The Illegal'

America is not the only country with a problem with 'illegal

immigrants'. This man says he's also 'illegal' but does business in

a local market -- and because he is one of only a few hundred or

thousand in a city of over two million with black skin, he's easily

spotted, but somehow, despite their fears, the 'illegals' have a

thriving business here in Kyiv. 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 photographic knowledge to help improve my photography.

Thanks! Enjoy! John

So I am scrolling through some of your most recent pictures and this one is the one I had to look at really close. I had to figure out Hmmm what makes this one really special.

 

Truthfully I like it the most of the last bunch only because it is different AND because I have been watching the cool show 24 on DVD all in a row. I like the suspense of this photo. GUY on the run feel.

 

THEN I scrolled in closer thinking that guys hand is weird. It almost at first glanced look like a gun.

 

So it looks like YOU are chasing a guy with a gun. WHOO HOOO. LOL

 

Sorry, I got excited.

 

So I am also looking at the BAGS and itlooks like they are some kind of shoes or something but in my mind I am visualizing stolen stuff or maybe...

 

HA! WELL who knows.

 

But I think this is a wonderful picture full of drama.

 

Maybe not captured JUST as you wanted to. You KNOW how I feel about those feet not being chopped off but you were capturing him as he was on the "LAMB" as they say. (giggle)

 

I do like that you did still get that bit of the other people on the outside their and the bit of some sort of magazine stall.

 

Great motion picture. ~ micki

The raters don't share your (and my) enthusiasm for this photo, but I like it, and especially for the detail and the sidelight in the side/background.

 

I'm in love with side-lighting and this has it perfectly. Sidelighting helps make for great drama, and this is a 'drama' photo.

 

I started to pick up my camera and this guy fled, lickety-split.

 

Later, he and cohorts came around to me (and my friend) and peered over my shoulder as I was reviewing my takes. They were scared more than threatening but they wanted me to delete this capture. Fat chance. I delete nothing unless my life is threatened (then plan just to delete, and pull the CF card, and restore the photo later).

 

(see, I am a contingent planner . . . photos are not deleted just by pushing the 'delete' button -- it just destroys the file structure.).

 

And 'so what' about chopped off feet from a fleeing guy . . . this is one photo I can't take over. Plus the foot is in relative darkness -- that's one of those Photo.net types of critiques that one expects to get but hardly means anything in the world of such photos -- photos for exhibition maybe, but not a photo like this. (But I notice you were not really critiquing that - just noting that someone might make that as a critique. Good for you.)

 

This has ten ratings and yet has not broken a 4/4 on the ratings for one of my worst-rated photos ever. It will stay posted, however; I like it.

 

thanks for sharing your thoughts (ably as always)

 

John (Crosley)

 

(Sorry bout the pneumonia -- hope you're all well again. Pneumonia is a killer and best cared for with great care, unlike colds and flus.)

 

jc

I don't think people LOOK at pictures and appreciate them.

 

I am feeling better just still not A+

 

I think I have to wait till the silly "thick" storms of Florida Summer pass and I can get off the silly meds they have me on. I do hate the thick breathing I have. Arghhh

 

My trip to Texas put me back a spell but I am feeling much better ;)

Ratings hardly deter me if I decide a photo should be displayed.

 

They may determine which folder a certain photo ends up in, as that is not 'writ in stone' when I post. I like to see 'reaction' to a photo to determine whether it is well-received by viewers before I make a final decision about which folder will be resting place for a certain photo.

 

I have been surprised, however, as certain photos, despite very low ratings, get very high number of 'clicks' or 'views', and that cannot in those cases be because of any high placement on a Top Rated Photo page, because such photos are not 'top rated' -- so the answer is that people 'click' on them, which is contrary to the way things generally work on this service.

 

I once had a severe pneumonia and found that it was allergic-based -- that I had a cold (or Legionnaire's Disease) but when the coughing started and wouldn't go away and my lungs filled with fluid, I went finally to an allergist who scratch-tested me (the only way) and found that I was highly reactive to practically everything in my environment. I was treated for severe allergies and the pneumonia went away . . . . even though it left me weak for a long period.

 

The allergist told me that a virus (even a bacteria or a cold response) may 'turn on' certain allergies and make recovery vastly more complicated or even 'cause' a pneumonia where ordinary people would not get one.

 

Just a thought, from something that almost killed me, and I self-diagnosed. I told my personal physician 'what was wrong' (even though I had no known allergies), and the allergist saw my reaction to the scratch test for various allergens and he told me I as among the 1% of most sensitive people he had ever tested, and that was irritating my lungs -- something that a few inhaled steroids promptly got rid of.

 

;-)

 

John (Crosley)

NOPE! We had really really bad fires here in this part of Florida and that caused some really bad problems. New meds and crap ~ YUCH!! PLUS here in good old Florida these houses got LOTS of mold issues. PLUS the gold ol' immune is broken. Getting those B12 shots. YEP! So staying low and keeping those fingers crossed that I will get back to normal in another month. Today the heat index was 112. arghhh

 

So this picture is getting LOTS of HITS? GOOD!

 

Wish they would make a comment!!!!

 

I dare them!

 

NOW maybe THAT WILL WORK! HA! :)

When I practiced law, I noticed with clients 'of color' (e.g. 'black' clients), if I mentioned their color in relation to their legal case or claims, they quickly excused themselves -- color was a forbidden topic, even though it had a major effect on the results of cases. While upscale black women got above-average rewards for plaintiffs' cases -- the women on a caliber of Condaleeza Rice (without impeachable offenses), lower economic leve and social level blacks, (as said to me by judges who had practiced for 30 and more years) got less than the outstanding results, often based on what a hypothetical 'jury' would return, and jurors where i practiced uniformly were white and mostly retired or living in economic security where there salary was paid while they served on jury duty.

 

If I didn't mention their color, there was no reaction, though the case outcomes were the same.

 

It's as if 'color' were an 'offensive' word, though no one doubts there is discrimination in our society and as a (then) attorney, I saw it regularly and periodically, and had to factor in society's reactions to my black clients in order properly to evaluate them (however wrongful and unjust that may sound -- them's the facts and few attorneys would dispute that).

 

So, I am not sure low ratings on this photo are entirely due to whether or not it's a good or bad photo, but maybe because of how it portrays a black man, and his color is mentioned in the request for critique (but he's definitely NOT in the US).

 

Funny, how some things work, isn't it?

 

Also, as a street photographer, I have enormous difficulty taking candid photos of black people who somehow just assume I'm up to 'no good' even though I take photos of just about everybody. The black objects of my lenses almost uniformly take offense -- like I'm stealing from them, even though few others take similar offense.

 

It's just a current fact of life (in the US), and another heritage from centuries of slavery, followed by Jim Crow laws which, as the Bill of Rights, Amendment XIV states was effectively a 'badge and incident' of slavery.

 

Elliott Erwitt in the '50s made a very wonderful photograph of two drinking fountains -- one a water cooler with a spigot and the other a plain spigot with the sign 'color only' abovce it. We're still paying for those who did such things to citizens.

 

Shame on our forebears who did such things.

 

(not in my family, however, I can proudly say -- our house was filled with visitors of every color and every social milieu, and derogatory statement sabout anyone based on category (such as race, religion, creed, etc.) were stricly forbidden.)

 

Best to you, but don't look for too many comments, Micki.

 

John (Crosley)

I, for one, appreciate it when a photographer takes the time to tell the story behind a photo, assuming there is one. However, it seems many raters only judge a photo on technical merit and I suppose it is easy to argue that this should be the approach. There are so many "this is one photo I can't take over" photos that fall by the wayside here because they have a technical flaw or two. To those raters, I suggest they get their butts out of their studios where they can control every step of the process and try something like this where human drama is etched in every pixel.

Bravo!!!

 

John (Crosley)

could not find a decent photograph even if a Life magazine was shove in front of their face 24/7 or they are pure a$$ jealous.....Tones, and detail are right on. The "illegal's" motion just adds to you documentary....

Is he selling small TV's?

[omitting remark about possible typo - ed.]

 

I agree, that many people cannot find a good photograph if it is shoved in their faces, but then many raters looked at this and it failed their test -- so that is honesty on their part, and I respect that.

 

And, what you imply is a 'small TV' which might be seen in his upraised right hand, of course is the background, with daylight at the end of a long, enclosed area, maybe under a roadway, for all I know.

 

Thanks for attention to detail in the posting; things like saturation, etc., are 'lesser' things to me in posting here, but I do make an effort.

 

And, I was drawn to this photo, which also looks pretty good in color, by the way, as it is pervaded by blues.

 

It's that sidelighting, which I remarked on above.

 

It does wonders.

 

If I had to film something in daylight hours and couldn't use 'movie' or 'cinema' tricks (which I can't), I'd just head under the nearest overpass or overhead roadway and film there, in diffuse sidelighting.

 

(See, also the man lying on stairs at the entrance to a underground walkway/kiosk area/metropolitan sales complex/and Metro (as in actual subterranean train, for a good instance of some great sidelighting).

 

And Dennis, I am always thankful for your comments; I have never seen any that is less than excellent.

 

John (Crosley)

and it is corrected...Sure looks like he is holding a tiny TV...

Like I've said about your work, your 3/3 work has more guts than any of my 7/7's... I truely mean that.

(BTW, that mess on Ms. Churchill's feather photo was sad. I appreciate the way you handled it. I'm friends with her and most of the folks that made comments. Thanks again)

In a sense, I wish for universal acclaim -- I would like to be regarded as 'the best photographer in the world' in any genre in which I choose to post.

 

But I am not the best photographer and unwilling to do the things which might earn me that acclaim if I had the power and the skill (which I don't).

 

Regrettably, I am not the best photographer in the world or even more than a beginning journeyman at certain sorts of photos.

 

But I'm gutsy.

 

I'll post anything that I find interesting.

 

That comes from a certain disregard for ratings.

 

Ratings matter to me for some reasons; they determine in what folder a photo may end up in. I have certain popular and less popular folders, and my best (and most view worthy) work ends up in my 'black and white' and 'color' folders at the top of my portfolio - if it fits into the genres of those folders.

 

I have separated out face shots and portraits, which once were featured on the 'color' portfolio and made them into a separate portfolio and some of my other 'best work' is found in themed folders -- one of the Eiffel Tower for instance, and two or three photos from my 'day in San Francisco' where I shot some film one day with my F5, when I was out of flash cards, and got some pretty wonderful shots, and close to 1/2 million views now for that afternoon.

 

I use the critique process for weaning out the ones viewers will look at, versus the ones I want to look at, then separate them into folders -- often at a later time.

 

Some shots I absolutely am in love with will go directly to one of those folders, while others go to one or two temporary folders, just to 'see'.

 

So, ratings do mean something, but also so do critiques, and some of my 'worst rated' photos have ended up being highest on the critique list and not because they're bad -- but because they're interesting or break the Photo.net fishbowl glass a little.

 

You have exaggerated the importance of my work; soon you'll be comparing me to Jesus, Picasso, and others . . . (reference to the 'critique' that sunk me on your friend's photo by overpraising me so that nothing I could do or say looked reasonable or sensible.

 

I'm just a guy.

 

I take photos.

 

I love doing it.

 

I am preoccupied with trying to 'improve'.

 

I am attracted to Henri Cartier-Bresson's sense that it's not 'what you take' but 'how you take it' and what you 'find' not what you 'make' in a studio.

 

I'm about he exact opposite of Karsh of Ottawa who made wonderfully 'dark' and moody portraits all his life, which just oozed with character, but he was constrained by his own studio and printing. In some ways, all his portraits 'looked alike' -- while his proponents would say 'of course, that's the Karsh of Ottawa look' and of course the proponents are right.

 

I've been looking through Magnum.com's collection of Cartier-Bresson photos, (their web site has a whole new look, and it's no longer possible to view 'all his work, frame by frame -- or at least as much as they chose to show, so far as I can tell. One used to be able to go to that site, and examine The Master's work, piece by piece, photo by photo and separate out the good from the bad, but I can't figure out how to do that now, and perhaps it has something to do with his death and the Fondation Cartier-Bresson's ownership of his images -- I've been there, but disappointingly there were few of his images in his own 'atelier' -- just images of others.)

 

Cartier-Bresson took very few photos that even looked like one another, but they all had a distinctive 'feel' and 'look' to them. One could see that the cantankerous old guy had a genuine sense of humor, and whether he could express itself other than through his photos is something I don't know. His sense of design and catching morphing designs around him is legendary.

 

The one thing I have learned from his images is be 'true to the image' -- do your best to portray your subject with design and make it interesting.

 

One thing he did to create 'interest' was almost never taking the same photo twice. There were themes of course, such as 'people lying on the ground or grass' which I think gave him an easier time, since focusing with an old Leica was pretty hard, as was framing photos too. (You can see his camera(s) in his old photographs of himself, which are now appearing.)

 

I didn't set out to emulate or otherwise lionize Cartier-Bresson when I started photography -- but there was some resemblance between some of my work and his -- and I DO have my men lying on grass photo -- one that got only about four rates and they were in the 4s or below, too, but not one I'd take down for anything.

 

Dennis, you take a pretty mean photograph, and I'm not just returning a compliment. I looked at a flower photo of yours the other day, with a drop of (dew?) coming from the flower, and thought it was just about as good a flower shot as I've ever seen. I supposed it to be a sunflower because of size and color, but didn't find a clue otherwise (or missed one in my admiration of the photo).

 

So, the truth is, you have mastered the genres which you have set for yourself. Ansel himself, if he were photographing with a smaller camera, would envy some of your landscapes, say of a certain national park, and your macro work is just stunning.

 

And you can quote me on that.

 

John (Crosley)

and no, I know better to compare any to those folks you mentioned... Different, day, different time and certainly not Jesus... not stupid enough or foolish enough to go down that road.

As for the Sunflower.... We were working on our theme that week of "Drops". First sunflower I'd ever grown and decided to take a drop of sunflower oil to see what happened...

I won't be praying to you, or any other deity, although my heart skips a beat every time I start viewing Henri Cartier-Bresson's photos and I want to pick up my camera, race out and see if I can take something 'interesting' -- that's my driving force. I get a racing heart and I'd start to perspire if it weren't air conditioned in my quarters. Everything he turned to photographically, it seemed, turned to photographic 'gold'.

 

I wish I had that photographic Midas touch; however heathen that may sound (remember, Midas was a king who believed in alchemy, which decidedly was irreligious or anti-religious -- in effect dealing with the devil.)

 

I have decided that if some Faustian devil were to approach me to tempt my soul, about the only way he would have entree would not be to promise young beautiful women (I'm in Ukraine, remember . . . . ), but to promise me that I'd be able to take photos like Cartier-Bresson during my lifetime.

 

Then I'd have to struggle to find out whether I really had control over my soul.

 

In the meantime, I'll still try to be 'gutsy' in my postings.

 

Imagine that this photo barely struggled to a 4/4 rating and only after GungaJim Downs posted a high rating, but it already has 12 comments (half of them are mine, of course).

 

I took some amazing photos today, and they'll show up sooner or later . . . .

 

(I'll bet, however that even if you aren't a deity, you'd still take 'offerings' . . . I know I would . . . . ;~) )

 

John (Crosley)