Spot the Boy

These spots on the wall, and the lightness of the boy's round head

provide an unusual juxtaposition in this photo, taken in a poor

neighborhood in Los Angeles recently. 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

I must say that the head is very well positioned against the dot. His posture is intriguing and seems to be saying "Waht's up"? I imagine him being next to a gigantic dalmatian.

Although at LAX (Los Angeles International Airport) there is a fleet of buses with black spots against yellow (that's yellow) background, this is not the home of those buses or that parking business. It's just a neighborhood business in LA's South Central area, and this boy just happens with the nape of his neck to fill out the roundness of one the circles of one of the dots - (well it's off by just a fraction, but I didn't embellish it at all in Photoshop or other image editing program).

 

This also shows very well in color, but the boy's face is very, very yellow since it was near sunset on that particular day, and it appears a little unnaturally yellow, and if one hits 'auto adjust contrast' or 'auto adjust color' in Photoshop the face adjust to flesh color (though in the capture it is very yellow from the setting sun) and it comes out as though it were not sunset, so the boy's face turns a different shade than the yellow of the background, which is NOT the point of the color photo at all.

 

But deep yellow is a little unnatural for flesh tones in any case, so I challenged in my mind its verisimilitude and whether others would see it as being 'faked' although the original capture is a little more 'true' than this.

 

But at the same time, this makes a pretty good B&W photo to me, at least for 'street' genre, and Adan W. you did get the point -- nape of neck completes (in contrasting tones) the spots circle -- even as to roundness.

,

This is about one-third of a frame or one-half, so it is a crop, and completely something that could not ordinarily have been anticipated, so I am not unhappy with this being cropped, no matter how rare a crop is for me.

 

After all, it's taken with a 12.3 megapixel camera, and some of my very wonderful photos (think laughing guy in Thailand against a similar guy in a Coke poster, head also tossed back) were taken with a D70 Nikon, with 6.2 megapixels, so a image quality crop from a 12.3 megapixel camera is not that bad comparatively.

 

In fact, high crop image quality is a major reason for buying a camera with higher megapixels if you use superb optics on it, in which case the resolution will withstand the breakdown of the frame into pieces.

 

Now, I frame in the camera, but the whole photo had a 'Western Union' advertisement in one corner, hence the yellow and black colors, and the whole scene just did not hold together.

 

So when this boy took off for a corner of the frame, I did not have time to adjust my zoom to zero in on him as I might have done (I was shooting across my auto's front seat, through the open passenger window, across traffic, from parked wrong way on a two-way street, across the street. That's sometimes but only occasionally, how I may position myself for a photo oppotunity I see that may occur if there's just no other way and traffic is extremely light.

 

And sometimes I'm actually right to do so, photographically at least.

 

And occasionally, I'm really right and get a 'precious' photo (think 'SCREAM!!! with the little boy at the video store looking around the store corner to his pal with a 'scream' mask on the day before Halloween).

 

I take a lot of failures, or as I like to think of them, as the necessary stepping stones to success.

 

Now sometimes I may get success just stepping outside my door, or it may take several hundred frames, but ultimtely my instincts take over and events bear out my view that the world is both symbiotic and a little absurd, and there, in black and white or color, is a photo of something that is both absurd and harmonic at the same time.

 

And voila.

 

This is a minor photo, but I'm happy to have taken it.

 

I may some day post process it some more, darkening again the upper body (as in the original -- here it is lightened, maybe too much.)

 

This photo has greater possibilites than shown here if edited just soooo.

 

Trust me.

 

I just didn't have what it took the day I edited it.

 

Some day, I may have the time and the ability to do it just so.

 

Best to you in rainy S.F. (look out the storm door is open!!!)

 

John (Crosley)

Nice one. Another interesting background well utilized to set off the boys head. The alignment of the smaller dot against his back, at first glance, gives the appearance of a rather large backside, with the dot becoming part of the boy.This illusion adds a bit of humour to the shot.

... really is you, John. You spot, you prepare, you wait and then ... timing is all ... click. I played with the image a minute to make it look like the boy was walking into the shot; decided I liked the original better. Somehow more insouciant. Think that relates to Adan's posture comment. Well done!

This is a rare Crosley crop -- 1/2 to 2/3 of a frame where I saw the most unlikely juxtaposition -- the continuation of the circle in reverse at the nape of the boy's neck, off just a little, which I didn't fix in Photoshop or other image editing program (notice how I have taken to taking away the exclusive franchise of Photoshop and lumping it together with other 'image editing programs' because they 'own the field' pretty much, but shouldn't, though they are good, very good.

 

I will be writing you a letter one of these days when rested, perhaps a very long letter, suggesting that you set your sites on gallery sales rather than publishing and if publishing comes your way, all the better, but gallery sales are more remunerative (publishers never make any money on photo books, I hear tell; they'r emore for the prestige and of course the artist never makes more than the advance -- no residuals ever. . . . is a commonly heard complaint, so it's prestige to be published if you want it on your resume, but it you want more prestige, get in to a gallery.

 

I will try to share the entree (lateral if you can get it) on what I've learned in the past several weeks, though I have not approached any galleries, and none has seen my work, but I have a wealth of info that should be and remain proprietary (I'm currently residing with our friend when in the US, but do not pass it around, please -- we get along absolutely famously; your friend was right, he is changing my life, just by his presence, whether or not he gets me into galleries (publishing it not a goal unless a gallery owner directs that).

 

So, when I feel articulate and have had a full night's sleep and if you indicate receptivity, than I'll try to share some of the lessons I've learned, since yhour work, I judge also to be gallery worthy, and I'll direct you to the only extant list of every American (and many foreign) list of substantial photo galleries (and also another with many 'art' galleries, which might also take a chance on work such as you produce.

 

Although if I were approaching them with architecture, i would have wanted to be using a larger format camera than 35mm equivalent, and I suppose you are using 35mm equivalent or DX type, but I cannot say I've checked recently, so that is just a guess.

 

(I always try to say when I reach the limits of my knowlege -- a leftover from my days with Associated Press -- I never had a retraction, or also with a business magazine I worked for, as an editor/writer for a year).

 

I always had notes to back up every word I wrote.

 

What I write you will be distilled, so you must take it with a grain of salt, plus it won't be 'tried and true' but it will be something frankly that I'd rely on (and am).

 

The first major step will be to go through ALL the photo galleries and art galleries and see how many are peddling junk (they seldfom name their prices -- they want you on the phone so they can feel you out and sell you, if you're a live one.)

 

And it's all about closing the deal, but there are different standards, and some galleries just make their work available (and 'art' galleries also make financing available it is well documented), something we have not discussed, but for photography, that is something outside my source's ken.

 

I can tell you about limited editions, photo numbering, etc., all of which is known and sometimes variable and may be very interesting to you, since it's an insider's view.

 

And of course, I will freely share it with you, proudly with a tip of the Hatlo hat, for pointing me in the right direction, and just for thinking of me in a charitable way (and changing my life, I hope -- well, really, already, no matter what the outcome.)

 

A 'Crosley' or not a 'Crosley' I made up my 'street style -- synethesized it after I reealzied I was zooming too much and just pulled back and see how prolific my 'street' work has been in the past year and a half or so, and even in the past six to nine months -- I've posted 60 to 70 'winners' in my view since my last one that kind of 'sucked' and I'd wished I hadn't posted it ('cross in front of Notre Dame'), preceded by a number of pretty good ones and some not so good ones.

 

I'm finally getting a handle on what it is that's the 'street' style, but I shoot other styles too (see the sea gull plucking flesh from the dead sea lion, for instance. I spared the audience the plucking the eyeball from the socket photos, they no longer bother me after seeing vultures in India pick a sacred cow/buffalo clean, in time lapse, but for others it may have been a bit much.

 

it may be a few dahys or a week or so, andif it doesn't come, just remind me, and I'll be sure you get it. We go, I think, to two gallery openings this week, so that will be interesting for me; mostly it's being done for my benefit I think, though it's not being said, as I long ago was told that gallery openings are skipped as 'old hat' and 'not worth the trouble.'

 

And at my age, I have to go in laterally, or wait until I'm 90 and suffering from Alzheimer's, and can't find the cap to the toothpaste or even the door to the bathroom (or the toilet, or even know what those things are ;~)

 

But I plan to be around a good long time; I ain't skipping town now that things are getting good.

 

In my wildest imagination, I never, not ever thought I would be in this position, even a year or two ago.

 

Not ever.

 

I had pretensions when I was in my '20s, early, but saw Cartier-Bresson's work touring and got so humble I put down my cameras. It may or may not have been a mistake, but I sure am making up for lost time.

 

It has been an astonishing revelation to follow his advice and review what galleries, even top galleries are offering, and I have the slight advantage of having some work for each of five decades, which is highly valued (a little cheaty, but really, parts of five decades, truly from the '60s to this decade, and soon another decade -- six decades, and right now shooting my strongest ever.

 

If only I could shooot at 25 as prolifically as I can shoot now, and had the ability to see that I have now; I could see very well then -- exceptionally well then, but on a very limited scale. I needed more exposure, and that just wasn't available at that time except through being schooled in photographhy or immersing oneself in it full time for decades (and photographers with bad backs have their careers end -- a photographer friend of mine got hit on the head with a thrown brick at a riot and had career-ending double vision, and that was all she wrote for his photography forever.

 

May you live in interesting times is the old saying.

 

I like to think I can take any old time and now see and portray it as interesting.

 

Even just a walk down the sidewalk or a drive down a city street.

 

The above is just an example.

 

And my girlfriend (whom you don't and won't know) is very patient and delights in my abilities to transform the little magic box called a camera into such delightful photos.

 

Now if I cojuld just make some money to feed myself, so I can take more photos. . . . .

 

Best wishes.

 

Thanks for dropping by and putting some very flattering effort into this.

 

(and I presume that 'gallery' would prevail over 'book' if you found that placed your name on the map as a photographer worth 'colllecting', as it very well might.)

 

It might not have been the direction you were pointing, but then neither was it for me, either, but I learn lessons well, if somewhat slowly.

 

John (Crosley)

You know, I 'selected' this boy, for a little selective lightening, then reversed my decision, as I wanted him to remain dark, and even though I noticed the spot, I completely didn't pay attention to its overall effect. I can be so myopic about my own captures sometimes.

 

What a stupid guy I can be sometimes about such obvioius things.

 

A little cloning and it might have been actually a little better; here it looks like he has a little 'junk in his trunk', to coin a neighborhood phrase from the area where he lives, if you get my drift.

 

And it's funny a little, but I might have permitted myself some cloning too, since I was interested in messing with this particular shot to make it a little better. These large black dots had flecks of white where the paint didn't completely cover, and when I slightly enhanced contrast and then sharpened it looked terrible with blacks flecked with white in those round dots, so out came the healing brush. This is NOT unmanipulated (manipuilated minimally), and if says it unmanipulated, I'll change it to tell the truth, and it is NOT full frame.

 

I believe in truth in posting.

 

I like your observation; you see so clearly what I, the photographer, could not see, though I was using the 'magnetic selection tool', right over that dot and his rear end. . . . What an ignoramus I feel after reading your comment.

 

Oh, well, I did take a reasonably good photo, no matter how many points about it I missed.

 

Best to yuo and thanks for commenting.

 

(this one was slow to catch on, for some reason. I really liked it, but it just got passed over the first day - maybe the holidays.)

 

John (Crosley)

'junk in his trunk' I'm still laughing 5 minutes after first reading that. What a marvellous turn of phrase !

... it is always great to hear from you and to see the progress that you are making. This shot is such a wonderful pattern-shot, with the kid moving through. It is interesting that in the version where he walks in from right to left that I mocked up, there is more tension in the shot, perhaps because of our natural left to right reading orientation. I remember my teachers in school talking about that effect in theater. But the real casualness of his motion works better left to right. I like this one quite a bit.

that's been used by a certain Los Angeles-based radio show host who targets the 18-23 male audience as a term of derision for greattly overweight and even slightly overweight females.

 

'Junk in the trunk' is his standard term for referring to less than slender lasses, and it is a term that somehow just 'slipped out' when I started to refer to this hapless fellow.

 

It is a term I haven't heard referred to anyone for over two years, because I have been out of the range of direct broadcast and syndication of that radio host -- his name is Tom Leykis of blowmeuptom.com -- a real mysogynist, who actually has views of women who 'use' men that are endorsed by many women callers -- and his views on female sexuality also are endorsed by many female callers.

 

Leykis has genuine insight into female sexuality and the female role in female-male relationships among the unmarried AND married, even if he is more than a mysogynist. So, when I could, I listened to him, without adopting his philosophy; in fact, I'm just the opposite - in some cases, I am the man who loves women (but only the right one(s)).

 

He teaches his youthful male radio audience about all the scams women play on men and the various tricks they use to control young men to get their way, and the male way to counter those tricks and devices - after all, all's fair and knowledge is power.

 

He figures females often know this stuff instinctively, but males have their brains in their shorts and often can't see any farther than the ends of their noses, so they need help.

 

I don't even endorse what Leykis teaches, but at the same time his insights have helped me greatly understand the opposite sex, so that young women and older women now see me as somewhat of an 'old soul' who understands them thoroughly and they unburden themmselves to me most thoroughly when they model for me; there's almost nothing they won't tell me or discuss with me for the most part, and it's enormously interesting. This never would have happened if I hadn't listened to the Leykis show initially, then developed the ability to speak with women about such things. It helps relax the models too and build trust with them. They don't see me then as a predatory male either as many models see men, since I am then known to 'understand' them and 'speak their language'.

 

If I knew as a young man what I now know, I'd have lead an entirely different life, you can bet your booty.

 

It's been quite a revelation to me, and I owe Mr. Leykis quite an acknowledgement for getting me started on my quest for knowledge in that area -- for starting me off on the right path -0- one has to be a bit mysogynist to begin tryly to understand some of the odd business that motivates many women and their behavior(s), I have learned, and now they talk to me about that.

 

And so now, those behaviors seem more normal to me, and little surprises me any more.

 

And my knowledge from that has helped me have a wonderful relationhship with a good and stable (and very beautiful) girlfriend -- a lovely young woman with a kind soul who you'd be surprised keeps company with me, but who is deeply in love with me -- and I must say it appears to be reciprocated from me, also, although there is a huge age difference, which makes things a little improbable, but it endures despite all odds, which surprises even me.

 

Mark me astonished.

 

I won't write my birthdate, but my college graduation was blocked by the student riots at Columbia when the students took over Columbia University, led by Mark Rudd (I had been previously shot and was hobbling around with a cane, crippled by a man headed with a gun toward race riots in Washington, D.C., following the Martin Luther Kind assassination, who shot another white man, and me with the same bullet.

 

They caught and later imprisoned the bad guy, and as they released me from the hospital in that N.J. city to the police station, with me all crippled in the only available squad car, a riot of blacks was forming in downtown Trenton, and my lone cop driver and I drove right through the riot.

 

Two were killed that night, and at the end of the evening, only one cop, and the dispatcher were left in the police station to protect it and me, and the black rioters broke in, armed with hatchets, axe handles, etc., and started up the second=-story stairs after me, and were held off only by the lone officer staring them down with a drawn 16-gauge shotgun, standing next to me.

 

Whew.

 

I had no film for my camera.

 

Shot, then in race riots, then in a police station break-in by rioters with a shotgun standoff.

 

And no film in my camera.

 

I was going to buy some the next day.

 

I learned a valuable lesson.

 

That's a major reason why now that I take photographs very actively, I am never without cameras loaded with compact flash cards.

 

Eddie Adams, who took the Pulitzer shot of the police chief of Saigon blowing the brains out of a Viet Cong prisoner, was near the World Trade Center on 9-11 with his cameras.

 

He had the second chance of a lifetikme to take world historical photos.

 

He had no film for his cameras.

 

He lost his chance that day, to take fabulously memorable photos and to rid the scourge he felt that resulted from that great photo's fame having hounded him throughout his professional life (he was identified only with that famous photo - the brains blown out photo -- so much he hated it and banned it from his photography studio/gallery)

 

He died soon afterward, having lost his second chance at photograph immortality.

 

If my chance for that once in a liftime shot comes, I'm gonna be prepared.

 

I learn from the lessons of others.

 

Best to you.

 

Junk in the trunk, just made sense.

 

John (Crosley)

John, I think that a book about your life would be just as fascinating as one about your photography. You "live" your life. So many of us go through it with such mechanical predictability. It was a rough day in Burlingame (not too far from San Francisco). The storm arrived early in the morning with powerful force knocking down branches and flooding streets. Emergency personnel had a busy day with their sirens constantly howling. My place lost power for most of the day. Thankfully all is back to normal now.

John;

 

I appreciate that marvellous explanation and response, I enjoyed all of it enormously and the lesson contained within, is well taken. Thanks

Discursive writing can irritate some. It is fun for me to wander a little, then return to the point, but only if my writing is 'interesting'. I am glad you find it interesting.

 

John (Crosley)

Some people are just plain easily irritated, I'm not one of them. "Interesting" was actually an understatement. When I go through your photos, often the correspondences can be nearly as instructive as the photographs.

If the 'comments' were not 'interesting' they would have no place there. Many people have remarked that they like to read them, even some of the stars of Photo.net have shown a familiarity with the contents of these comments -- I won't name them, as they seldom or don't comment, and the point is not to self-aggrandize.

 

I said in 'comments' under my portfolio early on when asked what kind of photos I take, that I take many genres (though my first love is 'street') but that most of all I hope I take 'interesting photographs', for to take boring photos is a sin of the highest order, in my book.

 

The same applies for the comments.

 

If they're boring (at least for those who otherwise would 'get them') they have no place here. (some will never 'get them' and just be irritated, of course -- too bad for them.)

 

I have lots of fun writing them, and I type 60 or more words per minute, so I don't labor as hard on them as you might imagine.

 

And early on I was an admirer of John dos Passos, who wrote stream of consciousness -- I just write what flows in to my head, and edit if it gets too discursive or doesn't seem to make sense.

 

I allow myself lots of leeway, and try to tie it up at the end.

 

I am happy for your feedback; good feedback (or even bad feedback) is always welcome (well, the bad feedback at least is instructive).

 

John (Crosley)

This one made me smile. I love the geometry.

Glad to see you once again lurking around.

 

However, this one IS a crop.

 

I'm not THAT fast or quick-witted.

 

I had to 'see' this in the captures.

 

But it came out pretty good, hunh?

 

John (Crosley)