Two Women, Each in Her Own World

A little youthful flash, an adult seeking cash and unhappily so, it

appears in the latter case; this is why I often live in Ukraine --

such sights are common if one knows how to 'see' them. (You might

pass such a sight by, however, and not 'see' it if you are

not 'sensitive' to it). 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

This photo stands at a 3.5 average after four rates -- no problem; it's hard for some to understand, but it's a great photo in my personal opinion; and it'll stay posted, no matter what the rates.

 

I stand behind what I post.

 

Just the woman's expression below, alone is worth the posting.

 

John (Crosley)

 

Copyright Notice: This image is Copyright 2008, All Rights Reserved John Crosley

It seems that you had to choose between, the apparently happy, woman and the, apparently sad, woman... It is a question of heads! So, if you cut the head of the stylish lady, you get the whole desolated woman. But, in that approach, which is the aesthetical impact of the image? And, in that scene, what can we say about a woman with gorgeous legs but without head? So, finding the equilibrium, you chose the two heads but in that approach you loose the charismatic, strong, meaningful, pose of the prostrated woman. And the stylish lady wins!!! Curious!!! Your photo is also about a dilemma, your dilemma and the society dilemma, it is a good photo, not really in the aesthetical aspect, but in the human and sociologic content. And there is some irony in all the scene! Best regards.

What elevates this photo to a greater plane to my way of thinking, is the expression on the older woman's face, and she's only a few years, (really) older than the teenage model featured on the stocking advertisement above her, settled into a slide into old age that begins when a woman begins to have to fend for herself in a harsh, cruel world in Ukraine, and especially when she has children, and child-rearing and bearing begins at about 20, or 21 maximum for most women -- it's expected.

 

So, you overlook the aesthetics, not of composition, with classical composition, but of the aesthetics of the emotions and the looks and the contrast, which in my mind are very strong and justify my placing this with my very best work -- and to my mind it is a standout.

 

It is very hard sometimes to understand why such works can be standouts, but they are; and therein lies the true dilemma. Few understand them, and it takes more than a Photo.net audience, I think to realize their full potential, because they are not 'ordinarily' composed.

 

But if one looks at classically good shots, one finds a certain category in which the shot is made by the strength of a special, strong and emotive look by just one person, placed in a whole which makes sense, here as you have explained it.

 

And, thus, to my mind, the 'aesthetics' of this photo are not wanting at all -- they are more than justified -- they are exemplified, but not in the usual manner by 'classical composition'.

 

That may be hard for you to see or envision. But I see it, and maybe others 'see' it; it is hard to see and no one can be faulted for not sharing my vision of my own photo.

 

And perhaps I'm just full of hot air.

 

Sometimes I am.

 

But this photo touches me, deeply, due to the expression. I've been searching for it in my hard drives and worked up postable captures 2,400 of them, for weeks, hoping to find it, and now that I have, voila.

 

I hope you'll come back in a year or so and see if your tastes have changed after you have viewed hundreds of thousands of photos on Photo.net and preferably also elsewhere.

 

Thanks for a competent analysis, even if I am picking a hole in it. It is a good, even excellent essay.

 

John (Crosley)

 

 

My good friend John Crosley... I know your work from long time, years I must say. I see all your images and I read all your comments. When you write "...this photo touches me, deeply, due to the expression" I understand it perfectly. It is a question of coherence concerning your key ideas about life. Perhaps it is a bit strange for you, after my comment, but I also noticed the anguish in the woman's face and I also find the "value" of that photo in that "detail". But it is true; when I see photos I look for the marriage between charisma, expression, ability to produce feelings in the viewer soul, and the aesthetic one. For me photos must talk, they must speak, in an aesthetic way. They can speak about the beauty in some mountains but also they can speak about the pain that crucifies too many women and men in our world. They can speak about everything but in an aesthetic manner. I love emotions but I also love the aesthetic. You must also consider another detail concerning what I write: my language is not English! Many people in this site have a great difficulty to express themselves. I am one of those people. It is not easy! But we can always consider write something like "excellent" or "not bad" or "I like" or "great shot" or "nice pic". This is my way of explaining to you that perhaps, I repeat, perhaps, there is some incoherence in my comments. But it has an honour point: nothing of what I write aims to offend! Best regards.

I never took any offense at what you had written. It was written intelligently and coherently, and I understood exactly what you had written, and I could hardly believe it wasn't written by a true scholar of photo criticism.

 

It is just that when you wrote that this photo was somewhat 'lacking' (to use my phrase) in aesthetics, I felt you had missed a point, and I wanted to point that out, and I took no personal umbrage with you at all.

 

As a matter of fact, I respected you for writing a well thought out and intelligent critique, and I think I pointed that out to you in my response, and to the extent I did not, I do here now.

 

Whether or not English is your first or third language, you express yourself quite well, and your contributions here are quite welcome, and quite comprehensible. You made good points, and many people would have made the other point you made - that the photo lacks 'aesthetics', and it might if the woman did not have that particular 'look' on her face, but she has that 'look' so it elevates the entire photograph to another plane, I feel.

 

One can almost 'feel' her anguish at having to be a street seller and being a little chubby (approaching obesity, and not so attractive, but notice she still is young and not so long ago might have been very attractive. Life is tough in Ukraine.

 

Then contrast that to the insousiance of the stocking model, doubtless in her late teens, and flirting with customers. Anguish and flirting. Contrasts.

 

Not so good if the anguished woman did not have a prize-winning look of anguish, but she does.

 

That's what makes the 'aesthetics' of this photo, not its formal composition, of course. And for 'formal composition' it is not stunning, and for that I agree with you. On the 'street' you take what you can get.

 

Thanks, Jose.

 

John (Crosley)

My good friend John Crosley... I understand you perfectly. I read my second comment, today, and I detect in it some incomplete ideas. I desperately need to get more fluent English... But I'm getting better. "On the 'street' you take what you can get", oh yes! I have a request for you: can you see my "AT THE QUEENS' TABLE" and write your critique bellow? And don't take pity on me. It would be a pleasure. You understand a bit more about the Queen if you see "< THE KING >". Thank you. Best regards.

I need a link.

 

Please copy the URL (in the browser line--uniform resource locator -- http:// etc.) and put it in a comment -- one for each photo.

 

Then I can jump directly to each photo.

 

OK?

 

Thanks.

 

John (Crosley)

AT THE QUEENS' TABLE = http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6772428

 

< THE KING > = http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6383605

 

Thank you very much.

Perfect title succinctly conveying the meaning of this capture. These two worlds could not be more extreme in their contrasts. The model on top looks at herself (her legs in a narcissistic sort of way) while the real one looks around her in anguish and supplication. One can empathize with her pain.

 

I would have liked to see the full body of the woman sitting down contrasting sharply against the model standing up. Just a minor observation.

Good critique -- very articulate and making observations (narcissism vs. pain) I hadn't articulated well myself.

 

But the 'body' of the woman, bottom, was not available, because this woman, bottom, is a street seller, and she has a table in front of her with wares she is selling. Sorry about that (it doesn't help the photo).

 

And for composition's sake, it would have made for a very 'tall' and slender photo, in any case -- the poster would have to be lower to make the photo you suggest (want?). I want the same photo, but it's impossible, at least here.

 

Some are just better than others.

 

That's what happens when you shoot 'street'.

 

Your comments continue to be superb.

 

John (Crosley)

I like especially 'at the queens table' -- it's wonderful.

 

Just a note though.

 

I do not mat, frame or otherwise do anything to my captures, and it may cost me rating points.

 

Even a simple black border probably would help them by delineating them from the background, since sometimes the edges are somewhat indistinct.

 

In your 'at the queens table' however, you have extended the photo a great deal by setting forth a very wide mat (border) of the same color as in the photo - blue - and that exaggerates the photo and seems to become part of the photo.

 

It creates an interesting effect, but part of that effect is 'owned' by the skill of the matting, not the very fine photo.

 

I let my photos stand (or fail) on their own.

 

They are presented esssentially 'naked' with no 'treatments' whatever.

 

I do not even know how to put a Photoshop 'mat' or 'frame' around my photos; if I had wanted to know, I would have learned three years ago, I suppose, and all would be framed.

 

Cartier-Bresson framed his in thin black, because that was the edge of the neg, and he wanted them all (but one) printed full frame. That was his proof it was full frame. But it also was aesthetically pleasing.

 

I may someday do the same if there ever is a book with my name on it; we'll consult with experts; many know far more than me about that, and I'll listen carefully.

 

Best to you, Jose.

 

You are a highly skilled photographer (I don't like monochrome treatments of photos that should be in B&W personally, but your king's table has good composition and captures a moment (for a moment, however, I thought the staff was him doing a private thing in the pasture . . . then realized it was too high -- you may have to think about that one. And look again at the photo from a fresh eye.

 

My best again.

 

John (Crosley)