The Bike Trick

This trifle of a photo shows one guy demonstrating a bike trick, and

another watching, with some amusement -- special attention is made in

this photo to the composition; which is somewhat understated but

quite important; this a bit more than just a photo of two guys

fooling around on break from work, but for me, a work of photo art.

Am I wrong? 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 love the comical factor in this one Very well done, compo is very neat indeed!

(Copyright notice: Copyright 2008, John Crosley, All Rights Reserved)

 

This photo is destined some day (when the software gets better), for my long-standing Presentation on 'Threes in My Photography' (the threes presentation).

 

Threes as an element of a photo has a long history in my work; I like to use it when I can as it introduces an element of dynamism in photos that otherwise might be static. Three points might infer the points of a triangle, the simplest and yet most dynamic of figures, and one in which the eye cannot rest at any one point, but which causes the eye to go from one point to the next to the next to the next et seq.

 

I tried to send these guys a copy of this photo but was forestalled. I hope they download a copy each (one only, it is copyrighted, 2008, John Crosley, all rights reserved), print it with my blessing, and take it home. (Thank you guys for a good smile. This photo turned out far, far better than a simple snapshot. Take and print a copy with my good blessings and best wishes, each of you two.)

 

John (Crosley)

This was all in-the-camera processing. No editing at all in Photoshop. Just straight to the upload file, after a brief resizing stop in image editing. It was shot as color, desaturatede in the D300, then the file was downloaded looking exactly like this. This is the new breed of digital cameras -- it sets a new standard for Nikon vs. Canon. You should see how well the D300 does in low light. And this is with a less than greatly sharp lens, the 18~200 at 18 mm. with all its compromises at f 4.5 -- almost wide open.

 

This camera shows off even less than perfect lenses - -think what it can do with nearly perfect lenses and in low light situations where it excels at 3200 iso (street shooting under street lights with no flash -- imagine that -- next to a D2Xs which was a complete washout -0- the latter produced unusable prints entirely while the D300 at 3200 iso and 1600 iso produced a great number of usable prints, especially when converted (in camera) to monochrome (I use solely B&W, but they give two toning choices.

 

Look at these as 'test shots' for static shooting.

 

Thanks for the comment.

 

John (Crosley)

Unbelievable..!!! Balanced in every aspect of life! Pure joy..! My favourite of yours!

It also is a secret favorite of mine.

 

I tried to get a friend to send a copy to these two guys to see if they'd appreciate it, and he refused.

 

So, I am hoping they get this message it's ok for them to download one copy apiece of this copyrighted photo.

 

I was drawn to the balance -- I was moving about, bobbing up and down like some bobble head doll, trying to get everything in the frame as the bike, center, moved, the bike rider's head and hands moved into and out of the frame and the guy, left rear, began to move to the left.

 

I caught 'em.

 

It just goes to show you that not only is it important to carry a camera or two everywhere (I asked this bike rider to show me his trick he had been practicing), but to be ready with a full skill set when that opportunity does arise. His work friend was greatly amused, but it only shows well in one frame of several.

 

This is the magic frame.

 

I'm happy to see your comment here; it gladdens me.

 

It's a deceptively 'simple' photo, isn't it?

 

(addendum: I saw your rate -- the highest possible -- I see it did indeed pleases you. I cannot thank you for a high rate -- just for taking the time to rate. I thank you even if you low rate a photo too. Any rating at all is an honor -- you're in my photos taste, which I don't see expressed too often, and that is something I agree with completely -- I'm thinking of the great critique you wrote in the case of the Paris Metro photo of the falling woman and the youths congregating below and how I was able to capture that one. I'm getting a sixth sense (or is it seventh?)

 

Best to you Olaf.

 

Don't be a stranger.

 

John (Crosley)

haha I have seen the examples of the d3 and 300 Very impressice indeed! Beautiful shots on Iso3200 is completly new to photography! I guess it does set a new standard in evolution of photography.

For me photoshop is like the dark room, it belongs to photography.. it shouldn t matter how much photoshop u did or didn`t, for me the image counts.. it all in the art ;)

I start liking this picture more and more I have to say

Addendum: M. Barbu removed a comment suggesting a lower view; the response remains here below:

 

 

Well, in this case, I'd have to say 'no' - this photo is so carefully composed with vanishing point -- perspective, texture of the brick wall, lines of the pavement and everything so well considered (and on the fly at that) that I wouldn't change anything.

 

Also, to get down low, means to include a great deal of sky and would have meant a huge exposure adjustment that would have prevented my getting any photo at all (it would have been over by then).

 

Also, with this lens, to get close to the foot/feet, would have destroyed this carefully laid out composition and made an entirely different photo.

 

If I had a 12-24 mm wide angle (I have one but it was in my car) with it set at 12 mm I might very well have tried for the photo you suggest, but you gotta go with what you got at the time, and this is what I had on camera (the other camera around my neck had a huge, large aperture zoom telephoto on it) at the time.

 

As remarked by Olaf de Vries, this one hit the spot (for him at least). It certainly hit the spot for me, so this is one I wouldn't change anything. To get close to the pedals would have meant also changing the perspective on the laughing guy, left rear, and he is absolutely essential in his reaction to the 'trick' being demonstrated.

 

For it to be a 'trick' instead of 'practice' there must be an audience, even if only one, and a 'reaction' is important -- and here it's a great reaction that almost convulses that wonderful guy's entire small body -- look how he's bent over at the shoulders and his arms are to his mid thighs, one foot in front of the other, a big smile on his face. He's small in the frame and in stature, but essential to the photo.

 

To change the photo - this particular photo -- is something I would just not do.

 

I would, however, try to take other, different photos, maybe even as you suggested, changing lenses if I had time and re-metering or making adjustments for backlighting from a very bright sky overhead (getting down low means shooting more up and having more bright sky behind, throwing off the exposure even beyond what the fabulous Nikon Matrix Metering (improved) can handle and causing adjustments to be made with Easy Exposure -- possibly on the fly.

 

But it's a good thought and if the photo were less good, I probably would be thinking 'next time, I'll do that'. It's also hard for me to kneel -- I have balky knees and a balky back -- I'm disabled and partially paralyzed (not greatly) which few know, so those movements are very difficult for me.

 

In a way, these two men's body positions 'mirror' each other. The bike rider's body has hands outflung and akimbo. The observer and reactor, left rear, has his hands to center, with straight arms, and he's not using them at all -- one is actively using his arms and hands, the other is so regaled he's not using his hands and arms at all.

 

All in a split second.

 

Of course there were other frames as well.

 

I try to choose the best.

 

Next time, I may try exactly what you suggest, just not for this one.

 

OK?

 

(Olaf doesn't give out those 7/7s freely to me or anybody so far as I can tell, and when he says something's good I sit up and take notice.)

 

John (Crosley)

I hate spending time processing images. I like taking them.

 

Cartier-Bresson liked (even loved) his images but he disliked processing them. He was for the chase (la chasse -- the hunt).

 

He was a former big game hunter in Africa.

 

He had his own personal printer, and he let his printer do the work. These guys here are photo printers for one of the best names in the photo printing industry which is undergoing a name change at the present time due to a merger, or so I understand.

 

(I am not comparing my work to Cartier-Bresson's let me be clear. His work is in a class by itself.)

 

You are right, shooting stuff at ISO 3200 with the D300 is amazing -- it is not 'noise-free but it's usable but with the D2Xs next to the D300 the D2Xs output at ISO 1600 was totally unusable for serious photo purposes -- maybe as police evidence, OK -- but not as photos for photography's sake.

 

Imagine 16 women (Dykes on Bikes) shot available light as they rode their Harley Davidson motorcycles down Santa Cruz's main street at night in the darkness, completely nude, the only light from store fronts, street lights, and the illumination of the following cycle's head lamps all carefully recorded with the D300 set at ISO 1600 -- and all over in a 'flash' so to speak.

 

Yes, the days of 'flashing' are not quite gone.

 

Not one of those 'ahem' 'women', was pleasing to my eye, however, regrettably. They make those Harley seats big for a reason - usually it's older guys with big rear ends, but in this case it was slightly larger dykes with slightly larger rear ends filling those huge Harley seats.

 

All recorded at ISO 1600 or ISO 3200 as I left photographing a street band playing very agreeably for a large audience streetside.

 

I just went out for pizza, and with the D300 you can capture anything anytime, anywhere.

 

Build quality is not No. 1 for the D300 though it's 'tight', just as with the D200, so for a long-lasting camera the D3X may be the ultimate, but it's pretty expensive (and doesn't multiply focal lengths as with the D2X and the D2Xs, which sometimes is an advantage outside the studio).

 

This photo kind of grows on you, I note, doesn't it?

 

It did on me.

 

I liked it at the start and the more I reflected, the more I thought it among my best work.

 

Best to you Ruben.

 

John (Crosley)

This from a digital D300, could easily have been seen by some to be from a Leica, don't you agree? Especially the camera's digital processing in-camera from a color capture to a purely monochrome (B&W in this instance, but toning also is available) rendition. I think the image quality is superb, and I think this is about iso 400 or so. Maybe iso 320 but more likely iso 400. I'll look at exif data and post if it's different.

 

I am in love with quality of this particular camera. I want two of them and may be a D3X instead of D2X's and D2Xs's. If I'm going to be taking images, I want the best, and I don't think today Canon has a rival for this, and this lens is not the sharpest in the bunch either and a DX lens too.

 

A consumer lens basically.

 

Imagine the sharpness of a pro lens -- say, a 17~55 mm f 2.8 dx (I have two) with this quality of tones.

 

John (Crosley)

 

Addendum: Exif data says iso 250. Wow, what quality, though. D200 or D2X never could do that, plus they shoot color OR Black and white and this is an in-camera conversion. double wow.

IMHO ultimate "street", being one of the most difficult genres has always to do with the main-subject people. City- and streetscape is different.

 

Being "full-framed" hit.., haha.. the 7/7 in a reflex was the only poor defence! Even looking -and I didn't- for enventualy disturbing elements, ways of improving.. crop, simply does tell me, the touch wasn't completely a hit!

 

Can imagine your acts here, John on it's best! However, what's John on it's best, not getting that magical moment..?! The "afterwards" having it, it's going so fast.., does prove the talent!

 

Greatest shots are often "hidden" in soberness,in often so called "simplicity", hardly noticed at all. At the end they do last the longuest.

 

About the suggestion of bringing his foot nearer.., the King behind would lose his place and so would have been broken our very strong directly eyecontact, for me the biggest source of humor here! Next: by that space beneath the frontwheel the total ballancing efforts of man with the total bike are shown. Crop would mean: an accent toward his body, so a loss. Eliminating that space would even mean a strong elimination of the idea a failure of the trick could be possible. At last, the limited amount of sky does accent his tallness.

 

Postprocessing is saying: "I did shot a bear", while seeing me.. he for laughing died on a heart-atac! Does realy only the end-result count?

 

Both should be judged on it's own. Let's enjoy differsity, only that is being complete! Often the nicest music is supposed to come out of a studio. Yes, it was constructed there. I still do remember that special night in Romania: five gipsies playing in wild, while their wives were talking and sharing pan-cakes..

 

Haha.. about being a stranger.., you are right John. Thinking: "A yearly response would be fine.." I even decided not to react anymore.

 

Yes.. and next your hit.

 

Olaf.

this may not yet have enough rates for the top rated sorting engine, but I have a surfeit of comments; thank you all for contributing. I am a very rich man for all my contributors (of course half of them usually are mine, because I believe everyone who contributes is worthy of a reply, even if to say they're all wet or to consider their ideas and to reject them -- or to say, maybe . . . but for another day.

 

Eventually, this photo will get more rates, but four is enough with so many comments; thank you again, all (now 13 comments) And of course, some members sort photos by highest comments in, say, last 24 hours, too. I know I sometimes do. It leads to the most interesting photos (and occasionally the worst.)

 

I hope the latter is not the case here.

 

;~)

 

John (Crosley)

but not said it exactly.

 

This photo is a paragon of balance and composition.

 

It's just a photo of a guy doing a bike trick, and another guy reacting -- as simple a photo as one could imagine . . . . almost.

 

But it has high status in my firmament.

 

I try to elevate everything I do into some higher plane . . . . I try not to take hoary snapshots. I try to leave my imprint on every photograph.

 

Someone -- a photo expert and friend -- visited Henri Cartier-Bresson in his later years and picked up a photo -- a personal photo of C-B's.

 

It was a masterpiece, the photo expert visitor said. 'Really', said Cartier-Bresson, 'I thought it was just a mere snapshot' He in fact was enlightened. He didn't really know any longer how to take snapshots. He only had it in him to take great photos (or at least attempt them) no matter what his intent.

 

When I see a guy balancing on a bike, I see a photo opportunity to try to make a great photo.

 

At least someone agrees, I succeeded (there are some low-raters out there -- new members, whose rates will bring this down, I'm sure.

 

I hope their 'snapshots' all will look as good as this.

 

John (Crosley)

Masterpieces are fine!! Do totaly understand you. However I do prefer a master, not completely by his desires just breaking to pieces. Wish you also balance in that! :) With more than respect! Olaf

John, this picture is a feast in 3's starting with the Mitsubishi logo in the back of the car composed of three rhombuses.

 

The threesome of characters (the car and the two guys) make an engaging triangle through their positions. Each faces forward and taken as a whole it makes the eyes wander in a circular motion. In addition, the guy performing the trick has three stripes on his shirt.

 

The pavement hints at the tip of an arrow while we see a smaller triangle on the lower left hand corner.

I'm not sure why I should leave a critique when you've already critiqued your own photo down to the nub.

yes, sometimes things work out that way, don't they. Very acute observations. Micki F. used to see things so acutely also; she has such an acute eye (I'm surprised she didn't chime in here someplace. I miss her when she doeesn't make an appearance, but then she's up to her ears in hockey, according to her last post.

 

It's pretty amazing, so many posts, for such a simple photo.

 

There's some more complexity in its simplicity - more than one would gather - as I suggested in request for critique.

 

Thanks Adan W. for adding some original thoughts.

 

John (Crosley)

There are three observations to be made:

 

1. be first and don't worry about things 'already being made'.

 

2. I didn't make all the analyses - they were started by others and complemented by me.

 

3. If you have nothing to contribute, then why comment at all, except to be a spoiler.

 

You are welcome to contribute, and all good faith comments are entirely welcome and if they are helpful they are acknowledged.

 

Why not try again -- maybe on another photo -- and be the first to critique, instead of being the 16th or 17th and then complain it's already been done before (then wrongly say I did it all, when it really was a joint effort - a colloquy if you will -- between me and a number of commenters?

 

Good spirits go a long ways here; i get almost no negative comments because I treat everyone fairly and with consideration and this is a hint on one good way to get treated with good consideration.

 

So, I will welcome you back when you have something serious to contribute.

(It is not uncommon for my photos to be picked to death -- members seem to like to do that -- it's like a graduate seminar in photo analysis for many of us - even including me, for I shoot inchoately sometimes and my wonderful (for the most part) commenters help open my eyes to the many tricks and devices I often unconsciously use in creating my 'works'.

 

For that I owe then a great debt of gratitude and for which I thank each one of them. Without them, my posting would lack the fun it is and the community for all. I think many are drawn to these pages not only because of the images but because of good - spirited colloquy -- why not join in, in good spirits?

 

John (Crosley)

From the bicycle tire, to the Mitsubishi's blackness, to the outstretched arm of the bicyclist to the guy, background left, back to the front bike tire -- if one traces it, it's a parallelogram.

 

That's part of the strength of the composition of this. Not only does this have the 'strength' (as I see it) of 'three' masses stemming from three subjects, but if one traces the outline of these three subjects, one gets a large, encompassing parallelogram.

 

It's all rather neat.

 

I'm NOT a cubist or from that school that says everything can be reduced to geometry that was championed by some of those matchbook cover art schools, but it just happens to be so that this photo has some outstanding geometrical properties that are not readily apparent until one really analyses it -- it's pleasing, but one doesn't know why until one searches for an answer (of course, the 'action' is pleasing in its own right, but then one has to look further, and see why it is so pleasing to the eye as well . . . and I think along with the good tones, the textures, and the vanishing point, this photo succeeds when it's really seen as so 'simple'.

 

In fact, it's really quite 'complex' from a compositional standpoint -- it just appears deceptively 'simple'.

 

John (Crosley)

 

To the member above who complained that this photo had been explained to the 'nub', if he had thought and added this particular point, he would have made a genuine contribution to this photo analysis instead of sounding like he was complaining.

 

Let's give him a few more chances.

 

This is an open area for commenters, and some people don't get it the first time; everybody who comments here in good faith and helps (or tries to help) is greeted warmly here. The idea is to share and make everybody look good, and provide a forum for those who are trying to improve their photography (or critiquing) skills.

 

John

Like almost everyone else who commented above, I think this is a great photo. I glanced briefly at it, threw back my head and HOWLED with laughter. That doesn't happen to me often these days, and that is what makes this photo great in my opinion. Comments on technical detail are quite beyond my level of photographic skill right now, but everyone has an emotional response to artwork. Your photos consistently illicit emotional responses from viewers...that's what makes you a good artist. I don't know how many of your photos have drawn my admiration, but there have been quite a few. I think this is one of the top 3. I'll keep looking, going out taking photos, and studying your nubby commentary, and just maybe I'll get to be half as good eventually.

 

Thanks

Elmo,

 

Your short tribute humbles me . . . . seriously.

 

This is 'just another photo' for me . . . although one I like very much . . . . but then I shoot to please myself, and hope my photos'll please others too.

 

I have had an interesting life, according to others, perhaps only because I've actually stopped and recorded those moments of interest and even sought them out instead of rushing by, ignoring life's interesting stuff.

 

We often rush by the interesting stuff in life . . . I know I did at one time . . . although I almost always was aware of it on the periphery . . . and apparently I was 'saving up' (my appetite for 'interesting stuff was kind of building up pressure inside my mind, kind of like in a pressure cooker) waiting for the moment I picked up my cameras again . . . and this time with a hunger that was like that extinguished a long time ago when I was a photo editor and just saw too way way many photos under too much pressure . . . but this time I doubt my photographic hunger ever will go away again.

 

That's because I now have an audience and a place to put my work instead of in a drawer, never to be shown to anyone, as before.

 

And this is such a simple photo (at least on first glance . . . .)

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

John (Crosley)

nice,,, again,,,, also the Logo Brand of the car, is Three.... ;)... and a lot to read over there...See You..Threeman .... ;)---- Fred

 

You compliment me by your presence.

 

Merci, monsieur.

 

John (Jean) (Crosley)

Great moment, beautifull tones and composition. I like this picture a lot. Thank you for sharing. Regards, Adam

And I noted when I posted it it was a 'trifle' of a photo. Go figure. This should be exhibit #1 of why a photographer should carry a camera around at all times.

 

This guy was fooling around on lunch or a break with his bike and I asked him to show me so I could take a photo, and he did, and this is the result. It started out as 'posed' but it's really impossible to 'pose' something like this -- epecially with the guy, left background, included in the frame, when I'm not so sure he thought he was part of it. Of course, his reaction is essential to this capture.

 

I really want to thank these two guys for letting me photograph them; they make their living by creating prints for a famous photographic outfit in LA, but I think I turned the tables on them; little did they know this photo would turn out so well (same for me, truth be told, but then any photo I take has that potential).

 

Thanks again, Adam M. for commenting.

 

John (Crosley)