Homeboys in Gangland

These two 'homies' are walking in Los Angeles' South Central

District, near 'The Forum'. Wall Art or murals are a Los Angeles

tradition, but many official ones are being defaced or painted over,

while independent ones, like this, are part of the vitality of LA's

underground (so to speak) arts scene. 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

The story is on your description but the photo tells nothing but the reproduction

of a wall paintings even though it is not close, i think you need to isolate

the object and give it more story

I think you are confused. 'Isolate the object (subject?)?' The subject is the depiction of violence within the neighborhood and the neighborhood youths. That is what is depicted.

 

To take a different perspective would mean destroying a view of the wall mural and take away its meaning, as it would not be 'whole' - actually, this is only part of it -- it's cropped right -- there is a left arm to this wall mural figure as well (as we view it.)

 

While I understand your wish to 'make this better', your suggestions do not accomplish that purpose within what this photo is to represent.

 

It is not about 'murals' -- there are plenty of those around L.A., but instead this particular mural with its figure, its arms, and its menacing gun, in relation to these passerby youths who seem oblivious to it.

 

That is the subject, and that is what is depicted. Perhaps you got confused and thought this was about murals in general -- it is not -- you're a new member and don't know my work, so it's understandable, so I invite you to look at my Presentation: 'Photographers: Watch Your Background', about integrating foreground objects with their background.

 

You might find it interesting or at least explanatory (it is unfinished, though it is by far the longest presentation on Photo.net, all because of inadequate site software to finish it, plus I'm a prodigious shooter, and maintaining that 'Presentation' along with my voluminous output (and preparing hopefully for gallery presentations) is beyond my capacity.

 

I urge you to rethink this now that you know it's not about the mural but about boys in the neighborhood -- and the neighborhood as depicted in relationship to the mural -- one full of danger and violence -- indications of gangland activity.

 

I studied this particular scene for some time, and because of the unusual dimensions of the wall graphic, there are few or maybe no better ways to portray it rather than have someone more interesting or doing something more interesting pass by.

 

(I'm open to being corrected, but with a posted photo, please . . . jsc)

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Let me know if you get to and/or through the presentation (even though it is not finished . . and probably never will be -- it's far too long to digest in one sitting.)

 

John (Crosley)

John what I think he means is that those two guys get a bit lost in that mural. Actually I think he's right on that. It could well be that it doesn't look that bad when edited and printed. But I think that would you have waited a second and positioned them under that barrel it would have looked better and stronger.

Great visual statement. Its meaning is obvious to me without even reading the title. Also it seems like the guy on the mural is telling the "homeboys" to get lost.

 

The fact that the subjects are wearing black do not really make them really stand out in this composition. Also, the head from the guy on the left sort of blends into the mural. I know you don't crop, but I think the parking meter on the left, the indention on the wall with the blue sign on top and the red stripe on the sidewalk are a bit distracting.

 

 

Defending does not mean defensive. When I defended against invalid or misplaced criticism above, that did not mean that I was placing my photo or myself away or distancing myself from well-made criticism.

 

Yours, for example, is well-intentioned and also might well be followed.

 

I think I may have such a capture, but the boys are caught not looking like they're walking forward but rather stiff-legged.

 

Also, they give balance caught here under the gun, but you are right, they lack contrast being caught against the 'busy' hand of the shooter, wearing black and the leftmost boy being 'black'.

 

Chalk that one up to an exposure deficiency that even Adobe Camera Raw could not rescue from/this was taken at or about after dark on a winter's day and was about the last of the exposures. I could have lightened my settings or increased my ISO, I think and had more exposure latitude. The Nikon algorithm for exposure sometimes causes overexposure at the gloaming (when the sun goes down, for those areas that are still lighted but no longer in sunlight but illuminated by afterglow -- and that causes some trickiness in exposure.

 

All things being equal, I wish I had a better capture to throw up here, but the graphic is so strong and it's the best of a large bunch, so I decided to throw it up and see what others felt about it. They do not feel much different than I. It's very strong, but technically could have been more strong, but it required a brighter day/different exposure or different clothes on the passersby.

 

Alas, that was not to be that day. Perhaps if I go back again, but that could turn into an obsession and there is a world of photos to take . . . . and sometimes ya gotta move on.

 

Best to you, Ton and thanks for the helpful feedback.

 

John (Crosley)

Hobson's Choice.

 

This photo represents a Hobson's choice -- fix one thing and create new problems.

 

It IS a crop, and a big one from a larger capture. I was photographing with a mid-range lens across the street and cropped this from that, but on a big sensor.

 

I intentionally left in the parking meter (it shows 'street') as well as the other things you mentioned, because they are part of 'street' photography. 'Street' photography, to my way of thinking, involves leaving in things that might be distracting, and then going out later and taking another photo that is better somewhere else.

 

To take this photo meant leaving in the parking meter.

 

I did want the left shooter's arm (as we view it), to be visible, so we can see he is not one-sided or one-armed and for compositional purposes. That's also why the boys are captured under or agains the hand, rather than beyond it - otherwise does not help the composition, though it helps visibility.

 

You are right about visibility of the boys, right, and their coloration against the background. Without getting into pixellation problems and 'noise' problems that were major, that is not fixable (I tried a little to fix it, but it didn't work well-- the capture didn't have enough latitude -- a problem from matrix metering at that time of day/night.)

 

Your critique is right on technically, but I do sometimes leave in 'distracting' things purposefully -- and never 'clone them out'.

 

The choice of this shot was to 'post it as is' or 'not to post it' -- not to edit or make other changes, and I chose to post it. Visually, it is somewhat stunning, because of that giant graphic -- one of LA's best.

 

I do crop from time to time, when appropriate to get a proper photo, but seldom.

 

This is one instance.

 

Best to you, Adan W.

 

John (Crosley)