'No Words'

Words have failed me in captioning this image; perhaps some images

just speak for themselves. I welcome submission of your possible

caption, but would prefer it be a little clever. 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've got to make sure this one is copyrighted (I will look right now) just exactly AND registered.

Some may try to reproduce it; its appeal is obvious, I think.

I took some photos of this guy from far away at 200 mm and this is what I found in a series of them. I could hardly believe my eyes, and with the background dead on.

I decided NOT to crop and to keep it natural . . . for now. It's croppable ultimately, but I want to show such work as H C-B might have shown it, IF he shot with a telephoto -- as a composition rather than a random act shown close-up.

I'm still learning about such things, although it seems I had the 'eye' for it (he called it 'les yeux') and said you either have it or you don't. I'm still getting my 'long-ago' eye (yeux) back, I think.

I'm glad you approve, as your comment means something to me.

John (Crosley)

About color vs. b & w.

Some photos were meant to be color photos and others were meant to be black and white.

Some are mixed and can be shown either way, and of those one way may predominate.

This was primarily meant to be a black and white photo. Taken at the end of the day, sundown colors predominate and 'affect' the color of the 'white' building side, distracting from the true photo, which in this case is built not only on a humorous subject (I hope anyway) but also on a composition that is structured around lines.

Extraneous or colors that do not 'belong' or strike us as distracting or unusual will detract from the photo, plus the 'white' wall washes out and is overexposed in the color version, and I had to bring it back with shadow/highlight filter. (that's an 'issue' with Nikon Matrix Metering in late afternoon and early evening with very light areas -- the tendency for the system almost to 'blow them out' or otherwise make them unattractive.

I worked this up as a black and white and don't think I want to work it up a second time, as color. If I exhibit at a gallery and a very good customer asks and the gallerist says 'ok' then I might; otherwise, it will remain 'as is' in all its black and white glory, unsullied by confusing colors (of his shirt/the mannequin/the storefront fixtures, etc.)

Too many colors can detract from a capture built on composition using geometry as here, and that's the way this one is going to stay, I think, but for good reason(you didn't see the original, but if you did, I think you'd readily agree.)

Thanks for the helpful and nice comment, though.

(it helps me to explain my reasoning sometimes, not just for readers/viewers but to explain to myself why I was right in doing something -- or occasionally 'wrong'.)

John (Crosley)

I'm glad this one caused a chortle or two. It did for me when I saw it on my digital screen, and more when I downloaded it and blew it up. It shows pretty small on a digital screen, and not so well in color, and even if one manipulates in a D300 to a monochrome then tries to 'crop' in the camera one cannot enjoy this one like it should be.

I live for capturing moments like this, too (as well as numerous others of different types/genres).

For me photography is about engaging the viewer and 'being interesting'

It seems this passed that test with you.

Thanks for letting me know.

John (Crosley)

No, not the Nazis, Italy (fascisti) and Japan.

I mean the lines in the curtain wall behind the guy.

His bent over body lines up almost perfectly with the horizontal line in that wall.

The mannequin lines up pretty well with the vertical line.

Together, there is synchronicity that one can only wish for in such a photo.

It works well cropped too, but I prefer it as a full-size capture.

You can 'work it up' and crop it yourself to see, and there's enough digital information to show it cropped, but I like it this way.

John (Crosley)

This is really a nice shot. Everything coincides very well, the vertical and horizontal lines. No heads. I think it would lose everything if cropped. I can't help wondering what the colors were.

Rather reminds me of a fella I know at work.

Lucky

The one at work, headless or head up people's business?

Thanks for the comment.

John (Crosley)

John, my first reaction, without seeing your title was: uh,. . . . .

What the heck he is doing? hahaha.

with regards

There are several English phrases that may come to mind for many Americans.

He has his head up someone's **s.

and so forth.

I always wondered who took such photos one finds on 'funny' web sites.

And how they get them.

Now I know.

I got one this time.

Want to bet it'll show up elsewhere, even though it's copyrighted?

You are a very smart woman, I think, based on a recent personal decision I understand you made, and I applaud it. (personal)

You are always welcome wherever you post your photos; I'm likely to be nearby.

John (Crosley)

I was far enough away that this was a 180 mm zoom frame from my 70~200 mm zoom lens and stopped down for aperture, so it's pretty darn sharp.

As such, I could have easily cropped it, and it would have been pretty stunning in thumbnail, but it would lack some of the 'street' nature that it has here - the symmetry and as Henri Cartier-Bresson repeated over and over 'the geometry' when in fact I think he actually meant 'composition' which involves relationships between subjects/objects within the frame. (redundant?)

In any case, this is my take on it; and a crop always would be possible.

The colors were not harmonious enough to make this a color capture; they neither added to the scene nor tied the scene together in any way, so color was discarded. It often is in 'street' photos, and for good reason besides tradition.

And I can and many times have taken beautifully color-coordinated 'street' photos and posted them as such; but on looking as such captures they also seem capable of being desaturated.

I did not have a chance to 'zoom' in closer - I was too far away and if I got closer, the scene was long gone. I did what I could under the circumstances and am glad I did.

Thanks for the kind comment.

John (Crosley)

Little things sometimes appear in shots like this that seem to resonate.

Consider besides the horizontal/vertical placement of the (human) subject, the clothes each figure is wearing.

The mannequin (left, in case you didn't guess), is wearing dark clothes and is nearer the darker window.

The clerk is wearing lighter clothes with a plaid/checkered shirt; he's nearer the lighter doorway and the doorway is a lattice of sorts -- with light stripes both horizontal and vertical -- a sort of plaid surrogate?

Anyway, that's my take on something I doubt if anybody would have noticed (now that Micki Ferguson's not actively critiquing so much anymore -- she might have spotted that with her eagle eye).

John (Crosley)

When a photo pleases you, I know it's good.

Thanks.

I'm glad you appreciate it.

I laughed when I saw that I had succeeded in the capture, and again when I posted it, and again and again when I saw it . . . . it's caused me to do a lot of snickering.

The poor man was totally unaware of even my presence, let alone being photographed, as this is a 200 mm capture at full extension, and I was about 80-100 yards away. This is a full-frame capture with no manipulation.

Life's sometimes sweet when you look at a digital display and see something like this on the back.

John (Crosley)

Thank you.

Whether or not to post it was just no question, now, was it?

I share you view, of course. I was very far away -- this person probably couldn't even see me or my car, much less notice my camera.

Thanks for the nice note.

John (Crosley)