No Lounging in the Plush Airport Lounge

This businessman has his nose almost to his computer as he works

away in an airport lounge waiting for his flight, or perhaps a between

flight business meeting, all amid plush surroundings and mostly

unnoticed by him. Airport lounges throughout the world are populated

by similar 'road warriors' armed with their laptops and briefcases,

traveling on business, ready to use any opportunity to do office work,

and cherishing any desk (or desk substitute) and power source for their

laptops they can find. 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

Reading the financial news... A remarkable photo of our time. Karl

looks really good , youve got a little speck on your sensor behind guys head that i would repair otherwise well done !

This guy was so engrossed in his computer that for the hour I was there, he didn't raise his head and look around even once, let alone notice he had been photographed several times.

 

The composition was a natural, so I took the photo. It is not a 'standard' photo, but nevertheless, the balance and 'balance of lights and darks' were compelling to me -- ultimately the whole composition, as well as his inordinate amount of attention to his computer. Notice his face is bathed in light from his computer screen.

 

I showed this to a friend who suggested I try for more 'tones' in the photo (probably especially the face) but didn't realize in this low light tele shot that the face was primarily illuminated by that screen, rather than strong, 'theatrical' overhead lights.

 

So, if the face seems 'washed out' it is the truth and a result of being bathed in glow from the screen, and a result also of low light shooting.

 

This guy was so engrossed; I hope it shows here.

 

;~))

 

John (Crosley)

I felt it looked pretty good also, and actually felt compelled to take it, despite some disapproving stares from the hoity-toity types in this upper class lounge (of which I am a long-time member, though I do not dress up for travel and often have three or four cameras around my neck as well as two to three carryons, (full of cameras, lenses, computers and hard drives) so I treat these peope ultra-nicely. Such things cannot be checked or they'll be stolen or end up as rubbish, completely unusable and damaged beyond repair, no matter how well packed, especially hard drives.

 

I've had back luck with hard drives this year, especially when tipped over on concrete floors after years of almost no losses. Also as they get smaller and smaller and cheaper and cheaper to buy, the build quality of the chasses gets cheaper, I think, though they do work OK if they are not disturbed, but they're not made much for traveling, and I have a large number of such drives.

 

Thanks for the kind note about sensor dirt; I have two D300s in use and they have auto sensor cleaning at start and end of each use with lenses permanently affixed, so lens dust is almost unheard of for me. I have a bulb cleaner, and I'll start with that (and use my 'healing brush for a while until I get that sorted out).

 

(Maybe the vibrating lens shaking system has already taken care of that)

 

I'll hope until I see proof otherwise,but I'll notice quickly.

 

Thanks for the 'heads up'.

 

John (Crosley)

I love shots like this. I don't give a hoot about the technicalities, but I enjoy the moment you captured. I am too wary of strangers to use my camera, but I've thought a hundred times what a nice image this guy-gal-whomever would make doing whatever. Anyway, this image really tells a story. Congrats.

I also love to take and post photos like this even though it got a 3/3 as its first rate. I seldom if ever take down a photo; I believe in what I post.

 

The fact is, I caught a moment, one of concentration and also of balance and composition -- here of balance of whites (lights) and blacks (darks) of which I am proud.

 

Notice that unlike famous Gary Winogrand who made 'street photos' and who had a particular technique, this site's founder here in describing Winogrand's life work notes Winogrand's work fell apart when he moved to LA and started taking photos from the right front seat of cars -- his style was idiomatic to walking and specifically to his dynamic approach.

 

I take anything that moves (or doesn't), and hope I can get heterogeneous and pleasing results (and entirely original ones) from wherever I am, no matter what subject -- even landscapes or portraits.

 

Look at how few of my 1200 or so photos look like another, yet in in a way how similar they are so that you can maybe identify the photographer - me.

 

Having been for 20 years an attorney since my first go at taking 'street' photographs where I had pangs of consciousness for invading people's personal space, has taken care of my personal qualms about being intrusive. Now I care, but it does not stop me and I sleep well at night. I just take care for my personal safety, and age helps me there.

 

That and realizing (or being told by high-level experts) that my style and output has genuine artistic and historical worth, worthy of being pursued at the highest level -- say gallery and museums. All that has emboldened me, although I needed little.

 

I'm on a quest (not from God, of course, as I don't think I'm psychotic).

 

The purpose of each photo is to capture a moment, whether it be 'decisive' or not. To present to you a complete synopsis of that moment within the four lines of a frame, and often times it will be a 'story' although I did not think about that when I began taking (I mistakenly began with 'telling stories) photographs. It just turned out that so many 'told stories', but then a long-ago profession where I was diverted when I was hired as a photographer for Associated Press, was story writer, for which I wrote wonderful, compelling stories, literally from day one and without any formal training at all. (they just threw me in the 'pool', sink or swim, and luckily I swam, and not just dog paddle, but championship strokes).

 

I abandoned my photography then, having seen Henri Cartier-Bresson's work and judging I had nothing further to offer, but he's dead and I'm having the time of my life with showing the world 'my view, my way'.

 

I'm glad you approve.

 

It heartens me to the bone.

 

John (Crosley)

I do not know but suspect that those very first 3,3 or 4,4 ratings come from the moderator. Perhaps to attempt to "normalize" the rating system. Those 3s pop up in a blink of an eye and then nothing for awhile or even a day.

I think 'moderators' have better things to do, than try to pre-emptively try to 'normalize' ratings by trying to guess what subsequent ratings will be.

 

I think it is a member with just horrible taste (or perhaps someone who just holds a grudge).

 

I presume this photo has more than adequate lines, composition etc., to be held to a higher rate than 3/3 by the vast majority of PN members and does not meet the criteria for a 3/3 rating.

 

But so what?

 

Eventually rogue members weed themselves out. The Administration finds really low raters and takes away their rates. -- they often disappear overnight when a pattern develops that suggests 'socially malevolent' rating.'

 

Just my 2 cents worth.

 

The Adm has a big stake in honest ratings and not skewing them, and I bet they adhere to high standards; it once was far, far, far worse. I have few or no complaints about ratings, and those I have have been handled courteously and expeditiously.

 

(thank you Jeremy, from Abuse@photo.net as always for the once or twice a year we communicate.)

 

And thank you Asher L. for your comment.

 

I don't comment about bad rates; I just communicate with Jeremy. Those rates often disappear or other problems 'take care of themselves'. The Administration here is very well meaning.

 

John (Crosley)

Wonderful capture and composition, it really tells us a story. Thanks for sharing :)

This is the hallmark of American capitalism: working every second when one could be 'lounging' away from the boss's eye. Or perhaps he is the boss. In any case, he was working in 'overdrive', just as were so many other 'road warriors' traveling that day.

 

The French or Italians might have been enjoying an espresso and conviviality of their company contemplating a four or six week vacation, but Americans work, work, work, and do more work, then take their work home with them.

 

This is just one exemplar.

 

Thanks for the compliment about composition, etc.

 

John (Crosley)

Bad taste or grudge..yes those too. But if that were the only case you'd see a lot of 3,3 not just the usual 1 and I just looked and there is only 1 3 rating. Anyway the moderator thought was not my idea.

I have only complained once recently to abuse@photo.net about 3 3/3s appearing on three photos posted.

 

The response was 'no problem detected'.

 

So, I let it go.

 

Then, after a while, the 3/3s all disappeared.

 

I guess I had alerted Jeremy Stein (at abuse@photo.net) that there indeed had been a problem, and once alerted and verified, the ratings suddenly 'evaporated'. The 3/3s were the first ratings on all the three posted photos, and there were the same ratings as first ratings on others' photos too.

 

Anyway, with thousands of ratings, it all works out in the wash.

 

One rating don't mean much . . . in he overall schema, so i don't get all het up.

 

John (Crosley)

John, many thanks for your responsive comments. I put this image in "my favorites", which I do whenever something strikes me as impressive enough to want to view often - rates notwithstanding. This shot is a great study for me.

To heck with rates.

 

It's the photo that counts. Although I like the raters to 'see' the worth of photos that I see, if that don't that's usually their tough luck -- so long as those who have judgment and good taste (some of them) see what I was trying to convey, as you have with this photo.

 

For that, then, it's a success, as it was when I took it.

 

I'm surprised by low rates, but so what?

 

They're just numbers, and have nothing or little to do with the intrinsic worth of this photo.

 

There is the grand exposition of photos at Paris happening about now at the Grand Caroussel du Louvre, and if PNers could see the photo illustrating their brochure they'd mostly give it a 3/4.

 

It's a photo they felt most worthy for that annual exhibition which is world famous -- those who confine their tastes to Photo.net are bound to live in a Photographic fishbowl.

 

I look outside that fishbowl whenever I can.

 

I just 'see' subjects, I 'view' them through my lens, then I 'frame' them and 'take' them -- sometimes in as short as one second, if I am quick about it.

 

Oftentimes I'm stunned by results of posting; sometimes for the better; sometimes for the worse.

 

But for myself, usually my judgment of the 'worth' of a photo is already fixed (there are some changes from time to time as a result of ratings, but not very many).

 

Ratings do help keep me honest about popularity, however.

 

Enjoy this Photo, Liz.

 

Again and again.

 

I'll dedicate it to you.

 

'Liz's Photo' for letting me know how much it affects you.

 

John (Crosley)

If a photo ratings start with 3/3 and go to 7/7, of what worth are the rates other than to say that the photo either is unrateable or has different meanings to diferent people and doesn't easily fit into a rating scale.

 

Some photos just defy being rated in some sort of 'Bell curve' - maybe this is one.

 

John (Crosley)

John, I feel so honored - and proud - to be associated with you this way. Many thanks.

That was my point. The first rating is 3/7, 3/7 for most everyone and appears right away so the 3, 3 rating is not a random occurance Why from 3/7 going to 7/7? Because the population of raters is shifing over time; and ratings on a given photo ideally should not be bell shaped but rather skewed like scores in gymnastics. All in all what use are ratings? You decide. I'd rather look at photos, not rate them. I have to get some sleep.

Well spoken (written)

 

If you look at my statistics, you'll find I have given fewer than 500 ratings (far fewer) in 4-1/2 years. I don't rate except to place a photo in my highest-rated gallery.

 

I hope to be rated, and by anyone, so I don't kick much when someone (not a bot) gives me a rogue rating. I'm not a voter, so I can't really judge those who elect rogues, as I don't participate. I'm a provider -- like somebody who runs for office and is judged by the voters.

 

I imagine if I ran up 60,000 rates and they skewed 'high', I'd have 120,000 page views on my bio page and much more visibility, but that's not for me. I'd prefer to let people find me as they can; they're more loyal.

 

Hope when you wakened you had a good sleep ;~))

 

Ratings, in the end, are only guides to popularity . . . but for that they're very good.

 

Addendum: when I first came to Photo.net, this place was a den of ratings cliques -- full of mate-raters who worked en masse, to uprate their friends' photos and downrate others they perceived as competitors, all so they could manipulate the top-rated photo engine and photo placement there -- so all could be seen as better photographers than they were. (perhaps it all zeroed out but it made for much enmity)

 

I refused to participate and therefore rated seldom, if at all. Therefore, it was impossible for me to 'mate-rate', and I have NEVER been accused of doing so. With so few rates over 4-1/2 years, it would be a hard argument to make against me, though some idiot might try ;~))

 

John (Crosley)

Yep, a typical John Crosley photo, :-)

With regards

Maybe you, of all the people I respect (and I do respect you greatly for personal attributes and artistry) could explain just exactly what a 'John Crosley Photo' is?

 

I'm kinda befuddled.

 

I don't think I take two photos that are alike, but somehow they all do have some sort of 'look and feel' don't they?

 

I'm here in rainy Hamburg, just a stone's throw away from you, headed for a North Sea port.

 

Does it ever stop raining in Hamburg . . . I've never seen the sun here in several trips?

 

Mystified.

 

Of course, you Dutch share some weather with the Hambourgeoisie, so I guess I know why the old Flemish and Dutch painters, even when painting a summer sky, always included great big clouds . . . .

 

Clouds make rain and rain is/was never far away.

 

Kind of reminds me of my old days in Seattle (or living right down the street from the Casa Rosso ;~)) (albeit at superbargain prices in a 5-star hotel that was empty for the holidays . . . . at prices they would be embarrassed to admit they gave to anyone).

 

I never ate meals there, preferring the old mother and her sons who made sandwiches in the deli across the street, all from the finest hams and cheeses, etc., and sold them at super bargain prices too.

 

My hotel rooms were so fancy they gave each (I had several) a theme name . . . . and I stayed for about $35-40 a night, when they charged others about $250 a night.

 

(I like to bargain, and then generally dressed nicely so they could envision me hanging around the lobby looking respectable, and not giving away that I'm really riff-raff.)

 

That was before I took up photography again and living the bohemian life.

 

;~))

 

John (Crosley)