'Name the Similarities (And Near Similarities)'

There is more than one similarity between the poster actor, left and the

pretty young woman, seated right. Can you name them all, or just the

key one I'm thinking of? They don't have to be similarities and can 'miss

the mark' (remember the movie 'Educating Rita'? If so you'll get the

point.) Special honor to whomever gets the point I'm going to make

about the 'similarity' or near similarity between the two. Are you up to

the challenge? Your ratings and critiques are also 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

In trying to find a 'similarity' don't look for 'exact match' and instead 'think outside the box'. Look at the photo from more than one direction and use an open mind.

 

You may be surprised to find 'the answer' I'm seeking. Someone may spot it right away, or maybe never.

 

I'll hold my tongue (keyboard) for a while, but may offer 'hotter, colder' clues.

 

John (Crosley)

I see a pair of earrings looking like a pair of handcuff for one thing

 

A watch looking like a phone, phone beeing held by the woman for a second thing

 

But knowing you the similarities you see are probably even more twisted ;-)

 

great photo by the way ...

I HAD to take this photo, but the reason at first escaped me.

 

You notice some similarities and good for trying, but they are not THE similarity I am looking for.

 

It's now (and almost soon after was) obvious to me, but one has to be a very trained observer or very lucky to notice it. It's not very obvious to the ordinary viewer, I think.

 

I searched at first for 'why' this photo appealed so much to me -- why I had to have 'her' and 'him' in the photo together and 'why' they seemed so complementary and finally I found it.

 

There are the obvious similarities (they are looking at 'me' etc.

 

But there's one other: You'll slap our forehead when you hear it.

 

And it's not 'twisted' -- just not obvious to people who do not study photos of mine or others seriously, I think (I could be wrong and a neophyte might get it in a half hour.)

 

John (Crosley)

"just not obvious to people who do not study photos of mine or others seriously"

 

Not sure how I should take that one ;-)

 

If that is in term of composition, the "V" shape of the man's finger framing the face are a similarity with the "V" shape of the woman's collar

 

I have to say your reference to "Educating Rita" is confusing me a bit : is that a reference to a particular scene, or to the narrative of the movie ?

 

Great game for a wednesday, btw

 

 

 

If anyone in the world could get that easily, it is you.

 

Yes, indeed, it is the V of the man's fingers, indicating that one should use one's eyes.

 

It is 'mirrored in the inverted 'V' of the woman's fake fur hoodie.

 

I took the photo, was certain I had to take the photo, and didn't even know why.

 

I even took this, framed it in stopped traffic, was cut off by a right-turning car, then when traffic cleared my lane was moving and I fired this just before stepping on the accelerator, but without leaving enough room between me and the next vehicle to become ticket bait.

 

Yes, indeed, 'V' and Inverted 'V'

 

In 'Educating Rita' the whole movie was about a housewife who had decided that a certain poetic device in which a poem seemed about to rhyme but didn't quite, was just that -- a rhyme that missed.

 

In actuality in formal English studies, that device in poetry has an actual name and the erudite know that name so saying in a few words 'it's a rhyme that doesn't quite make it -- a rhyme that misses' is something that would get a person thrown out of university.

 

Michael Caine, the star, takes Rita (Lynn Redgrave I think) under his tutelage, and shows her that sometimes she cannot say the obvious - sometimes you cannot say that a rhyme that misses is a rhyme that misses and you must call it by its formal name (which escapes me, damn).

 

Anyway, sometimes things look similar but aren't; they can be almost mirrors, but are not mirrors -- they 'miss' but are similar enough to give pause, as here.

 

Mssr. Robert, You are the Winner and proclaimed a GENIUS at photointerpreting John's photos (an official genius with John's imprimatur.) Just show a copy of this imprimatur in the tube and pay the normal fare and they'll let you on.

 

But maybe someday it'll be worth a bar bet or something.

 

Q. Who is John Crosley's official photo interpreting genius?

 

A. Laurent-Paul Robert

 

But then everybody knows he's a genius at everything he ever tried.

 

Even I.

 

I should have barred you from the contest, but then it would have been no fun. I knew when I saw you appear that you probably would get it.

 

I could have made this go on for weeks if you had not appeared, but them's the breaks. I must say 'the best man has won.'

 

;~))

 

My best to you, my photo-interpreting genius.

 

John (Crosley)

But I give it to you anyway.

 

Unless by 'collar' you meant the 'hoodie' an inverted 'V'.

 

Close and I give you the 'cigar'.

 

And I think actually that's what you meant.

 

John (Crosley)

Yes by "Collar" I meant "Hoodie". Couldn't find the right word at the time, and thought I may get away with a "collar", supposing it may be late where you are at the moment ;-)

 

Now I'll read the long answer ...

 

Sometimes you wonder, even as an experienced photographer, what makes a photo compelling, or what compels you (the photographer) to take a photo, as here, and then, a half hour later, though you like it, you look at it and say 'why'.

 

Well, with the help of a vast Photo.net audience and a Photocritiq.com audience too, I've been getting pretty good at analyzing such things,and soon the reason became apparent to me.

 

This is a photo about symmetry. The man is white and black; he's looking at me. The woman is black and white, (conversely by the way or saying it with care and emphasis, the man is white and black ;~)) )

 

In any case, he has twin fingers (indicating that one should use one's eyes to 'observe' as he's from a movie poster aimed at the clueless about some 'mall cop' which I'm sure I'll never see but about which IMBD.com carries one review which says it's 'hilarious'

 

I'll bet.

 

In any case the black and white woman (note that this time black comes first, not white and black) has her white hoodie, an inverted 'V' to complete the symmetry, and this time upside down.

 

Photographers like me live for captures like this.

 

This was part of a series - my first of the day, and I could have laid my camera down right there, as I only set out to take one good photo a day.

 

But see my other two postings from the same day, also posted, and there are others too.

 

Those will get displayed at some further time. I had enough good captures Tuesday to make a folder (Tuesday's good captures -- all with a cheapo lens)

 

John (Crosley)

Guess what? I do not agree again -with either of you in fact. It is not about similairaty. It is about two disimliar lives -about as dissimilar as you can get and neither could care less about the other; they won't even look at each other. And heavenly light is shining down on him but not her. It could be in Hebrew a להפוך-lives fliped over. There is a better word but I cannot think of one just now or maybe"A-is-not-equal-to-B". You could claim that the V fliped is a "siman" or symbolic of the inversion. I'd also say that the reason you took this is because you "gravitate (word?) to either contrast or repitition between billboards and people. This one I will give to you that it could be Bresson or Erwit. I;ll give this one a 6s (rare for me with anyone) based on how I see it.

Good b/w capture. Regards.

Expressive composition

Meir,

Guess what : you are right : there are lots of dissimilarities.

But then there are also lots of similarities, and I could get on an on about similarities in this photo.

 

And this is in my opinion, exactly why this photo is very strong, and why you rate it much higher than you usually do : this is somehow about the complexity of life in general : Similarities and Disimilarities are always present together, and we can't never find one without the other.

 

Then in art and photography in particular, we always have troubles getting this whole aspect of life, and are drawn toward one of those two, because we can;t help but try to simplify life as a kind of reflex.

 

John,

I hope you were a bit tired or not fully awake, ( depending the part of the word you are shooting these days ) when writing your 08:39 A.M message.

It is a very nice one, but certainly too nice : I may start to believe you on of these days

Frankly, I like the parallel between the fur around the girl's head and the plants in the background. Obviously that's not really what this photo's about, but just something I noticed.

The photo is mostly about iriony (?) if that is the correct word. If it went to MOMA that would be the reason.

Thanks so much Marta. I couldn't stop taking this, even as traffic was moving and I was starting out. This is through my front windshield. There are two similar captures, and this is the better.

 

Thanks again.

 

John (Crosley)

I indeed was tired, but entirely lucid.

 

You are brilliant; do not doubt about it.

 

Believe it.

 

No crossing my fingers behind my back. You deduced correctly, and I thought I only got it by a fluke.

 

It's a very odd 'similarity' or 'near similarity' and many would never have got it; you hit it on the second try, right on the money for my enduring admiration (as with other things.)

 

Went from that to the McHugh exhibitionin Beverly Hills in a fabulous art/design building curated by my former and once again mentor Michel Karman.

 

He's back.

 

With all his personal power, amazing charm, and the doors he opens just by his sheer force of personality -- one of the most amazing personalities I've ever come across.

 

I took brilliant shots of him, which would compete with best anyone has taken ever of most artists I think (in my style at least). All in five minutes. DIdn't want to upset photographer McHugh by photographing at his exhibit and 'stealing his thunder'.

 

McHugh -- Brilliant photographer with connections you wouuldn't believe in celebrity world, but beautiful art in shots of architecture, etc of Old Los Angeles etc. A beautiful artistic eye. Karman curated exhibit; a must see in LA if you happen to be in area. (Pacific Design Center, second floor).

 

From my ridiculous circumstances to Beverly Hills (and back) (and then the Philharmonic Association hangers on soliciting my work for their next charity auction. It's a strange world. (but please, John, nothing gritty, only some pretty for the rich women who support the philharmonic -- but they were talking about this unknown artist salvador sal . . . . [salgado] who couldn't be grittier, and didn't know it I guess. Live and learn; I guess I spent too much time with ordinary people and not the glitterati.

 

;~))

 

Nothing rarified about me.

 

Maybe it shows in my photos.

 

I like ordinary folk and the 'ordinary' and 'extraordinary' in all folk.

 

That's what I photograph.

 

Without that, I'd be a landscaper, I suppose.

 

John (Crosley)

Thank you so much for your kind words.

 

John (Crosley)

I urged you to 'think outside the box' and you have, much to your credit. We cannot all be as 'on the spot as Laurent-Paul was above, and I maybe just had an intuitive moment to understand the 'V' fingers and the inverted 'V' of the 'Hoodie' and it was a once - in - a - blue - moon type of sort of recognition.

 

Keep your eyes open; you may make the next big discovery.

 

It as almost 40 years (maybe more) before I was fully able to understand my first post and most significant post 'Balloon Man' -- my highest rated ever.

 

Best to you and 'A' for effort.

 

John (Crosley)

Funny shot: who is observing whom ? BR Joerg

Aha,

 

Who is observing whom?

 

We all are, each other, I think, except she can't see me behind the bugs on my windshield and the bird droppings.

 

;~))

 

Thanks for the comment.

 

John (Crosley)

I almost discouraged four movie-goers from viewing this movie after reading the LA Times movie review on it; it panned the movie, or so I thought.

 

Later, I met a fellow who saw the movie; he thought it was outrageously funny.

 

I decided to pass on movie recommendations. There's no accounting for taste, and I'm certainly no arbiter.

 

Newspaper reviews are only one reviewer's opinion.

 

Just like individuals who rate photos.

 

;~))

 

John (Crosley)