johncrosley

I wrote a still unfinished treatise for Photo.net back in the days when people still read such things about 'Photographers: Watch Your Background', and part of the thesis was by watching one's background, and incorporating it properly (or avoiding bad backgrounds, or just using them intelligently), one could make or break a a potential photo situation. It was widely read and has over 60 comments, when last I looked. I think thousands read it, judging from the numbers who referred to it who did not comment there, but later referred to it in their photo comments. It's still there, I think, still unfinished, because old management refused to install the 'handy dan' new software for moving and rearranging one' photos (and comments) which it installed for our portfolios and folders. It would be a horrific job to rearrange the photos to make that a coherent text without redoing it, and it's L O N G with more photos commented on than you can imagine. But surprise! In writing about what I did and worked, I not only learned how to repeat the process more intellectually, but also learned how to teach others with thout out explanations and clear expressions. Win, win. Now also I've taken tens of thousands of new photos, maybe hundreds of thousands of new photos, and easily posted a thousand more here, so the points I was making have new and often better photos to illustrate them. But with no backing from old Photo.net management, the project was sunk. It has stood dormant, by far PN's largest and longest and best thought out -- certainly its most ambitious, and never to be finished, but worth transforming the text with new photos for illustration into a basic text or part of a text for photo students, especially doing street, but relating to other genres as well.I like 'street' (and flying bird shooting) because it requires fast thinking and reflexes with no do-overs. I'm writing a text on 'street' and 'how to do it successfullt (a great deal has to do with one's own psychological makeup which is somewhat malleable), and afterwards may come the text on how consciously to arrange your photo elements in a hurry when you have a little time (maybe even very little), you can move (even a little) or wait for your subject to move in a perhaps predictable manner. I have literally hundreds and thousands of potential very good illustrations, so I'm glad you put me onto the subject once again. As to this photo, it has its inspiration in two photos by the great Henri Cartier-Bresson, an early one in which a youth stands right in front of the firing line of a cannon lined straight at him and perpendicular to the photographer. who is far away. A later one of the same theme shows the huge suspended counterweight overhead of an alpine ski tram with its huge cement and/or steel weights hanging by thin-looking cables and a sole individual far away standing weight that appears ready to fall on him. Theme: imminent, unseen danger. Subtheme: Sublime unawareness of the danger. Here, i recognized the gun photo as 'danger', then looked for someone to fulfill the second part, and since I was far away, just stood there with my telephoto for not long, and soon enough this guy depicted walked by, milled about, paused, and 'snap'. The reflections, noted above, (disregarding those I cloned out), were very fortuitously placed and might be gun smoke. The man was quite nearer me than the gun, but foreshortening made him appear in its firing line. With a long tele, indoors, I had to stop way down, then use a very long shutter speed hand held and pray he or I didn't move for at least one shot. There was only one, then the situation vanished but I had a capture. Essentially, I had an 'idea' and I 'built' this shot. It is a 'constructed' 'street photo' that depends on foreshortening and knowing the effects of varying depth of field and knowing enough to stop down to extend the depth of fields to avoid blurring either subject to keep the optical illusion. It also helped I was using a camera with an APS-C (reduced size) sensor, as that helped increase depth of field versus a full frame sensor. So, that's how it's done, but extremely quickly, and so fast that you would not have been able to turn around for more than two to four seconds before I had my entire capture, man, gun, 'gun smoke' and all, then to my memory card and already prowling for my next capture. I hardly thought much of it until I found it in review, but I like it very much. I'm not ashamed of doing such things or writing about them; anybody worth their salt if they're honest will do such things from time to time, or practice other manipulations which I might not -- it's personal choice and there are few rules in 'street' except it has to be an authentic capture (even if it depends on foreshortening). Remember, however, this is not journalism, and no sane photojournalist would turn this into his editor except as a feature and 'for fun', certainly to be published with an explanation of foreshortening.'s effects. Or the photographer would be out of a job. I'm glad to have both of you as viewers and critics and I welcome your participation; it is nice to get feedback, and writing like this hones my writing skills. john John (Crosley)

It's obvious of course, that this photo has three subjects, but that's not all. In fact, this photo (with a little stretch of the imagination) is about three sets of threes. Of course there are three silhouetted subjects, but more than that, there is nearly a 'rule of threes' (no such rule of course), blending of the beach (black), the sea (light gray), and the setting sun/cloudscape, darker gray. In fact the three levels of grayscale are quite close to an equal division of the grayscale, and this 'raw' photo was processed that way in color and when it was converted to black and white, it hardly needed any adjustment to make the black, light gray and darker gray triad on the grayscale. Compositionally, if one allows a little leeway, this also might be a 'rule of threes' (no such rule of course) photo, with the beach being one third (really, it's more, but then so what?), the sea being a third (or so) and the sky/clouds/sunset, taking up another third. It's not so precise in its three divisions that it looks composited by a graphic arts student as a first year student project, but with leeway, the photo is divided into three parts, and those three parts are three nearly co-equal parts of the grayscale or at least the setting sun is on the grayscale about as far from the beach (black) as from the sea (light gray). I was hoping someone would make a comment or suggestion, but no one did, so I am putting my thoughts here. It looks like quite a simple photo. In my mind it's 'three sets of three' and deceptively simple. Any response or thoughts? john John (Crosley)

Note the roundish light reflections seemingly emanating from the tip of the gun. As a photographer, I couldn't have hoped for better placement of those reflections; probably ceiling lights, but oh, what good fortune to have them THERE and lined up like that, just like gunsmoke. Outcomes sometimes are anticipated, like lining up this photo, but some parts are just the opposite, like discovering the light reflections lined up 'just so' without planning. ;~)) john John (Crosley)

Thanks for the nice comment and your view; I would love to have seen a hand holding the gun, but that's a photo of a gun -- no hand that I recall, and this is a HUGELY distant telephoto shot with HUGE (YUGE?) compression. If you get my drift. I really had to stop down to keep both in sharpest focus, as they were some distance apart, forward to back, and you can imagine what that did to my shutter speed, hand held at that, in the middle of a YUGE crowd (there it is again, it's catching!). Thanks again, and best wishes no matter whether you say HUGE or YUGE. John (Crosley)

This photo exhibition attendee might have a surprise if he turns around and has a look behind him! Your ratings, critiques and observations are invited and most welcome. If you rate harshly, very critically, or just wish to make a remark, please submit a helpful and constructive comment; please share your photographic knowledge to help improve my photography. Thanks! Enjoy! john

Yes, this photo is extremely stark, but it's a studied starkness, with tonalities that 'mean something'. I'm interested in someone who can attach some meaning between my request for critique and the tonalities in this photo, as well as two parts of the remaining composition (being generous to one part). It is a very studied photo, as that discussion may reveal, if it does take place. Otherwise, in about a week or ten days, perhaps, if it doesn't happen, I may comment. I'm interested in thoughts from those who follow my work and are excellent commenters, as anyone else who has a fertile imagination and a good command of photographic principles. Thanks for the comment, Steve. john John (Crosley)

These three are just one part of the threes and thirds that I see (interpreting liberally) when I view this photo of a beach scene in the Los Angeles area one recent December. Your ratings, critiques and observations are invited and most welcome. If you rate harshly, very critically or just wish to make a remark, please submit a helpful and constructive comment; please share you photographic knowledge to help improve my photography. Try your hand at finding the other 'threes' and 'thirds' (being liberal of course), if you wish. Thanks! Enjoy! john

My 'home page' portfolio has changed with addition of about 10 new photos since the above photo was posted here a few hours ago. It's 'dynamic' meaning the portfolio changes daily or nearly so, with new photos being added on a most frequent basis, often daily, sometimes more so, with occasional lulls. Have a look! Link's in the first comments or on my bio page. john John (Crosley)

Astute comment. You didn't mention that the guy with the very fashionable scarf worn a la Francaise was going to get 'cracked' by the petard of the falling woman. How ignominious an end. First to get 'cracked', then to get squashed. I had a wonderful time, still do, shooting the Paris Metro; it's the first destination for me in Paris, and I can spend hours, even days, riding the trains, taking in the advertisements, then 'seeing what I can get' with compositions and juxtapositions. However, in Paris, it's a state of seige . . . . cameras were 'forbidden' maybe (don't know for sure' in the Metro, but I shot right under the eyes of the flics and no one said anything. Same with others, tourists. Now, I bet it's raise eyebrows. Luckily my skin is light. Kyiv used to be OK for that, though far from wonderful, but wartime has made Metro advertising somewhat slim; there are other places to put precious local currency (called the hryvnia and pronounced 'grivna'). Each one buys one-fifth what it bought ten years ago/half what it bought two years ago. That's why in the USA the Federal Reserve is so careful about watching for inflation signs, but despite the Republicans who have been yelling 'inflation' for the almost eight years of Obama's term, none has been forthcoming. You can read Paul Krugman of the NY Times to find out why that's so. I would say whatever lifted this woman to her heights has finally let her down. Perhaps she's a harbinger of the British economy after Brexit? She'll fall down and crash all around her, rear end first, as will the Brits as the exit the EU, all because the Brits were worried about taking in immigrants (not saying they're unjustified, but even so, the EU is a 'house of cards' with no central government and pull out of one major government may cause the rest to fall). Putin must be laughing all the way from the Kremlin to his mystery home few have ever seen where he keeps his mystery woman one only hears snippets about except that perhaps he'll marry her. His favorite wish is to see the fall of the EU and of course NATO which one supposes would occur nearly simultaneously, leaving Ukraine and the Baltic countries undefended. (Ukraine is not a NATO country but has blessings from many NATO members.). First comes Ukraine. Let Ukraine go (the war's heating up hot now), then elect Putin's supporter Trump (with Putin's help?), and NATO starts to tear apart, opening the way for some more opportunism. In idealogy Putin and Stalin are completely on opposite poles, or so it would seem, but operationally, that's another thing . . . . . and the result is poor photo shooting for poor me on the Ukraine Metro. See, this is all about ME. I've shot the Moscow Metro, right under the militia's noses, and no one then seemed to care under Yeltsin, but now, I'd probably be seen as a spy. My favorite guy when I lived in Moscow was an admiral (retired) of submarines and his wife, the former librarian of the Kremlin (also retired) . . . . . two relatives by marriage. How strange then to have been related to one of Brezhnev's favorite people (the admiral). I enjoyed Russia so much, and now feel like I can't go back. Oh, and the admiral's son was one of Putin's aides, now gone. All that is over, sadly. I really take no sides/I just take photos of people being themselves. I look for human truths, not political ones. The Russians individually are some of the warmest people on the planet when you meet with them personally . . . . . they'd be the first (well before Ukrainians) to take you into their homes and give you gifts of their most precious valuables even if they are trinkets or chachkes to a person from a wealthier nation). I spent wonderful times in Russia, and wish I could do so again without worrying about a finger being pointed at me with life-threatening consequences. Just for carrying a camera and maybe taking interesting pictures. Because frankly taking interesting photos is my only noteworthy interest in life. I'm a non-interventionist. I just wish people could get along. Like you and me? Even though we're a half world apart. Sometimes more/sometimes less and sometimes this way and sometimes a different way . . . . . (depending on where I am). Best wishes to you this new week, Jack. And thanks. john John (Crosley)

After years of using pirate Photoshop software after I was shut down in Odessa, Ukraine once when I had a Photoshop problem with my purchased version and couldn't start it up without an Internet connection (though I had paid full freight), I was stuck and unable to use Photoshop. Photoshop, understandably upset with pirating, had made it so hard for me, a paid user to use it when it crashed on me, I couldn't restore it without an Internet connection; later they added telephone verification and install codes, but not soon enough for me. I bought (to go with my paid version) a pirate version, so I would never get stuck in that problem again. Things changed when Adobe offered its never ending subscription plan for $10.00 plus sales tax a month with its also neverending upgrades, including camera plug-ins and compatibility for the latest cameras which if you get a new camera sooner or later will drive you into the new Adobe camp. Anti-shake or shake reduction has saved my 'most highly rated' photo on this site in the past three and one-half years from the rubbish where he had sat for eleven years, just too unsharp to be used or shown to anyone. Shake reduction, used with practice, salvaged that photo, and now I'm working on one of five books, and it's on the cover of one of the two color books. It's worth the $10.00 (plus tax) a month, plus you get Lightroom (not for me unfortunately). I'm so glad this photo appeals to you; it's always a waste to post and keep posted a photo that's just dullsville and nobody really wants to click on. Yet I've done it and almost never take down a photo - maybe one or two a year and some years I take down nothing, and always only if 'just posted', but never if already commented on unless there's some huge mistake. I just found one of my very best photos EVER in some downloads from 2014 and just finished Photoshopping it. It needed an interfering car tail light cloned out of the scene and same with part of an auto that was very dark and then this beach scene, with some cropping is just drop dead gorgeous, and framed perfectly. It's a photo I can just stare at and know it'll always be among my very best (and my most simple). And to think that I just passed it by; probably never even saw it, until I got to it in a patchy sort of download review, two or three downloads or even ten at a time for the almost 2,000 downloads I've had. They started out with 6 megapixels and 1 gig cards and now are up to 64 gig cards, so now a single download can be very daunting to review, and sometimes a 'gold mine' of pretty good stuff. It could keep me busy for half a decade to a decade with no more shooting if I were to chose, but I plan to keep on shooting. It's what life is about. Right, Greg? (and Verena?) Thanks for the nice comment. john John (Crosley)

Don't write too soon. With the color version, you have to imagine the less sharp portions (people center and right) more sharp, as here, since I don't fool with my photos once posted as it will spoil the comments. If I'm going to do a substantial workover, I'll try to convert to another view say here to b&w, and have another go if the composition holds up and the photo is not 'color dependant' and posted as a color photo, or if a b&w photo, if odd or irritating colors don't just spoil the photo and it can be displayed either way. That way my portfolio doesn't become too redundant -- it's hard enough getting my nerve up to repost this as b&w. Yet Google.com likes it; under Crosley comment, there's a list of photos (four) and more with usually (not always as they mix it u and sometimes it disappears altogether), and right now the color version of this photo is appearing as one of the four featured photos. Then under 'more' below, there's links to anywhere from 14 to 54 more pages (not listings but pages) of my posts of posts referring to me. (Of course, when I write this, it will disappear to make a liar out of me!!!). Usually the folks at Google.com make pretty good choices, and my hat's off to them for their curating skills; and I just wonder if they do it by a person, a group or if it's just a very, very smart algorhythm. I think it's people, myself, and if so, I thank them for making very good choices almost always. Also, many times the discussions under the four chosen photos are interesting as well -- and I find myself rereading them. So, Jim, have a look, do some imagining, and let me know, would you? Thanks, my friend. john John (Crosley)

Thank you for the kind comment. This is what's called a 'dense' photo because of the vast amount of visual information and the various 'stories' or 'narratives' contained therein. What about the falling woman? If viewed literally, she's going to smash the guy's head -- literally 'crack' him open (if you get my meaning) before squashing him, and same with others nearby. There's a center group to themselves and a far group, each in their own clique, but they are joined in a whole composition. One can view this photo sartorially, starting with the almost obligatory scarf around the leftmost man's neck and shoulders draped in a manner that is well known to Parisians. Blacks predominate, which helps form a cohesive lower boundary and so forth. In other words, there's much to analyze in this photo, but most of all, I hope it's just 'interesting' and 'fun' which is why it's posted. Yours for 'fun on Photo.net'! Thanks again, and best wishes Sandy. john John (Crosley)

Here is a link to my home page here, which also is my portfolio of almost all color photos on the site ImageBrief.com. That portfolio contains 1300+- photos just in the portfolio part plus the catalog of licensable photos (again, almost all color) numbers about 14,000. I invite you to browse the portfolio -- there's 34 pages of 38 photos to the page, and the portfolio keeps getting rearranged and added to on an almost daily basis with new work appearing there almost as soon as it's Photoshopped. Here's the link; you'll have to copy and paste into your browser, or just click on my 'home page' link. Remember, that portfolio is dynamic -- e.g., it changes from day to day, or every other day, and if you are interested in my work much of which is not posted here or is posted here in B&W only, the mostly color work may be found there: http://www.imagebrief.com/photographers/john-271#/portfolio I hope you make the visit and enjoy. If you want to enjoy the rest of the 13,000 -- 14,000 photos, you can join the site, but it's free for the signup. john John (Crosley)

The center and right subjects in the color postings (which had its own listing in Google.com of this photo) showed these subjects as out of focus and no amount of tinkering with the raw original would allow this low shutter speed, telephoto, long distance, open aperture photo to sharpen those out of focus figures. Now they're acceptably sharp, though no camera motion detectable. The reason: 'Shake reduction', intended to reduce 'camera shake' ostensibly, but also good just as a sharpening tool for images that are cohesive but somewhat out of focus. If you look up in Crosley comment on Google.com the orignal link to the color version of this photo you can see the dramatic improvement. Rather than repost the color version, which is redundant, why not post in black and white, as it's good in my view as a b&w photo too? I hope you like it and also write about your experiences with 'shake reduction in Photoshop CC. john John (Crosley)

This photo, taken a while ago and seen previously in color, was taken in the Paris Metro, the home of some wild photo opportunities with its wonderful advertising posters which change frequently. Your ratings, critiques and observations are invited and most welcome. If you rate or critique harshly or wish to make a remark, please submit a helpful and constructive comment; please share your photographic knowledge to help improve my photography. Thanks! Enjoy! (I did!) john

I'd been through this particular stair/passageway combination nearly or more than one hundred times and never felt the inspiration to raise my camera partly from the fatigue of having already gone up and down several flights of steps just to arrive at that point. But then I saw that light coming like a shaft down the stairwell and it inspired me. This is not my first shot. I tried from where I had been standing, and the results were desultory, but I remembered the exhortation 'work the subject', and that is built into what I do anyway. So I moved right a little bit, and unlike so many of my photos that are taken in an instant, this was entirely preplanned with angles and proportions carefully taken into account. Then I waited. When the perfect (as well as I could get) person came by, I snapped the shutter, and would have tried for something better, but a vendor came and set up a cardboard makeshift shop to sell produce to the right, and that was the end of symmetry and the end of my chances. Frankly, that vendor or others like that person are the reason(s) I hadn't seen this particular relationship before, as they've almost always set up shop there on the landing. In post processing, you have to remember that the camera exposes on 'auto' settings for a certain amount of greyscale and this came out somewhat overexposed though tempered by the strong light down the stairwell. I tweaked it so the stairs, right, were dark and darker as one went father away from the near stairwell to allow the leading lines to 'work', and as you so aptly noticed, they work very well. That's because of a long time spent in post processing, which is very unusual for me, as the light/shadow combination for this particular photo was very tricky, and I had a particular 'look' (shown) I was trying for. Just a percent more light on the right stairs or even a fraction just about destroyed the look. One had to be very careful in post to make this come out right. This is as close to a 'manufactured' Crosley 'street' photo as you'll ever see; so many others are taken 'on the fly' no matter how wonderful their proportions. But I know what I want, and I also didn't want to waste a good chance, obtained by merely sidestepping a little, then up a step or two, and voila -- there it was, all for waiting with a little patience for the inevitable pedestrian. It wasn't all for you Alf, but it was for viewers like you, as Photo.netters are a demanding bunch, and I also demand a lot from myself, especially when I have time to set a circumstance up. Thanks for enduring my perhaps overlong explanation. And for the kind critique and compliment. john John (Crosley)

A young woman emerges from the city's transportation bowels, climbs some steps, and is illuminated by the strong but waning light of the long oncoming summer day. Your ratings, critiques and observations are invited and most welcome. If you rate harshly, very critically, or wish to make a remark, please submit a helpful and constructive comment; please share your photographic knowledge to help improve my photography. Thanks! Enjoy! john

Aha . . . . . john John (Crosley)

I'm not afraid of out of focus photos from subject movement of personal movement. I try for 'in focus' but if while trying for an 'in focus' photo I get some throw aways, then that's the price of taking chances, which I do in abundance. Once, before digitial and when I was in my early 20s, for a landscape photo, I backed up to my car in the Sierra with a long lens (135 mm) and zeroed in on a very small waterfall -- just a fast rushing stream dropping a few feet actually -- and attempted to capture it. I followed the meter on my Nikon and the exposure on my manual camera worked out to two seconds, which I followed. I breathed in, and I think even willed my heart to stop, pressed the shutter button and voila, the water was caught rushing, all the detail at the side of the falls and behind was in full focus. The capture was sharp as can be. I didn't know if I had caught the shot until a week or so later when I developed the roll, but the roll came back (transparencies) with notes from the dark room workers about 'GREAT SHOTS!' and other congratulations, from the private darkroom at the University of Nevada, Reno, where I used their darkroom staff. I'm just blessed; long ago in my first roll of film my best and first street photo of worth was a fight at 1/15th of a second versus the sudden shuddering of the very Staten Island Ferry. Like the natural eye some of my street work shows, steady holding is another of the gifts God gave me that I utilize in my photography. Thanks for the compliment. john John (Crosley)

Strong praise from you is not often seen, and it is very welcome. Thank you. john John (Crosley)