The other Portland.

[D Fuller]

Thoughts?

[OmerV]

Interesting photo, and without a doubt a "street" composition. You've paired most of the subjects, each busy with their own concerns. I like the African American on the left, smoking and relaxed, unconcerned with the heedfulness of those around him. Hell, even the dog is proper.

Odd light though. It looks to be at night, but the contrast is very low. Perhaps yellow, low pressure sodium lighting?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

The image created an impression that I was initially struggling to describe in one word, until it became clear that the word I was looking for is "rhythm."  That and "geometry." Rhythm as the interplay between stationary and moving, moving in lockstep, and moving in different directions. The geometry of those directions. Even the black guy's body geometry contributes to the dynamics. Well seen.

[Farmer]

The image created an impression that I was initially struggling to describe in one word, until it became clear that the word I was looking for is "rhythm."  That and "geometry." Rhythm as the interplay between stationary and moving, moving in lockstep, and moving in different directions. The geometry of those directions. Even the black guy's body geometry contributes to the dynamics. Well seen.

Excellent - I was struggling with a description, too - this it is for me.  And +1 - well seen and a great shot.

[fredjeang2]

A very nice photo, that would fit in Magnum's reportage portfolio, if slightly reframed.

As for a critic, you tell too much. The street lamp on the left does not bring any relevant information
But enclosed the eye's natural circulation. It becomes more a boundary. (Exacerbated by its darkness)
If that street lamp would have been located not that much on the edge, it'd become part of the composition.
If, the photo as it, there was just a slightly bit of air on the left side of the streetlamp, so it's not glued on the corner, it will work also. But as it, something is wrong. Or it's been told clearly (I'm in favor of the accident but not like that), it has to do
With the story told, or it's better not to tell.

Removing (by cropping) this lamp, at the same time would slightly crop the upper part that is a bit useless also (but not problematic)
In the sense that from the upper horizontal windows structure, all is told. No need to see more.
That way, the focus remains on the subject(s) without discraction and a better dynamism will also be obtained,
Without affecting the essence of the photo itself.
Personaly on this one I'd use a distort in PS.

If you really want to keep the street lamp and do not have room on the left, then the only possibility IMO is to remove the left part until you reach the 1/2 of the lamp itself. In other words, if it's glued on the corner, let's then really glue it on the corner, a more intentional decision and not that much of a 1/2 undecision.
Because the very thin background remaining on the left side of the lamp is not enough or too much.

I would not touch the contrast. It's perfect as it. Looks cinematic. The dr is great.
A great shot that only needs a slight reframing.
My 2 cts.

[Martin Kristiansen]

Really like this

[OmerV]

A very nice photo, that would fit in Magnum's reportage portfolio, if slightly reframed.

As for a critic, you tell too much. The street lamp on the left does not bring any relevant information
But enclosed the eye's natural circulation. It becomes more a boundary. (Exacerbated by its darkness)
If that street lamp would have been located not that much on the edge, it'd become part of the composition.
If, the photo as it, there was just a slightly bit of air on the left side of the streetlamp, so it's not glued on the corner, it will work also. But as it, something is wrong. Or it's been told clearly (I'm in favor of the accident but not like that), it has to do
With the story told, or it's better not to tell.

Removing (by cropping) this lamp, at the same time would slightly crop the upper part that is a bit useless also (but not problematic)
In the sense that from the upper horizontal windows structure, all is told. No need to see more.
That way, the focus remains on the subject(s) without discraction and a better dynamism will also be obtained,
Without affecting the essence of the photo itself.
Personaly on this one I'd use a distort in PS.

If you really want to keep the street lamp and do not have room on the left, then the only possibility IMO is to remove the left part until you reach the 1/2 of the lamp itself. In other words, if it's glued on the corner, let's then really glue it on the corner, a more intentional decision and not that much of a 1/2 undecision.
Because the very thin background remaining on the left side of the lamp is not enough or too much.

I would not touch the contrast. It's perfect as it. Looks cinematic. The dr is great.
A great shot that only needs a slight reframing.
My 2 cts.

Interestingly the lamp post on the left doesn't bother me at all. I'm more attuned to what Slobodan said, the geometrical rhythm and arrangement of the people. I've learned to appreciate imperfect compositions, which to me retain a kind of open liveliness, as opposed to the ossification of the "perfect."

[Telecaster]

Yep, IMO the implied movement makes the photo. It takes my eye back in a counter-clockwise rotation, lower right to lower left, after I've scanned the frame in the usual western left to right manner. Good stuff.

-Dave-

[D Fuller]

Thank you for all the comments. You’re making me think this one is worth working more on.

I love this image because of the motion in it—what Slobodan called rhythm—but I’ve struggled with it because of the light. I kept trying to print it in color, but it is night, and the light is sodium vapor, and it does awful things to the skin tones. In B&W, it’s a lot more about the motion, but I’ll go back and play with the conversion some more. A lot of variables there.

The motion is what keeps bringing me back to this image. It seems almost choreographed—like a vamp in a broadway musical—though it’s just what I saw as I crossed the street.

The lamppost hadn’t bothered me until you pointed it out, Fred, but I think you’re right. Seeing beyond it to the right is unnecessary, I think, and I’ll try anchoring it to the edge of frame.

Great feedback. Thanks.

[Martin Kristiansen]

It’s all just opinion of course but I wouldn’t remove the lamp post. It will place  the walking figures too close to the edge of the frame. Trust your eye. It didn’t bother you before. It certainly doesn’t bother me.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

It’s all just opinion of course but I wouldn’t remove the lamp post. It will place  the walking figures too close to the edge of the frame. Trust your eye. It didn’t bother you before. It certainly doesn’t bother me.

+1

Besides, has anyone noticed the major contribution of the post? Apart from giving the “breathing space,” and apart from echoing in tonality the dark figure on the right, and thus framing the picture, it carries a pedestrian street sign that adds another pair of walking legs! Neat, huh?

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

+1

Besides, has anyone noticed the major contribution of the post? Apart from giving the “breathing space,” and apart from echoing in tonality the dark figure on the right, and thus framing the picture, it carries a pedestrian street sign that adds another pair of walking legs! Neat, huh?

+2

[fredjeang2]

It seems almost choreographed—like a vamp in a broadway musical—

Indeed. This is what this photo is about. In that sense, the street lamp is best to keep
If one wants to keep/put emphasis on the "Broadway musical” spirit.
It looks like part of a cine decor set on purpose by the crew.
As Martin pointed, removing completly the lamp would then glue the walking figures to the edge.
(But it can be done in a certain way so that does not occur)

Is the street lamp a major contribution to the story for the reason Slobodan wisely pointed?
My personal opinion is, as it, it is not, but could have been.
Personaly I'd just remove the thin useless space on the left side of the lamp, glued it completly, keeping the sign of course. But it's just me.
Again, the photo is really nice anyway. Worth publishing.