And Then. . .

[elliot_n]

I live in London, near Brick Lane market, and there is nothing puzzling about the sight of that doll. Similarly, Ivo's plant pot is a commonplace sight in Japan.

[Ivophoto]

Ivo, I think your picture is equivalent to the doll picture. Something somewhat out of place.

It is all about projection of the viewer.

Rob C pulls in the assumption there is someone cleaning a corridor. This is purely projection.
A doll is more projection inducing than a plant, it is a reasonably easy one, photographing an abandoned doll. Looking at a doll, the association with little kids and how that doll got left behind is obvious.
A plant is more abstract to projection, that makes the image less to read in terms of romantisme. For me, it makes the images more interesting.

Maybe romantic souls will be more attracted to the doll picture,  cynical or sarcastic minds will like the plant photo.

The subject I want to introduce is the viewers projection.

[Ivophoto]

I live in London, near Brick Lane market, and there is nothing puzzling about the sight of that doll. Similarly, Ivo's plant pot is a commonplace sight in Japan.

Absolutely, as said, it’s all in the viewers projection.

[RSL]

Here you go, Ivo. Project on this one.

[Ivo_B]

Here you go, Ivo. Project on this one.

I guess you have a whole Netflix full of projection on this one, Russ. This thirteen in a dozen picture is a rather poor composition and the content is not strong enough to justify. What does not mean the photo doesn't have it's merit, let that be clear.
I will tell what I like in this picture: I like the rhythm, the three angles and the color setting. And that is already a lot, isn't it?

[RSL]

Says the guy with the very badly composed and badly exposed pot in a corridor. That's some projection.

[Ivo_B]

Says the guy with the very badly composed and badly exposed pot in a corridor. That's some projection.

Yes. Thats the guy. The one with the crappy pictures.

In French we say:

Petites gens, petits esprits.

We can disagree, Russ, no problem.

[Rob C]

C'mon, you two guys, this is getting nobody anywhere fast.
...............

Living in London and seeing abandoned dolls shouldn't make them less interesting. I live in a tiny town in Mallorca and there's the abandoned doll there too, sometimes, and even another type, much more ambiguous because of where it/she is: inside the cabin of a massive boat hoist; Macho meets Humbert Humbert?

Any old abandoned doll doesn't cut it; the doll and its milieu have to resonate in acute discord for any impact. Just as any old model won't make the cover of Vogue, it all depends on the look.

Rob

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

If anyone had any remote interest in street photography, you guys are nipping it in the bud, discussing crappy examples.

[RSL]

C'mon, you two guys, this is getting nobody anywhere fast.
...............

Living in London and seeing abandoned dolls shouldn't make them less interesting. I live in a tiny town in Mallorca and there's the abandoned doll there too, sometimes, and even another type, much more ambiguous because of where it/she is: inside the cabin of a massive boat hoist; Macho meets Humbert Humbert?

Any old abandoned doll doesn't cut it; the doll and its milieu have to resonate in acute discord for any impact. Just as any old model won't make the cover of Vogue, it all depends on the look.

Rob

Okay, Ivo. It's been fun, but I'll shake on that.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

If anyone had any remote interest in street photography, you guys are nipping it in the bud, discussing crappy examples.

+1.

[Ivophoto]

If anyone had any remote interest in street photography, you guys are nipping it in the bud, discussing crappy examples.

Yep. Crappy examples. Correct.

[Ivophoto]

C'mon, you two guys, this is getting nobody anywhere fast.
...............

Living in London and seeing abandoned dolls shouldn't make them less interesting. I live in a tiny town in Mallorca and there's the abandoned doll there too, sometimes, and even another type, much more ambiguous because of where it/she is: inside the cabin of a massive boat hoist; Macho meets Humbert Humbert?

Any old abandoned doll doesn't cut it; the doll and its milieu have to resonate in acute discord for any impact. Just as any old model won't make the cover of Vogue, it all depends on the look.

Rob

And the viewers projection.

I know this is an annoying to discuss concept but I will try to explain why I find it valuable to explore.

The more a picture is stripped from information there is more room for projection. Some find this interesting some not.
I find it comparable with reading a book vs going to the movies.
I don’t have a quality judgement on both, they live on it’s own merits.

Narrative images have to fall back on visual eloquence. If this is not strong, hopefully the narrative makes the picture. The viewers projection is boxed in. Only top work does both.

As found pictures (I call them ‘as found’) require a cerebral exercise of the viewer. Only carefully composed images, graphically and color wise, are strong enough to invite the viewer to do the effort. The viewers projection is part of the image. Also in this case, only top work will do the job.

What the two styles have in common is the requirement of the biased viewer to be open to read the image. Also an nearly empty page can be read and provocative.

The reason I bring up the pot plant is because this picture becomes interesting depending on the viewers projection.

Rob C sees it as a practical situation during household, Eliot recognize Japanese common sight and a Tumblr connection sent me a message to tell me she was emotional touched because she found the plant was brutally kicked out the door after years of serving and Russ doesn’t see any of it because he sees Ivo behind the picture. All valid and fine impression of that pot picture.
So, that is how powerful a only registering (as found) picture can be. It depends on the viewers projection.

[Ivo_B]

If anyone had any remote interest in street photography, you guys are nipping it in the bud, discussing crappy examples.

When I was at Art academy, i complained why we always spent so much time discussing the crappy pictures. Why not discussing the great ones. I thought it was because breaking down shitty images is easy.
The teacher said it was the other way around. It was about finding the good elements in the crappy pictures and encourage the student to build on that.

In general, I'm not a big fan anymore of the obvious street work but I do take the time to find the strong elements (to my taste) when looking at a worthwhile image.
The example of Russ, the smoking blurred guy, The picture doesn't make me warm or cold but I admit that my first reaction was just to tease Russ, ok a bit childish, but that was the spiral we where in :-).
The image, as said does have it's own merits. And I will explain further, see picture below.

The yellow line is the main direction of the Picture's plain. the red lines are the lines that give the image dept and rhythm and the third line is the axis of the cigarette smoker. Images gain visual attraction when three lines are used to give dept and structure.
The reason I actually like the image is far away from the genre and for me the only important reason to like or dislike an image. If the scenery was of any interest, the photo would elevate above the average .

The image is actually good composed.
So, it is not so hard to give positive feedback on someones image, even if you don't have a positive vibe with the person.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...So, it is not so hard to give positive feedback on someones image, even if you don't have a positive vibe with the person.

You are trying too hard, Ivo

It is actually much harder to give negative feedback when you have a positive vibe with the person.

[RSL]

And the viewers projection.

I know this is an annoying to discuss concept but I will try to explain why I find it valuable to explore.

The more a picture is stripped from information there is more room for projection. Some find this interesting some not.
I find it comparable with reading a book vs going to the movies.
I don’t have a quality judgement on both, they live on it’s own merits.

Narrative images have to fall back on visual eloquence. If this is not strong, hopefully the narrative makes the picture. The viewers projection is boxed in. Only top work does both.

As found pictures (I call them ‘as found’) require a cerebral exercise of the viewer. Only carefully composed images, graphically and color wise, are strong enough to invite the viewer to do the effort. The viewers projection is part of the image. Also in this case, only top work will do the job.

What the two styles have in common is the requirement of the biased viewer to be open to read the image. Also an nearly empty page can be read and provocative.

The reason I bring up the pot plant is because this picture becomes interesting depending on the viewers projection.

Rob C sees it as a practical situation during household, Eliot recognize Japanese common sight and a Tumblr connection sent me a message to tell me she was emotional touched because she found the plant was brutally kicked out the door after years of serving and Russ doesn’t see any of it because he sees Ivo behind the picture. All valid and fine impression of that pot picture.
So, that is how powerful a only registering (as found) picture can be. It depends on the viewers projection.

Ivo, you’ve given an interesting picture of how you approach art. I agree with a lot of it, but I’d disagree a bit in places. I don’t know why you feel this is annoying to discuss. It’s important.

First off, I don’t agree that stripping a picture of information leaves more room for projection. With the pot in the hall there’s no more room for projection than there was with the three blank canvases that won first prize in a long-ago art show in which I once had a couple pictures. The important thing isn’t the lack of information. The important thing, especially in street photography, is ambiguity. With a blank canvas or an underexposed pot in a blank hallway there’s no trigger for projection. You’re not starting with anything. But with a picture like the one I posted with this response, the scene and the people are the trigger. Neither the scene nor the people give you “closure” (I hate that word). Your mind completes the gestalt.

It’s not just “found” pictures that require an internal response on the part of the viewer in order to be appreciated. I’d hesitate to call the response “cerebral” because cerebral implies that the viewer uses his mind to provide the response. I think the response is more like that involuntary response of something much deeper than mind I wrote about in “Touching the Seer.”

But I think Ivo’s right on the money when he says that narrative images require visual eloquence in order to be effective. This applies to reportage and to inanimate things like landscape.

I won’t comment on the rest of Ivo’s post, especially not on the response of the hysterical woman who felt Ivo’s plant was being abused.

[RSL]

When I was at Art academy, i complained why we always spent so much time discussing the crappy pictures. Why not discussing the great ones. I thought it was because breaking down shitty images is easy.
The teacher said it was the other way around. It was about finding the good elements in the crappy pictures and encourage the student to build on that.

In general, I'm not a big fan anymore of the obvious street work but I do take the time to find the strong elements (to my taste) when looking at a worthwhile image.
The example of Russ, the smoking blurred guy, The picture doesn't make me warm or cold but I admit that my first reaction was just to tease Russ, ok a bit childish, but that was the spiral we where in :-).
The image, as said does have it's own merits. And I will explain further, see picture below.

The yellow line is the main direction of the Picture's plain. the red lines are the lines that give the image dept and rhythm and the third line is the axis of the cigarette smoker. Images gain visual attraction when three lines are used to give dept and structure.
The reason I actually like the image is far away from the genre and for me the only important reason to like or dislike an image. If the scenery was of any interest, the photo would elevate above the average .

The image is actually good composed.
So, it is not so hard to give positive feedback on someones image, even if you don't have a positive vibe with the person.

Thanks, Ivo. I'll take this response as your handshake. But unfortunately, this is the kind of over-analysis that leads people to ponder and lose the shot when they try to do street. I had less than a second to make that picture, so I certainly didn't have time to analyze how it fit art theory. Again, I'd refer you to https://luminous-landscape.com/on-street-photography/, and, specifically the part about practicing composition. By the way, I didn't post that picture as a good example of street photography. I posted it as a response to one of Ivo's remarks. I think the picture I posted with my last response is pretty good street photography, if anyone's interested in that kind of opinion.

[Rob C]

Your "Touching the Seer" is a beautiful piece of writing.

I wonder if there are people who really do not feel any such emotional triggers/passports to anywhere?

Rob

[Ivophoto]

Thanks, Ivo. I'll take this response as your handshake. But unfortunately, this is the kind of over-analysis that leads people to ponder and lose the shot when they try to do street. I had less than a second to make that picture, so I certainly didn't have time to analyze how it fit art theory. Again, I'd refer you to https://luminous-landscape.com/on-street-photography/, and, specifically the part about practicing composition. By the way, I didn't post that picture as a good example of street photography. I posted it as a response to one of Ivo's remarks. I think the picture I posted with my last response is pretty good street photography, if anyone's interested in that kind of opinion.

Sure it is an over analyzation. 
Over analyzing is not wrong afterwards. It doesn’t work on forehand.
The reason I over analyzed is to stop the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ discussion.

[Ivophoto]

Your "Touching the Seer" is a beautiful piece of writing.

I wonder if there are people who really do not feel any such emotional triggers/passports to anywhere?

Rob

Back to my Academy docent. He claimed not able to project due to a kind of autism. I’m not sure if he played it or if it was genuine. I reckon the latter.
He was always hard on any work on the table and in his comments he stripped the projection from the image. That was very learning.
We had a lot of good discussions, after all, why should the ability of a viewer to project not be taken in account in the making of an image?
For me it is an extra element to play with.