[Leica] Lluis Boy and The Buildings

[Leon Pomeroy]

All: This thread got to me! It tickled my aesthetic sense and sensibilities.
I find Lluis recent photo of the boy and the buildings compelling in many
ways.made more so by Ted's critique. I'm moved to share a few thoughts in a
historical context:

 

Initially Lluis wasn't clear as to Ted's meaning concerning crop #1 . 

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/luisrq/La+Barceloneta/20140906_L1000067BN1.
jpg.html

  

Jim then announces how he favors Ted's Crop 1 version ("Lluis, Crop 1 is
very impressive! Jim Nichols Tullahoma, TN USA").

 

Nathan ("For me, either the original image or crop 2. Definitely not crop 1,
I think the water is essential. Wonderful image! Un abrazo, Nathan"), then
Gerry ("Lluis For me this is a wonderful image in it's uncropped state. Your
vision comes through, and I think you should go with the original. Gerry")
favoring Lluis' original photo:  

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/luisrq/La+Barceloneta/20140906_L1000067BN.j
pg.html

 

Lluis agrees with Ted and Jim and accepts Crop 1. ("Thank you very much to
all of you my friends for looking, your comments and your advices. I like
very much my original picture but the reasons mentioned by Ted I think are
definitive arguments. The main subject is the boy, if he was reflected this
would be really good, but he is not and the crop 1 enhance the main image.
Yes, Dr. Ted is right, of course! Cheers! Lluis"). 

 

>From the beginning I accepted Ted's critique of Lluis' photo: one that
invokes the power of geometry (i.e., spatiality) and lighting (i.e., the
Shadow Side) as two of the most powerful elements of photography. ("Hi
Nathan, 

Sorry mate I hate to disagree with you on this one. The foreground water
with only parts of the two buildings appearing are a complete distraction
from the boy alone and jumping. And full buildings standing in the
background. It might be different if the boy were also reflected in the
water????????????? Maybe? The water and building reflections are a definite
distraction! The three points that really make the photo work are..........
Boy and two buildings clean without water and reflections. I made a couple
of prints and the water reflections destroy the image of the "THREE POINTS
OF COMPOSITION" BOY AND TWO BUILDING POINTS! I find the foreground
reflections quite a distraction, rather than adding anything to another wise
interesting well balanced photograph. Once again........... ON THE "THREE
COMPOSIIONAL POINTS" Your thoughts good Sir? cheers, ted").  

 

I've always been interested in the power of light and compositional geometry
in photography which has a lot to do with balance and harmony. Since my Cape
Cod days with Ted I've given his Shadow Side a lot of attention. I'm
interested in any critique that invokes geometric and lighting issues as we
have here.   Dr. Leon Pomeroy, Northern Virginia, USA