* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #944 / Revived #164 on 2026 05 20 *

Welcome to the Wednesday Comments and Critique (No Theme & No Brand) thread!

We are dedicated to continuing the great tradition of this C&C thread because we are convinced that looking at, and talking about images is vital for better photography.

Our tried and tested concept (almost 17 years and running!) is a weekly "peer-to-peer" photo comments & critique encounter, in which you GIVE and RECEIVE.

The idea is simple: you post a photo or photo-based image that you have made and get critique on it. And in return you give other people your honest but constructive opinion of their images.

Any Theme, Any Camera, Any Style, Any Subject.

We are still figuring out how to create the convenience of threaded view on this new forum.
For now, let us agree that you post an image or essay with a title and short explanation, and that all comments include the image as a quote.
Replies to comments may or may not include quotes.

THREAD GUIDELINES – THE SHORT & SWEET VERSION
• This thread does not care about brands. It’s not about the tool, but the image.
• Post one image or essay that you have made and would like to get comments on.
An entry can either be a single image or a short essay. With an essay we mean not a collection of random images without any connection, seeking C&C on more than one of them. We mean instead a limited number (3 to 10) of connected images that together try to tell a story, create a fuller picture of a situation, event or location, etc.
• Add a clear title to your post to distinguish your entry.
• Look at the other images/essays and give your comments on at least one of those.
• For comments, try to go beyond a simple pat on the back or a short dismissal.
• Do you like an image (or essay) ? Try to explain WHY it appeals to you.
• Negative or critical feedback is OK (we all want to learn), but be polite and constructive. Try to explain why the image (or essay) does not appeal to you and how it might be improved.
• Please stay on topic, i.e. concentrate on the image and the photographic comments, without getting into politics or other distractions. No non-photographic arguments.

The critique you give is vital.
What was your first impression? What catches your eye about an image? Why?
What do you like, and what distracts you? What would you change?

Fiddle with the image in your head - composition, perspective, color balance, exposure.

PLEASE NOTE CLEARLY:
Unless the original poster specifically states (for every individual posting offered for C&C) that they do not want their image(s) to be downloaded, altered or reposted, it is understood that within the context of this thread, other participants are free to download and alter the posted image and repost it in a reply for C&C purposes. That reposted image may remain permanently within the week's thread, or you may remove it after a short period of time if you prefer. The downloaded and altered images are not to be used for any other purposes nor uploaded anywhere else than within the context of the C&C in this thread. No copyright disputes here!

Encourage - it is a scary business putting your work up for other people to judge!

More general feedback is also welcome.
Do you know something about taking the same sort of image that would make matters easier - share your own as an example in your reply.

Have fun, be respectful and let’s stick together!

MORE BOXING - PORTRAITS

Y'all seemed to like my shots of referee Renald De Vulder at the boxing bouts during the "Rumble in da Jungle" performance. So I'll continue with some images from the next couple of weeks.

My unexpected photo venture at that performance resulted in me getting in contact with Renald and discussing his work with the young boxers.
I got myself invited to come take a look at a training session at his ABA (Antwerp Boxing Academy) and went there a few days later.

What was intended as a one afternoon quick look around, turned into me going over there several evenings and weekend mornings over the next two weeks.

Being present often, chatting with the boxers and personnel, showing interest and being unobtrusive while shooting (and bringing a few prints to hand out on one of the days) was the ticket to gaining their trust and getting more and more access. And that, in turn, resulted in a positive reply to my nudging to grant me exclusive and privileged photo access (as "the official photographer") to the Antwerp Boxing Gala that was going to be organized a month or two later.

Maybe we will get back to that Gala someday.
But now we are in the Academy, during some physical training and sparring sessions.

Look here for a comprehensive look at the results of attending a handful of sessions (and a press conference):

roelh.zenfolio.com/p63967426

From that gallery, I've selected a few B&W portraits:

Ayoub "Prince" Nefzi at rest between some serious bag-punching:

Najat "Miss Nouni" Hasnouni in full focus while seated and throwing a heavy ball against the wall:

(this photo had me standing right over her, really close quarters, showing the trust that was established)

Meriton "Mr TNT" Karaxha letting off steam after some intense sparring with head protection:

Calcutta. 1984. Maybe 1982?
Recently I discovered some very old negs from my film days. Many have deteriorated beyond help while others such as this needed a lot of work.
It was my first trip to India. I found some street shots that now distress me. I would never take them today irrespective of how good they might be photographically.

On the one hand I can understand why this distresses you.
Norms and morals have changed.
What was standard street photography in times past, can now often be considered exploitative or neo-colonial.
This is not only true for photography in other (I hesitate to say "third world" or "developing") countries.
Street photography on the streets of any western city is likewise not anymore what it used to be.

Emphasis has shifted over the decades from the rights of the photographer to the rights of the people photographed.
Personality rights, rights over our own likeness and portrait: they have not made the life of a street photographer (or a people photographer in general) easier.
On top of that general shift, there is also the whole issues of gender, race, age differences to complicate matters even further.
A man photographing a woman: not obvious anymore.
A white person photographing a black person: ditto.
An adult photographing a child in public : ditto and to the n-th degree.

This is a fact of life, but it is also a shame, because what happens and is visible in public should be accessible for expression (also visual expression), insofar as there is not exploitative motive or commercial gain involved. I've had NUMEROUS discussions over the years with people who did not like being photographed, but I have always (or almost always) been able to resolve that with a clear expression of legitimate artistic intent and no ill intentions (+ some explanation about the rights around photography in public).
It has become harder over the years.

Why bother anymore?
Because it is valuable to document circumstances and cultures.
Because photographing someone is not a nefarious act, but can be a way to engage and to say "hey, you matter to me."
Because it can be a conversation starter.

Respecting cultural differences and sensibilities is important.

Engaging with the subject is and remains key in my personal approach.
It's not that I ask permission beforehand (permission beforehand ruins the moment - it's also often easier to get forgiveness than permission).
But when I photograph people or groups with intent (not just in a drive-by situation) I always do so openly and I most often approach them afterwards.
I say who I am and I show the result and we have a mini conversation - that breaks the ice, takes away the awkwardness and is often rewarding.

I don't take "sneaky" photographs where I try to hide what I am doing.
I think that most often, that is what creates the most tension: trying to do something stealthily and getting caught.
If you have honorable intentions, why hide your actions?

Having said all that: I would not feel bad about this particular photograph.
There is clear eye contact between you and the subject. There is no sneakiness
There is no expression of discomfort or rejection (maybe the little guy is just used to it and doesn't know better, but let's not assume that).
Maybe you remember what happened afterwards (a conversation, a small payment, having your shoes shined?)

The result is a moment in time and part of your journey.
And his.

You are correct. There was communication here and it was communication that I felt/feel OK about. Just. That isn't so of a couple of discovered photos that I wont be showing.

With your camera, you have captured reality—nothing more, nothing less.
Whether you prefer to turn a blind eye to reality changes nothing about the poverty of these people.
The only thing I would refrain from doing today is photographing people who have lost their self-control.
Otherwise, I would photograph anything I find interesting and informative.
By the way, a very interesting and well-observed photograph.
There are several pairs of well-polished shoes surrounding the child.

A Break by the Sea

Fallen Angels

I will push the envelope even further with this photo from New Orleans, which crosses several lines and are likely to be found objectionable by some. I agree with Roel and with Kumsal. I grew up in the journalistic world of the 1960s with its wars, violence, and social issues. Awareness of all that would have been impossible if people had not photographed real life events whether social acceptable or not. This is still true, but we have grown to accept that there is something morally or ethically wrong with taking photos in public places.

Until Covid, the New Orleans French Quarter was a melting pot of artists, performers, addicts, gamblers, homeless, eccentrics, collectors, pirates, workers, entrepreneurs, etc. This melange interacted easily with each other, and with tourists. After Covid, the city decided to clean up the quarter and pushed most of the "undesirables" past Rampart, under the bridges and overpasses, away from the tourists. So today's French Quarter is less a melting pot, and interaction is not as relaxed.

I took this just prior to Covid. The young man on the right is one I had some conversation with later (after he woke up) but never saw the other again.

I rarely ran into objections about photographs. A few of the street entertainers requested a donation if you took a photo, which I always obliged. Some of the fortunetellers preferred not to be photographed at all, so it was always best to ask them before raising a camera or you might get a mean look. Most loved seeing their photos, and I would often take prints back to the folks I photographed on next trip.

Each of these photos has more "punch" because we have already seen and remember the context created by last week's shots. Add your one line explanation and the viewer puts it together. The contrast between the two at rest and the portrait taken while the subject is training hard all build the comprehensiveness of the report.
I hope there are more of these to come.

I like the reflections and especially I like seeing the clouds that we don't see in the sky.
It's the unfortunate universal truth. A famous location and the oblivious people immersed in their phones. Sigh.

Thanks, Mike.
As many as you want.
(PS I corrected my spelling error in the OP: the last boxer is obviously letting OFF steam…)

Street Dog Tired

There are many street dogs in Mumbai and other Indian cities, but in my experience they are not at all aggressive. I expect the Hindu and Buddhist concept of reincarnation plays a role in that, as people respect animals partly as they may be reincarnations of people they care about, but also the concept makes people more aware of the important role animals play in nature and raises them as co-inhabitors of the planet rather than something to be used, sold, eaten or removed. So nobody kicks them or throws stones at them, so they remain docile and mind their own business. They sleep in what seems to be odd places, as in this photo, where the dog has chosen to sleep in the middle of the entrance area of a busy Mumbai railway station. The cool marble was a big enough attraction to outweigh the close proximity of passing hundreds (thousands?) of people, albeit non-aggressive people.

On the subject of the morals of street photography, this is an example, which is unlikely to lead to trouble.

This turned into an interesting discussion on photographing people in public places and it seems we share roughly the same moral compass. It is certainly sad that peoples' opinion of someone taking a photograph in public defaults to a negative, and they are wary that the photograph will be used to make money at their expense, poke fun of them on social media or used as a catalogue to find attractive children. On the few times I have been approached a friendly conversation usually wins the day, or I just delete the image.
I think there are two areas, which can worry a subject. Firstly, how the photo is taken. If the photographer is aggressive and enters their personal space, then the subject is disturbed, scared, annoyed, aggressive, as they would also be by such approach without a camera. Unusual behaviour can be unsettling too, as the subject is forced to analyse it and decide if it is some kind of threat or not. For instance, as photographers we tend to study the scene, observe behaviour, weigh up lighting, composition etc. , and this will be interpreted as unseemly staring. Trying to obscure this behaviour by secretive shooting from within a coat or whatever is likely to leave an even worse impression! I find it relatively easy to photograph openly but discretely, and avoid confrontation, if I cannot gain permission before or after the shot.
Secondly, what does the photographer do with the photograph. I would never try to make money directly from a candid in an advertising campaign, for instance, but publishing it in a book would be trickier, (not that I am ever likely to shoot an advertising campaign or publish a book!) In this case my guide would be if it was appropriate for the book artistically and did not show the person in an embarrassing situation, then I would probably feel OK.

Living in Germany, the law is confused to say the least. There is a law to protect a person's image, which was usually interpreted in court to protect commercial misuse, for instance, but allowed the photo to be used in an exhibition or art book, citing freedom of artistic expression. With the rise of misuse of photography on the internet, a law was passed in Germany to combat the abhorrent practice of installing hidden cameras in toilets, changing rooms etc. and taking photographs of peoples underwear in the street (being careful not to use the usual term to avoid censure!). The law was phrased rather ambiguously, banning photographs of people in intimate or embarrassing situations. This means that photos of drunks or impoverished people, for instance, fall into that category, which could catch people out. The killer here is that this law makes it a criminal offence, which carries a heavy fine or even a prison sentence, and a criminal record in every case. I haven't heard of anyone being prosecuted for photographing drunks or people living on the street, but the threat is there.

Just to make things really complicated, the European Union passed a Data Protection Act, and it is up to each EU country to implement their version of the law. The German government kindly pointed out that the combination of a picture of a face or other personal identification such as tattoo, with a date and time and especially with GPS coordinates, i.e. every digital photo, was personal data and had to be protected. Every digital photograph of a person in Germany is illegal, unless the photographer has a signed model release form BEFORE the shutter button is pressed! Groan. Inevitably there was much head scratching in the photo community and the government was asked for clarity. Their helpful reply was that it would become clear in the ensuing court cases. Wedding photographers panicked, but now wedding invitations normally carry a clause that if you accept, you also accept the chance of being photographed, although they can always avoid the group photos. But that doesn't help street photographers. Apart from giving up people photography altogether, the guide seems to be that nobody will be found guilty if there are no accusers. This makes the avoidance of any initial conflict doubly important in Germany, as you may already have broken a data protection law by taking a photo, and although it is unlikely that anyone would press charges, they might if they are an annoying dogmatic person, or if the couple you just photographed are famous or happen to have other jealous partners.
Alternatively go back to analogue photography, as the data protection law does not apply.

Oh, I forgot the most important thing!
This is a really good street portrait. The boy's winning half smile and simple tools of the trade are what catches attention. Afterwards, the irony of the shoe shiner having no shoes becomes apparent and I like the way the legs are all cut off at about the same place, leaving just the shoes and their link with the boy's trade.

The reflected clouds transform this photo from decent one to a stand out. As Mike said, it is very cool that we only see the clouds in the reflection and not in the sky.

I agree with you that someone has to take the uncomfortable and risky photos. If you read my comments on Mike's photo in this thread you will understand why I probably wouldn't have taken this photo in Germany, but it is important that someone does. Of course the intent is important. Social conscience is fine, as I know will have been your motive, but a "look at these lazy good for nothings" on social media would not have been.
It really makes me stop and think. The awkward pose, somewhere between collapse and getting up again, and the sombre colours suggest sadness, and the man being young and seeming relatively fit, makes it more disturbing than if it had been an older man in ill health. Being separated from the attractive sunlit greenery by a wall and fence adds its own subtle hint at their exclusion from a better world.

These are great portraits, which are not obviously about boxers. The indolent pride of the first, the grim determination of the second and the rather unique and amusing steaming head of the third, which is made even better by the calm, shy smile and no obvious exhaustion hinting at the cause of the steam.

Your photos may even rekindle an interest in boxing in me! I had a brief flirtation as a child, when my school friends kept asking me if I was for Clay or Liston. I had no idea what they were talking about, but I learned it was a boxing match and Clay could beat anyone, but had a big mouth and Liston was a great fighter and might shut Clay's mouth. Anyway the hype was enough for me to persuade my parents to allow me to get up in the early hours to watch the match live. At four am I crept downstairs towards my first ever boxing match, half very proud to do such a thing and half scared stiff of the dark. The match started and after a few seconds Clay knocked Liston out with his first(?) punch and it was over. Was that it? Was this boxing? Had I been subjected to ridicule from my father for this? That was the end of my brief affair with boxing. I went back to football and cricket.

There has been a really great conversation on DPR (many years ago) about this complicated subject in a forum thread about one particular image of mine that I hesitated to show because it was an ironic photo that (in retrospect) felt slightly exploitative to myself.

I just can't seem to retrieve the damn discussion.

I don't find the image in my inventory of Wed C&C images, so it was probably not posted to Wed C&C but in a separate thread, specifically to trigger the discussion.

The image was of an old lady in China, with a shopping bag with her belongings and the picture on the shopping bag was of a glamourous young lady.

I'll have to exhaust my imagination to come up with ways to try and find that discussion back.

Re Calcutta. It has been a thought provoking discussion and I'm still chewing it over. Two further Calcutta shots are attached.
I think it is relevant to ask why the photographs were taken and what the photographer intended doing with them.
In the case of the shoe shine kid and the girl with the begging bowl, I was communicating with both and I think it comes through. The communication was personal and I'm sort of at ease with the photos. The begging bowl photo goes closer to the edge.
Number three is very different. It's over forty years since these were taken and I don't remember taking Calcutta 3. This is the photographer deliberately being smarty and arty. As with the shoeshiner, the photo restricts the other people to legs and street level. Clever huh? If the photo had been taken as part of a series where the photographer intended making a statement or creating a wider awareness of some form, then perhaps it might, in the name of truth and reality, be justified. But it wasn't. This was me taking photos for my personal pleasure. It isn't a photo I would take again.

.