The Enthusiasts

MarkRMarkR Registered Users Posts: 2,099 Major grins
edited August 25, 2012 in Street and Documentary
SDIM0204-XL.jpg

Comments

  • TonyCooperTonyCooper Registered Users Posts: 2,276 Major grins
    edited August 24, 2012
    Is there a red triangle on that machine?
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
  • MarkRMarkR Registered Users Posts: 2,099 Major grins
    edited August 24, 2012
    Where? Or am I not getting something?
  • TonyCooperTonyCooper Registered Users Posts: 2,276 Major grins
    edited August 24, 2012
    MarkR wrote: »
    Where? Or am I not getting something?

    The Amish, which this man appears to be by his clothing, must have a
    large orange or red triangle on their buggies when on the road because
    they have no tail lights. It's the law.

    That cart looks roadworthy.
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
  • MarkRMarkR Registered Users Posts: 2,099 Major grins
    edited August 24, 2012
    Ah. No, historical re-enactor.

    Previous trips to Lancaster, PA have taught me to ask before photographing anyone Amish.
  • TonyCooperTonyCooper Registered Users Posts: 2,276 Major grins
    edited August 24, 2012
    MarkR wrote: »
    Ah. No, historical re-enactor.

    Previous trips to Lancaster, PA have taught me to ask before photographing anyone Amish.

    Historical re-enactor...I didn't catch that. What is he re-enacting, and
    what is the device?

    I see what looks like organ pipes on the cart, so I thought perhaps
    some sort of musical player. It looks like a traditional doctor's bag
    hanging from the cart. There's a shelf on the cart tilted as if a book
    would rest on it, so maybe a portable altar for an itinerant preacher.

    No monkey, so it can't be an organ grinder. Nothing historical about
    kettle corn. I'm out of ideas.
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
  • toragstorags Registered Users Posts: 4,615 Major grins
    edited August 24, 2012
    TonyCooper wrote: »
    Historical re-enactor...I didn't catch that. What is he re-enacting, and
    what is the device?

    I see what looks like organ pipes on the cart, so I thought perhaps
    some sort of musical player. It looks like a traditional doctor's bag
    hanging from the cart. There's a shelf on the cart tilted as if a book
    would rest on it, so maybe a portable altar for an itinerant preacher.

    No monkey, so it can't be an organ grinder. Nothing historical about
    kettle corn. I'm out of ideas.

    You're missing the whole idea, that may be Mark with his cam...

    Nah, interesting catch Mark. The handle on the cart indicates a push cart
    Rags
  • kpstatzkpstatz Registered Users Posts: 13 Big grins
    edited August 25, 2012
    I like'em, even w/o a deeper explanation.
  • MarkRMarkR Registered Users Posts: 2,099 Major grins
    edited August 25, 2012
    @Tony, it's at the Genesee Country Museum, one of those "living history" places. The organ is an old fashioned portable organ, don't know much history behind it and I wasn't paying attention. The box at the bottom holds the music roll. As I recall it was mainly playing popular hymms of the time.

    What I thought was interesting was the interaction between the two technology enthusiasts, old and new. And they were both definitely enthusiasts, even if one of them has his guard up in this picture. :D
  • TonyCooperTonyCooper Registered Users Posts: 2,276 Major grins
    edited August 25, 2012
    MarkR wrote: »


    What I thought was interesting was the interaction between the two technology enthusiasts, old and new. And they were both definitely enthusiasts, even if one of them has his guard up in this picture. :D


    This brings up an interesting point about this type of photography:
    what we want the viewer to see vs what the viewer wants to see.

    Don't blame the viewer for not seeing what you want the viewer to
    see in your photograph. Once you release the photo for view, the
    viewer takes over. It's up to you to compose the image to direct
    the viewer if you want the viewer to see it as you intend.

    In my case, a pot-bellied tourist with a camera is so ordinary
    that I don't pay attention to that part of the scene. Where I live,
    that's as common as a tree.

    The period character with the unidentifiable (to me) thing draws my
    interest. I like the photograph because figuring out what the device
    is intrigues me. The photo would be interesting without the tourist.

    I don't see a man with a camera as representative of new technology.
    Newer than the device, but not that new.

    I'm not saying the tourist detracts from the image, but I am saying
    that you should not be disappointed that the viewer didn't see what
    you wanted him to see if the viewer does see the photograph to
    be interesting for some other reason.

    I don't see interaction, by the way. I see two figures sharing the
    scene, but no connection between the two. That's not a bad thing.
    That's just a difference between your intent and my view.
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
  • MarkRMarkR Registered Users Posts: 2,099 Major grins
    edited August 25, 2012
    TonyCooper wrote: »
    This brings up an interesting point about this type of photography:
    what we want the viewer to see vs what the viewer wants to see.

    Don't blame the viewer for not seeing what you want the viewer to
    see in your photograph. Once you release the photo for view, the
    viewer takes over. It's up to you to compose the image to direct
    the viewer if you want the viewer to see it as you intend.

    In my case, a pot-bellied tourist with a camera is so ordinary
    that I don't pay attention to that part of the scene. Where I live,
    that's as common as a tree.

    The period character with the unidentifiable (to me) thing draws my
    interest. I like the photograph because figuring out what the device
    is intrigues me. The photo would be interesting without the tourist.

    I don't see a man with a camera as representative of new technology.
    Newer than the device, but not that new.

    I'm not saying the tourist detracts from the image, but I am saying
    that you should not be disappointed that the viewer didn't see what
    you wanted him to see if the viewer does see the photograph to
    be interesting for some other reason.

    I don't see interaction, by the way. I see two figures sharing the
    scene, but no connection between the two. That's not a bad thing.
    That's just a difference between your intent and my view.

    Fair enough.
Sign In or Register to comment.