Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

I went to Voss's profile, but don't see a way to bring up his photos. Is there a way you know of to find the image for you? A search for Voss brought up no results.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

I assume the thread titled "She's In It"?

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-482255-1.html

That is a great image to analyze, primarily because of a rather simple composition that lacks some of the extreme complexity that Voss can often capture.

An image is much like a sentence written in text, both are meant to communicate a "message" via symbols. Some symbols are very significant while others are mere context to get perspective on or about the others. Lets look at the visual symbols in that image.

The lady's face is the one that attracted your attention, but of equal importance is the sign on the wall saying "Pleasure Zone". The image says nothing without both symbols because the actual subject is neither of those tangible objects, but rather the intangible relationship between the two tangible objects. Typical Street Photography!

A third object that has less significance provides useful context. That is the pair of people, lacking expression, facing away from the camera. They combine as just one visual symbol.

There are other symbols, all of which are distractions. The table and the lettering on the bags were mentioned in comments. Ideally those symbols might have been made less distracting (darker, less contrast, blurred, etc).

There are dozens of other objects that are too low on the scale to be a distraction.

But the woman's face, while not the subject, does provide the "decisive moment" when entropy is minimum. That is the important quirk that makes the intangible relationship interesting. Just do not mistake that as the subject of the photograph.

Why the look on her face? Life! The relationships between people and their surroundings. What Street captures.

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

Floyd, you did indeed find the right image.

One of my mottos is that clarity is more important than agreement, and I have great respect for the ability to think and express oneself with clarity. You've done that in your post. Great job, and thanks for taking the trouble to do it. I really enjoyed your analysis of the details in the image.

Have you changed my mind? At this point, not 100%, but you've given me loads of food for thought. Maybe more changes in my thinking will follow.

Where do we still differ? When I look at the photo, the woman's face is still the subject. I say that with all due respect. My last word on the subject is no matter whether my definition of the genre changes, I've learned a great deal from you in this thread. That's a big deal, so thank you.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

But without the sign her face has no significance at all. And without the face that sign means nothing. Also if the face is the subject the image would be improved by a closer cropped framing to show it in more detail, but that doesn't improve anything. Simple case of the actual subject is neither the face or the sign, but it really is the relatiomship between them!

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

The sign may add meaning, but her face is the subject with or without the sign. Now I'm Unwatching this thread. I tried to end this graciously, but you won't stop.