Over the past few weeks, I’ve been genuinely touched by the reactions to my previous article about failures (the previous article is available here). I wasn’t sure how people would respond to a post built entirely around my mistakes, but the comments, the critiques, and the thoughtful discussions that followed were far richer than anything I expected. It reminded me why I enjoy this community so much: there’s a real willingness here to look closely, to question, to share experience, and to help each other grow.
What struck me most was how differently people saw the same images. Some of you noticed things I had completely overlooked; others found value in frames I had written off long ago. That diversity of perspective is incredibly refreshing. It pushes me to rethink my assumptions, to articulate my choices more clearly, and to stay open to interpretations beyond my own.
So for this follow‑up, I thought it would be interesting to change the format.
Instead of explaining why I consider the next set of images “failures,” I’m going to keep my thoughts to myself for now. I’ll simply present the photos — no commentary, no technical breakdowns, no hints — and invite you to share your impressions first. What catches your eye? What feels off? What would you have done differently? What story do you see, or wish you could see?
After a few days (or once a good number of comments come in), I’ll post my analysis in the comment section so we can compare perspectives. Maybe we’ll agree, maybe we won’t — but that’s exactly the point. Photography isn’t a test with right or wrong answers. It’s a conversation. And sometimes the most valuable part of that conversation comes from seeing how others interpret the same frame.
So here we go: another batch of my “failures.”
This time, your turn first.
Thank you again for the incredible engagement on the previous article — it genuinely pushed me to look at my work with fresh eyes. I’m hoping this new format will spark the same kind of thoughtful discussion. Feel free to be honest, precise or even blunt if needed; I’m not looking for praise, I’m looking to learn!
I’ll share my comments in the thread, and once I’ve gathered the new insights from this exercise and the earlier articles, I’ll prepare another post showing the revised versions. I’m genuinely excited to see how your perspectives shape the next steps of this journey.
Cheers,
Alex
Share this post:
Comments
David Brancaleone on Reflecting on a few of my failures Part II — Your Turn First
Comment posted: 17/02/2026
No. 1 reveals a portrait of what Michael Fried calls «absorption», whether in painting or in photography it doesn't matter. Absorption refers to when someone is reflecting or concentrating instead of looking back, exchanging glances. The light helps capture this frame of mind, frames it, you could say.
I might crop the left side until where nothing detracts my gaze. Also, the all black bottom of the image I find a distraction or maybe it creates an imbalance with the top of the hat almost too close to the top edge?
N. 0 is placed above and unnumbered, striking as it is. Unworldly, though part of a social context and timeless. I like everything about it. The tonal range. The way the child is positioned to the right, contravening unwritten and rigid rules perhaps, but allowing the eye to roam around the room. No. 2 I would discount because of the lighting and flare, if that's the correct term. The third portrait speaks to me, despite the oddity of the background. Or is it just breaking my conventional expectations? I suspect it is.
The fifth one is also of interest to me. Why? The shadows are meaningful, somehow. Convey a sense of presence and absence, instead of just casting a different tone from an obstruction to light or emphasizing an object with contrast.
As for the others, quite frankly, those do not interest me, but I am struggling to justify this observation.
What I get from this and the previous post, is my learning to see as an ongoing process of educating oneself by seeing what other photographers are doing and, mutual surprise as a result. Thanks, I think your work will help me a lot with my own ongoing portrait project.
What I am thinking is probably dead obvious, but not to me:
There's the instant which still manages to compress time before the extended time of reflection and maybe that uncompressed reflection will be stored in memory and act as an influence next time.