thanks a lot, in fact they are the feeders of the whole word,and all what they have done is just for feeding themselves,and they are really the true warriors, my regards as always, Saad.
I don't know when I speak about non-technical issues too. I guess I do that in cases, when they suggest something remarkable to me without the implicit or explicit hints by the photographer. I have no real method for that but I guess that most of the time it will be the absence of "messages" that then brings some necessity for interpretation.
thank you so much Rashed for the interesting,yet a useful advices, as for my friend Nick,he is totally free to tell me all what my shots imply on him to tell,exactly and as much as he would like,and I welcome all. But I have to tell you ,I am Not Ali,I am Saad Salem, you have addressed me Ali,in this and in previous inputs,I just like to be addressed by my own name which is by the way Saad Salem, my best wishes, Saad.
Keep a carve brother Ali of your work, not delay, not monthly but once in 4 months times, give yourself a chance and enough time, to compare your images quality if it is improving or not and do make such comparison with some good photographers here, promise yourself to take and post good photographs and for that educate yourself more and more, read articles look at other people photos, read whets sort of comments they get and never rush to just post photos, until you reach a stage where you are in advance of your required technical capabilities.
Take care brother Ali and forgive me if I did go wrong with you by any means. Rashed
I believe Nick went too far with his scientist ideas into your image quality wise, a scientist of what, photography? , of course not!
One thing I do agree with here, that there should never be a link between a technical value of a photograph and a photographer laid down stories about his own photographs.
How you look at your photographs brother Saad it all your way of doing so, what interest me is how this photograph was technically captured.
This is in simple terms, the rest of things related to photography I do not need to state here, there are many on this site that are well educated in this field, both academicals and practical alike.
Brother Ali, I would request you and I will keep requesting you, that in order for you, me and others to improve our skill and understanding and maintain learning this media in a proper form, we do not really need cheap exchangeable Critique flying all over this site from to another!
Such act can only shift us behind and delay our progress and give us nothing to improve.
It also not the number of comments on your images will count, you get 20 comments and you give them on your same image 20 comments in replay making them look 40 comments, this will not over value the technical quality of your image at all, it is only a way or another of fooling yourself.
Unfortunately, many of us do this here and I mean on this site, this is what I feel so sorry for, we keep writing and advice other not to do what we ourselves doing, that’s includes me Brother Ali.
So Nick being telling you things about this image of yours which he do recommend adding to all of his images, ignore him when he says he being a I scientist, this again brother Ali not and will never promote him as being a good photographer, surprisingly one of my Prof. Teaching photography and his images quality of being viewed by us is zero while his technical touches on those images are well been read by the viewers, this is not the case with Nick, he is neither a great photograph nor his scientific knowledge is being read on his photographs.
you have come to my point at your last words,I will repeat my question once more but I have to put it in your words for now, Did it occuers to you to speak not about technical side for once in some shots,and did you ever see a reason on some shots to going further, Deer Nick,when I see a shot of the earth that showing the earth is not flat ,I will talk about that by saying it is a good subject,cause I know most of the shots,if not all of them showing the earth is flat, though staying on technical details is safer,and wiser,I admit. cheers, Saad.
There is no "regardless of the shot being good or bad", Saad. Just as there is no "regardless of the chord being played well or false", or "regardless of the novel being written grammatically right or not". It is a good image for what it shows.
I already told you about many other images of yours, where you try to impose "general truths" and things like that. First of all this is not the subject of photography. This is subject of social science, or of history, politics, philosophy, etc. The fact that photography can be a helping enhancement for the understanding of such matters is not for concluding that photography deals itself with such matters. For example, not a single of the images of mine that were used for my latest job for a flyer of an attorney office had anything to do with the content of their work. I didn't think about "lawyers" when I shot them. But I did think about good photography.
Second of all, and this is my personal taste, about that, even if we accept for a moment the statement "regardless of the shot being good or bad", it is trivial what you are doing. What do you think that it is? Special? Does it bring anything to the already known values and points of view of humanity? Are you one of the few that has that point of view? Is that really so special? Almost the whole humanity would have the same point of view, Saad, so what do you expect? You don't get any comments about that from me because the subject is not worth it. It is not difficult for me, it is trivial. I don't sit and write about "couch-philosophy". There are more than enough "hobby-philosophers" here that will tell you how "good the subject is" etc, etc. This is like standing on the pedestal, saying that the earth is not flat but rather a sphere, and expecting everybody to break out in celebrations.
Now, if that statement about the earth would be at least special, or subtle, or remarkable, or different, or aggresive, or demanding, or insane, or anything than the usual hyper-romantic approach that was already beaten to death, then I would get on that car and say what I think. But the way you do it is like repeating the songs of Bob Dylan with some new notes and expecting me to say that the music is yours where it is a cover version of a cover version. So I stay on the technical side until there is reason for going further.
Hi I get you point of view very well Nick, I just asked if you like the subject or not,regardless of the shot being good or bad. For this shot of mine for example, you could say a bad title,or fair subject,or a good point of view, let me put it other way,I would like to know your point of view about my shots subject,I am not talking about this shot specifically,but it is the mere chance that I have asked you at this shot,I think that is not a difficult matter for you,neither it is an impossible kind request, cheers. Saad.
Well... first of all, if a message needs confirmations of receipt then it was not worth talking about. Wanting such confirmations is like asking the girl afterwards if she liked the sex, which is laughable. I prefer it the other way around, you know.
Now, specifically for this image... and with many other images of yours, which are still very good. You make a mistake. A basic mistake! You don't load images with explicit descriptions of your "messages", and your "morals", and your "meanings" and similar things. Because the spectator doesn't need that. The subject should talk for itself, not your imposed ideas about that.
An image, and especially such a kind of image, is a neutral tale from your side. You just show what is, without any kind of preaching for or against it. This is exactly the difference between hollywoodian glorification and demonization, and movies by people like Andrei Tarkowski, or Theo Angelopoulos, or the late Clint Eastwood.
Or what did you wanted me to say? "Ooh, that great man, and what a braaaave warrior, and he is the true hero of everyday", and similar nonsense? Big deal, really! Are we serious? I am a scientist, Saad, and not a girlie in puberty, writing nonsensical romantifications about trivial things in her "poetry album", and being then soooo disappointed when a guy like the one you photographed perhaps smells too strongly after sweat or after some beers too much. That is, photographically I prefer to not bubble around about such guys, but rather being with them. And philosophically I prefer to go the library and read.
Of course I will also write about the conveyed message but only when the sender doesn't desperately insist to have me talking about his or her message, and only when there is something more than the completely trivial, worn out, pseudo-philosophical messages that most wannabes think they have to send. For such important subjects, like the one you wish to state by such an overdramatized title, you need a more down to earth view of things, and you are still not detached enough for that. But you decide, you are the photographer.
Which on the other hand should no way mean that the image is not good, not at all. It is very well worked out, and considering the fact that it was made with a cell phone makes it even better an achievement! One can really see what is possible provided one works with care and conscious mind, on order to get the image as it is contained in the own mental world.
Hi Nick, at first I would ask you so kindly,did it ever occurred to you to talk about the subject of the shot? what I would like to hear from a serious critiques writer,about the concept and the message the shot convey.I would very much like to hear from you about that. and for this shot Nick,it is edited extensively ,using silver effex program,it is a cell phone shot,with a bad quality shots compared to cameras, so I have done what ever possible to extract a viewable view from the original,I usually hate cellphone shots,it was for me as if you were shot a scene using a cartoon camera,but I can not resist the temptation of taking it,I found in his pose and look all the hope for the future,and I have died to know what is he thinking about, thank you so very much for the detailed input as always, my best regards. Saad.
And a true photographer that notices such good opportunities!
There is something quite "old fashoined" here, Saad, which matches the subject and the timing very well. The exposire seems to be centered on the wish to get as much details and plasticity of the young man as possible. This introduces many deviations from perfect balance on other areas of the image, like for example the overexposures on the gras, but on this one spedifically they are good! They are good because they make visible that it is about the man and that rest has only to supplement him. It works like some kind of decent spotlight on him.
The timing was perfect for the sense of the image. I couldn't imagine any better time to shot that exactly this. It also worked hand in hand with the exposore balance. I think that even a small turn of his face would change the amount of reflected light and thus could be a danger to miss that perfect grey scale on his face. The very good details on him are another plus here. The details on the gras look harder than normal but as already said, this time it contributes to enhancing the importance of the main actor.
0 
There is no "regardless of the shot being good or bad", Saad. Just as there is no "regardless of the chord being played well or false", or "regardless of the novel being written grammatically right or not". It is a good image for what it shows. 
