Photograph of the Day- Interface Hood

One minute they're booting a football up and down Castlereagh Street, the next hurling abuse and stones at their Catholic peers on the opposite corner

, , , , , , , ,

  • Isn’t clodding a Belfast tradition? What were the peers up to?

  • billy

    Poor photo. Weak composition, Could be anywhere. The image is meaningless without the text. In fact, even with the text, it’s still weak! A good photo doesn’t need words.

    P.s. Mick, don’t censor these comments as well. If Moochin wants his work given prominence then he should be able to accept a little constructive criticism.

  • willis

    Its not Richard Dawkins waiting for a ruck with Nelson is it?

  • Munsterview

    As fine an example of attempting to shoot the messenger as can be seen !

    If the photo and caption related to a Nationalist area ( as I am sure it equally could have ) would Billy’s ‘ artistic criticism ‘ have been the same or would compliments have been in order ?

  • Mark McGregor

    I think its a cracker shot. Mooch clearly got in amongst these young people, tells their story but demonstrates they will demand annonymity to have an image captured. The fact the hoodie could be anywhere but was engaged in activity far removed from most is all part of the story to me.

    I sense flickr sour grapes spilling over into slugger.

  • An excellent shot showing how difficult it is for the police, of any force, to know A from B in a situation.

  • aquifer

    Anonymity, the criminals’ favourite tactic, the terrorists’ best weapon, the perfect antidote to citizenship.

  • billy

    It’s a human shaped object (male/female/mannequin) clothed in a hoody standing somewhere/anywhere…the photo tells us nothing.

    What activity does the photo reveal that the person/thing is engaged in?

    Without the text supplied by Moochin the shot is utterly devoid of interest. Because we know the area Moochin’s text is relevant to us…but meaningless to an outsider.

    It’s a poor shot. In photo-speak, it’s a throw away.

  • billy

    Dear God, grow up.

    I wouldn’t give a stuff if David Bailey had taken it…it’s crap. Period.

  • Sound Bloke

    And your real name, Aquifer, is ….

  • billy

    When a photo needs text to convey its message then the photo has failed.

  • TheHorse

    Does that include women who wear burkas or just people who you class as terrorists.

  • billy

    Pippa, but your point only stands because Moochin had to explain that was a scene of interface disorder in Belfast…the photo should have been able to convey that on it’s own.

    If Moochin had submitted this shot without the text accompanying it then what would you have?

    I’ll tell you, someone/thing in a hoody somewhere/sometime. Pointless, meaningless image.

  • billy

    Moochin wrote,
    “One minute they’re booting a football up and down Castlereagh Street, the next hurling abuse and stones at their Catholic peers on the opposite corner”

    Yes, well two photos of that activity would have been great.

    Instead, all we’ve got is some dull shot of someone in a hoody. Could be anywhere for all we know.

  • Mrazik

    Billy, get off your high horse.

  • aquifer

    ‘Does that include women who wear burkas or just people who you class as terrorists’

    Are women who are made to wear burkas full citizens?

    Sound bloke.

    I withhold my real name because local armed conspiracies use anonymised violence to enforce political conformity and to control the content of political discourse. I also wish to be able to earn a living. I am upholding my right to express my views free of the threat of violence or victimisation by remaining anonymous, without threatening anyone.

  • lover not a fighter

    That hoodie is well clean and may even have been ironed.

    Fair dues to the lad for turning up spic and span for duty.

    His groom/butler/mans man should be commended.

  • Kevin McIlhennon

    Billy certainly seems to be on a mission to turn this thread into his own wee diatribe. Perhaps Billy is the photographed hood?

  • billy

    Not really, the hoodie gives anonymity and that is scary to a lot of people.

  • Scamallach

    That is indeed a quality hoody. What are we betting…Superdry….Carhartt, perhaps?

  • billy

    For all we know this could be just some random kid standing at a bus stop waiting to get home.

    That Moochin had to provide text to EXPLAIN the shot proves that the photo is a failure.

    Sorry that I don’t want to join in your ass-sucking love-in…the photo is poor. End of.

  • billy

    Sad, Kevin. Sad.

    How do we know the person/thing is a ‘hood’?

    Because he/she/it is wearing a hoody?

    What’s the subject doing to tell us that he/she/mannequin is a ‘hood’?

    Oh, wait, Moochin told us so!

    Poor photo. Crap composition. Conveys no information. No context.

  • billy

    And do what, Mrazik, kiss Moochin’s ass like the rest of you?

    If Moochin wants to put his work up in the public domain then he/she should be prepared to accept some constructive criticism, no?

  • billy


    Yes…to the blue-rinsed readers of the Daily Mail, perhaps.

  • billy

    Most sensible comment of the thread.

    If Moochin had entitled this shot, “Study of a Hoody” I would have commended his for the clarity of the foreground and the gentle ‘bokeh’ blurring of the background.

    As a study of interface sectarian disorder in Belfast, however, it’s crap.

  • Kevin McIlhennon

    Well Billy, I can guess at it for several reasons. The main one being that it states what he is doing. I do think you’re trolling here. Granted, not every picture is amazing quality. But you get days like that. I certainly don’t do my job brilliantly every sngle day. But you almost appear to have a personal vendetta against John. Perhaps you might want to attend his exhibition tonight at 7pm in the Waterfront Hall to see a sample of his work.

  • Canny See It Sur

    Without wanting to get into a whole debate about the angst of youngsters on both sides of the divide in Belfast (and elsewhere)… I must agree that this photo is poorly envisaged and could be a shot of anyone anywhere doing anything. There is no scene of violence in the background being dominated by the anonymous villain (we are to assume he is the villain of the piece anyway). This shot could have been taken anywhere and without the text means nothing… to anyone but the photographer as it is only he/she who seen the photo in their minds eye.

    The fact that it needed such a lengthy description is a kick in the teeth to all those who say that a picture speaks a thousand words. In this instance the picture says nothing and needs backed up by what would usually be unnecessary verbiage.

  • billy

    Grow up.

    Personal vendetta, my eye. It’s a crap photo, for God’s sake.

    I’ll pass on the expo if this is a taster, ta.

  • billy

    Spot on.

  • VI Lurgan

    Mostly have to agree with Billy. It is the text primarily that engages the imaginations rather than the photo on its own. Take the text out and the subject addressed could be anything. It is only the inclusion of the text that develops the ‘story’. Together fair enough but the photo alone is weak.

  • Billy i told you all it was taken at the top of Castlereagh street and you don’t appear to believe me.
    Your choice i guess.
    I’m really not interested in getting into a slanging match with you, but what i will say is that i’m not interested in showing photographs that glorify interface violence.
    I’m interested in trying to understand it and for me to get access i have to be discreet and yes gain their trust(up to a point) so this is the first of what i hope will be a series. The shallow depth of field was/is/will be a creative response to the need for anonymity.
    Furthermore i was challenged straight after this was taken by a testosterone filled youth and had to show the 3 photographs that i had taken didn’t have any faces in it. The fella pictured thought this was a ‘class photo’ whereas the two others were more concerned with the content rather than the aesthetic.
    Anyhoo i know that not every photograph is going to be to everyones liking and i’m certainly not worried about constructive criticism, it’s just that i haven’t seen any yet.

  • joeCanuck

    Some commenters here, well mainly one, needs to get a life. All that time spent on creating witty bon mots will never be got back.

  • Maybe you could go down into the short strand Moochin and take some pics from the other side – just a thought !!

  • jj i’m well aware of the need for balance and it is my intention to do so….. then i can have a similar shot with a green and white hooped shirt out of focus on the lhs rather than a blue shirt

  • “One minute they’re booting a football up and down Castlereagh Street, the next hurling abuse and stones at their Catholic peers on the opposite corner”

    I suppose what i’m saying is – why not say abuse was hurled back from the Catholic side ?

    You make it out as if a poor Catholics were being abused for no reason – when in fact both sides are regularly hurling abuse at each other. Many people wouldn’t know that unless they come from that area.

    So its really helpful to paint the WHOLE picture – JMHO

  • joeCanuck

    C’mon, Belfastjj; do you think that anybody would not know that the other side were responding in kind?

  • billy

    Blue rinse and the Daily Mail readers only?? Im guessing you think you are an expert. I disagree, I think young people are far more likely to be wary of heavily disguised people, but it does depend on the area

  • Are you saying by the statement

    “One minute they’re booting a football up and down Castlereagh Street, the next hurling abuse and stones at their Catholic peers on the opposite corner”

    everyone in the world would ??

    I don’t think so MP really needs to remember this when making these sweeping statements !!

  • David Bailey


    Maybe you could omit the pictures in the rest of your eagerly awaited series. If they convey nothing without the text, then why not remove the extraneous matter and just give us the text.
    You clearly cannot handle Billy’s constructive criticism. Your response deals only with what YOU were trying to convey, not with HIS criticisms.
    Personally I didn’t even think much of the accompanying text. It was cliched, predictable and implicitly biased. So, on second thoughts, maybe you should stick to the photos; perhaps some scenery would be nice.

  • j o’connor

    David Bailey?

    Hmm, interesting. If I remember correctly, and if you are David Bailey, you were not so much good as trendy.