I captured this image in the Bronx over by Gun Hill and White Plains, right under the 2 train. They have this banging Roti shop around that block. Go in there, get some good rice and ox tails. Finish it off with an Irish moss. Damn good food. I had just finished eating when I found this scene. 

So now, whenever I see it, I smell that place. Is that weird? Do you smell stuff like that when you see memories? Or is that just me?

Ultimately, an image is nothing more than a memory, isn’t it? Functionally, a photograph is identical to an image. Consider that your eyes are currently allowing some amount of photons to enter your optical nerve, and images are forming in your brain (there is of course much more involved, but you get it). 

Your brain either retains those photons, along with what smells occurred, what tastes where available, what emotions you had at that time, etc. So, I ask, what is the difference between a photographic image and an actual memory? One could argue that photographs are permanent where memories can fade. But so can a photograph. A photo can be burned, lost, stolen, ripped…..just like a memory. Can you think of a tangible difference, other than medium? 

Hmm…I like the composition of this image. It was lucky that the subject’s hair is so dark. The dark hair really is a prominent part of this image. I could it has the potential of being a more powerful image had I truly had the subject isolated. I applied a small amount of clarity to the image with a brush, specifically at the windows. I always find a small amount of clarity or structure on a wet surface makes for some drastic changes (in a good way) on my images. 

What do you think? I would love to know. 

• Maurice.