*Leans casually*

Snark aside, how... heartacheful

"Heartarcheful" is a good way to put it. These guys make me feel some sort of way.

Oh, I meant the photograph itself as much as the key figure.
Though perhaps due to my extremely corrupted view on things.

The fursuiter is the focus, the target of the eye, detailed and interesting... Inviting, to say the least.
But the figure in the back, blurred and distant, shadowed but not enough to attract the eye, an admirer of the fursuiter. But the fursuiter gives them no attention, is imposing in size compared to them. They are the viewer themselves in the photograph, everlooking at the target of desire (the fursuiter) but always too far to be "in focus" with them.

I don't think that's a "corrupted" view by any means, it's just the way that third parties will tend to view art. You're presenting a view that's more holistic with regards to the contents of the photo -- and it makes sense, since i have provided no commentary at all -- but my view of it will naturally skew towards one holistic of the process and circumstances that lead to its creation.

I don't take photos like this at cons very often, at least, not any more. I do enough work professionally and have so little free time that I usually can't stand the idea of running around with a camera, but occasionally, I'm in a particular state of mind and I do it anyways. Far more than before, I feel "integrated" with the community at conventions, and like those barriers between me and others like me are gone. But, there's still a veil of doubt, and sometimes, that comes to the forefront. I feel like an observer who wants to get to know these creatures and spend time with them, but my apprehensions and the reality of the circumstances don't allow for that.

With a camera, I'm that observer. This confers a certain emotional safety, where I can interact with the critters at the con without confronting that feeling of distance. Almost universally, this is how I view these convention space photos: they are distant, longing, and defensive. I asked this fella for a photo because I found him quite striking, and he posed like this without a second thought. I composed as reasonably as I could in the moment, shot the photo, thanked him, and I left. Now, I get to develop the frame, digitize it, and consider it, about 800 miles away from where I shot it, a month removed, with no chance to engage with the reality of the scene further. It's very melancholic, for me.

I have no idea who Zingo actually is beyond this, I have no delusions about him specifically, but rather I wanted to illustrate how these off-hand photos of furries in convention spaces make me feel.

I apologise for any offence caused by my previous statement. It certainly was not my intent, nor did i intend to force my view of the work as correct, if it appeared so...

I'm struggling to come up with a reply i find suitably respectful, i'm far too illiterate in the art of wordcraft to say much more than i enjoyed reading what you've written about the work, and if the goal was to convey a melancholic tone with these images than i would say you've achieved that terribly well. Though mind you i'm a very reclusive fox and while the idea of integrating myself at cons was promising in my younger days i fear i'm far too sour now to visualize the experience as anything positive anymore, so i am very much biased.

I suppose my view being more wholisitc may be due to the fact i'm still very much a layman when it comes to artistic expression, i try to only put things in my works that i feel have some kind of purpose or add to it, "form over function" i think is the word for it in artistic philosophy?
So i overly focus and view things in that way likely more than i should allow myself when viewing others artworks...

Again, apologies for any offence.

I didn't mean to suggest you've offended me at all. I'm sorry about that! No, what I meant was that any outside observer is going to consider the literal image in front of them, more than they are going to consider the process leading to it and the reality after it. This is natural, it cannot be helped because that's all the context that they have, since I did not provide any of it. You are not obligated to "see" things the way that I do, in fact, it would be hubris for me to expect anything like that.

I deliberately choose to forgoe any context, most of the time, and present most of these pieces in a vacuum, set alongside my other work, and nothing else. I want people to get something different out of it than I do.

But, I really insist: you do not bother me at all. I promise, I will tell you if you ever upset or offend me.

No need to be sorry. I'm just not as apt as reading tone as normal folks. So want to be careful.
Thank you for the clarification though <3

I think its a very noble effort on your part, likely one i should try to replicate better if i'm being entirely honest, i'm certain what ever context i do give to some of my works has lead to the works detriment than otherwise.