Jump to content

Black and White, Revisited


michaellinder

Recommended Posts

I've puzzled over this for a few days. "Omitted the OP"???

 

There's something here you are assuming that I don't understand.

 

JDM, that was my foolhardy sarcasm getting the better of me. Yet, I'd appreciate a quick explanation regarding the abstract characteristics of your image. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JDM, that was my foolhardy sarcasm getting the better of me. Yet, I'd appreciate a quick explanation regarding the abstract characteristics of your image.

 

I'm still puzzled.

1. most centrally - cloud pictures are in some ways at the very core of "abstract" photography - I even labeled it "equivalent" in reference to Stieglitz's famous (ca. 1929) series.

 

2. more peripherally, I hope that we are not going to get into some kind of definitional 'standard' of the sort that nearly crippled the Nature forum and pretty well did in the Street forum altogether in the old original P.net.

 

3. I took B&W to indicate monochrome, and the image is heavily desaturated. I thought that was monochrome enough. Apparently not to everyone's satisfaction.

 

Why can't we all just get along?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was pointing out that it's not black and white. I was not suggesting it not be posted for that reason. I just thought it was ironic that Michael was concerned about the abstractness of a photo with obvious abstract character and didn't notice it wasn't black and white as he'd requested.

 

Getting along is easy, even with photographic disagreements and challenges.

  • Like 1

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still puzzled.

1. most centrally - cloud pictures are in some ways at the very core of "abstract" photography - I even labeled it "equivalent" in reference to Stieglitz's famous (ca. 1929) series.

 

2. more peripherally, I hope that we are not going to get into some kind of definitional 'standard' of the sort that nearly crippled the Nature forum and pretty well did in the Street forum altogether in the old original P.net.

 

3. I took B&W to indicate monochrome, and the image is heavily desaturated. I thought that was monochrome enough. Apparently not to everyone's satisfaction.

 

Why can't we all just get along?

 

JDM, had I entitled the thread "Monochrome," your point #3 would be moot. Black and white, I take it, is a more restrictive category than monochrome.

 

Also, I must apologize for my lack of familiarity of photography's history. Having said this, I yield to your statement about cloud photos. Finally, I have no intent whatsoever to define standards for this forum. That, if needed, would be a task for Moderators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was pointing out that it's not black and white. I was not suggesting it not be posted for that reason. I just thought it was ironic that Michael was concerned about the abstractness of a photo with obvious abstract character and didn't notice it wasn't black and white as he'd requested.

 

Getting along is easy, even with photographic disagreements and challenges.

 

Sam, I must do some self-disclosure. Sometimes when viewing images in this forum and those in No Words, I may be in too much of a hurry, since all I really have to do is to click on the like button. In the case of JDM's image, I suspect that the presence of other recognizable elements besides the clouds led me to think that it wasn't an abstract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, in another thread recently you mentioned having a personal distaste of the LIKES function. If that’s the case, why would you consider that “all I really have to do is click on the like button”? Why would any of your attention be going to a system you claim not to respect. You are one of the more ubiquitous distributors of likes, to the point where it often looks like you simply run down a page distributing them with no other purpose than simply to do it.

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, in another thread recently you mentioned having a personal distaste of the LIKES function. If that’s the case, why would you consider that “all I really have to do is click on the like button”? Why would any of your attention be going to a system you claim not to respect. You are one of the more ubiquitous distributors of likes, to the point where it often looks like you simply run down a page distributing them with no other purpose than simply to do it.

 

OK, Sam, whatever you say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...