"the devil made me do it" (request for critique)

The other week me and a friend took an excursion to the Los Angeles County

Museum of Art (LACMA), ostensibly to see the David Hockney exhibit (his

photography has been a huge influence on me, much more so than his painting,

which was the focus of the current exhibition). We also took some time to

explore the permanent collection, which is where I took the two photos linked

below.<br><br>

 

The first of these is just about my favorite shot I've taken this year. No

flash allowed in the museum, so I was using my Sigma 30mm f1.4, and taking

advantage of the ability of my Slik Mini Pro III tabletop tripod to double as a

chest pod, to help steady my hand. A fair percentage of my shots weren't

critically sharp (due to either focus errors or movement), but enough were that

I went home happy. <br><br>

 

Especially happy with this first one, which shows a portion of <i>Satan</i>, a

bronze sculpture cast by Frenchman Jean-Jacques Feuchere in 1836. (The

out-of-focus areas fore and aft are his wings.) <br><br>

 

The sepia conversion was done with the Gorman/Holbert technique, described here:<br>

<a

href="http://www.gormanphotography.com/bw_conversion.pdf">http://www.gormanphotography.com/bw_conversion.pdf</a><br><br>

 

Big thanks to whoever first posted that link on this forum a couple weeks ago!<div></div>

Now, this second one, I thought was just a throwaway shot... The only reason I spent 5 minutes with it in photoshop was to email to a friend who seemed to really like the satanic aspect of the first one. <br><br>

 

I've been really surprised that it's gotten such a strong reaction from the couple people I've shown this to. What do you all think? For my next public exhibition, would you hang this one next to the first and call it a series, or let the first stand on it's own? <br><br>

 

The same sepia conversion was used, but I added about 80% of the color back to the devil himself. (Partially desaturating images is a ploy I may be overusing as of late...) <br><br>

 

This is from a piece called <i>Saint Michael Casting Satan into Hell</i>, done in the early 1700's by Domenico Antonio Vaccaro. Shot through glass display case. <br><br>

 

Thanks for any feedback. <br><br>

 

Darren<br><br>

 

PS. Hail Satan.<div></div>

Don't think you need the copyright symbol Darren, no one is going to steal it.

Not very nice, Wayne.

 

Darren, I like the second one very much, but the first one has a technical flaw which ruins

it, and that is the blown-out highlights, especially on that big portion of wing in front of

the top of his head. That's really too bad because the rest is very interesting.

 

Thank you. Keep at it.

Played with the curves and hue. Resized. (There are some hot spots in the original capture)

 

How is this?<div></div>

Blown out highlights are only a "flaw" if they impact the image as a whole. A couple of little reflections that shoot off the right end of the histogram are not reasons to throw out a shot. A man in a white shirt, which is entirely blown out, for example, would be different. The upshot is that if you like the shot, it doesn't matter what anyone else says. And "technical flaw" is an utterly meaningless term.

Vivek - I like it! (I never did figure out that 'curves' dialog myself.)

 

So, the 511 pixel limit on inline posts is only for the width? I guess so...

 

Darren

J Sevigny:

 

"A couple of little reflections that shoot off the right end of the histogram are not reasons

to throw out a shot..."

 

In the first pic, there are a little more than a "couple of little reflections..." And nobody

asked anybody to throw out a shot.

 

"The upshot is that if you like the shot, it doesn't matter what anyone else says..."

 

Absolutely. However, the man asked for critiques. So...

 

As for "And "technical flaw" is an utterly meaningless term...", it looks to me like an utterly

meaningless statement.

wow, man.

 

If so fearless, why not join the group in IRAQ?

Darren,

 

I like the compositions. Exposures, you can always err on the underside and take care of it in the post processing. Yes, I tend to avoid the flashing highlights.

 

Depending on the version of PS you have (if you have older versions, BTW, upgrade it to PS-CS2 from Adobe for about $170- really worth it), you should experiment with the different tools. You would be surprised how many of your captures would look different.

Paul, All groups there are involved in plundering and killing (and more as telecast all over the world), without exceptions.