dennis_couvillion Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Brad, you lost me with that second picture. I cannot understand what you find attractive in the metallic tones and complete loss of shadow detail. And why do you want your pictures to look like everybody else's? I can look at w/mw threads on the forum where you post and entire threads sometimes look like they might have been taken by the same person. It's like everyone is copying each other with this wierd style. My advice to you is you should break away and develop your own style. You have a good eye but to be very blunt (and to borrow grant's terminolgy)... this "sucks". Sorry... but I'm sure you want a frank appraisal. Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted April 23, 2005 Author Share Posted April 23, 2005 Dennis, you and Brad are both good photogs and nice guys... <b>Now, don't start a fight on my thread! ;)</b> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 "Now, don't start a fight on my thread! ;)" Not sure if I understand your remark, Ray. You routinely give frank, critical evaluations of other people's photographs. I wasn't aware that I was not allowed... ;>) My point was that the original is a boring, "found" shot of two mannequins that does not demonstrate any particular talent or skill in either the seeing or the taking... then Brad tried to make the shot dramatic in Photoshop by ramping up the contrast and adding that weird metallic look. If this is what you meant by suggesting that film users learn to use Photoshop, then definitely no thanks. Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Dennis, you and Brad are both good photogs and nice guys... Now, don't start a fight on my thread! ;) I concur,Ray. Hey, what's wrong with a good banter...just hope they are not getting peed with each other. Both excellent photographers with a good sense of humour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis1 Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 what's wrong with the stinking DR? and what's so great about getting what u want in PS easily? Both gets the job done. It's the man/woman doing it that matters...and nothing else matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Ray, why should Brad get mad about an honest critique? You don't give Brad enough credit for maturity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Dennis, the nice thing about photography, is that if one wants to, they can <I>experiment</I> with different techniques and develop a style they find interesting/ expressive/pleasing and might eventually call it their own. I'm always doing that. For example, earlier I took another approach of very highly saturated color SP. There are a handful of others here (few on this forum) that experiment as well - and in my view, they are some of the more creative photographers. If you don't understand why one would want to do that, or more likely, feel that it's a move away from the ethnic purity of leica photography you espouse, that is certainly your right. You've spoken many times in the past on the forum swaying from "traditional" leica photography.<P> Which gets back to your original question: <I>And why do you want your pictures to look like everybody else's? </I><P> Well, don't yours with a straight B&W look, look similar to a few million other photographers. Where is your voice and expressive style?<P> It really is a shame, Dennis, that you have this aggressive need to keep people and their photography/art in line to your rigid standards and view of the world. I suspect you might have similar views with respect to pre-1400 Medieval paintings - why the heck couldn't painters keep their art simple and liturgical... Someone's recent analogy with respect to yourself and Tom DeLay was apt.<P> You're still playing the Gotcha! game. Time to grow up and stop being disingenuous - your recent several posts are a good example of that. www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 this is were we start laughing at Dennis again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Jeeez, Brad... awfully touchy aren't you? If you want to believe it's a great shot... go ahead. I'm sure there are lots of your friends who'll tell you it's awesome. Is that what you want? I'm sorry you're not amenable to listening to an honest critique. IMO the shot enforces previous remarks I've made about this popular style emphasizing style over substance. And apparently it's not too hard to obtain in Photoshop... that's all I'm saying. You have a good eye and IMO you should more often emphasize substance over style. Forget about taking 300 medicore shots in one outing that can be Photoshopped into some cool style. Take fewer shots and concentrate more on improving the content of individual shots. If you are taking 300 shots in two or three hours, when so you have time to think about your shots? I'm sorry you are not receptive to criticism and constructive advice Brad. Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 More disingenuous remarks by Dennis. Nowhere did I say it was a "great" shot. Please point out where I said that. You can't of course... Just more twisting on Dennis' part. And refusal to address the points. www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 There's plenty of room to play around with composition, lighting, subject matter in more traditional B&W Leica photography. When it comes to people as subjects, unless you back off with a telephoto you're interacting with your subjects no matter how much you make the attempt to be strictly the observer. And of course all these things would apply to digital capture, or color film for that matter, as well. There's more to "style" just what you can manipulate with photoshop. A Minor White doesn't look like an Ansel Adams. W. Eugene Smith, H.C.B., Cornell Capa, all distinct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Brad, don't be angry and upset because I criticized your picture. It's a boring, very average picture and is not indicative of your level of talent. You attempted to cover up the lack of interesting content with a cool Photoshop style. Do you disagree with this? Jeez, man... other people have their pictures criticized. Are you special? The beat kind of critique is the honest, brutally frank kind like I've offered... unless you think you've already reached a point in your photography that it requires no improvement. There is nothing inappropriate about my remarks. You response is out of line... Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 You really are losing it Dennis. The topic YOU brought up was my style (after I responded to Ray's question with two photos) . You made the claim my style is like everyone else's. I explained why I do what i do. You just keep doing the straw man thing.... You're looking really silly and disingenuous not staying on-topic. www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 And why are you trying so hard trying to drive Ray's thread into the ground? www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Brad, you are a good photographer. I am sorry that you are emotionally incapable of discussing your photography... unless the observer offers fawning, unbridled adulation. That's your problem, Brad... not mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 And now the insults... www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis1 Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Ray: "possible extra oomph.." Ray, wanna share what that is? ;0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 "...Tom DeLay"??? ;>) Have a nice life , Brad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squareframe Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 I think it is important to be accepting of differing styles and tastes. a photograph should exist on many levels, and the viewer processes through their own selective-filtering of what makes it through. this could change on a daily basis .. and is what makes reviewing an image a year later so exciting. perspectives change, life-experience alters the view. one important lesson in life, is that our personal view of the world (or imagery) is just one view among many, many possibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 It really is a shame. This was one of the BETTER threads I've seen on he Leica Forum in a long time. Good questions and information exchange. And civil too. Then Dennis, feeling the need to railroad the discussion and get some attention, goes at it with his 8:21AM comments - which had nothing to do with the thread at all. Anyone know why that is? www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 hmm, so we have Brad and others contributing thoughtfully and constructively to Ray's thread that was chugging along just fine amongst the adults. and without an invite, some twat comes along and starts badgering and making things up...again. Dennis, you've become so tiring. give it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Daniel: I actually agree with you about keeping an open mind about other styles. It doesn't mean we have to like all other styles... and my opinions are just as valid as the next guy's. FWIW, in this particular style I think Edmo's work is very good. That's because Edmo's content and composition is interesting. I believe it's Edmo that a lot of wannabes copy. I still can't stand the bronze, metallic skin tones and high contrast, even in Edmo's work, but I still like some of his shots. I'm sure Edmo would disagree with me about his skin tones... As for a more traditional style have you seen much of Jung Yang's stuff? Consistently very good stuff. Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 "It doesn't mean we have to like all other styles... and my opinions are just as valid as the next guy's." since when was this thread about critiquing other styles? you're an ankle-biter-kick-me dog running out and taking any opportunity to have a go at Brad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Look, Eric... Brad posted pictures to demonstrate his style; and even showed before and after Photoshop examples. Brad wanted everyone to see his work; he wasn't asked to do it. Would it have been inappropriate for someone to say how much they LIKED his pictures and his style? Would you be whining right now if someone praised the photographs? In light of the entire thread, if you would care to read it, there was nothing wrong with my comments. Brad is just throwing a hissy fit because someone criticized his photography. In your case, Eric, hero-worship is not very becoming in an adult man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted April 23, 2005 Author Share Posted April 23, 2005 Dennis, c'mon man, have a go at Brad via email or criticize his pics on a critique or w/nw thread. This isn't the place for it, simply because you're screwing up a good discussion. Travis, the extra oomph is the whisper subtle tonal quality I've seen in some silver prints with some photographs. On the other hand, you can pick up a D70 now with a good zoom lens that covers the equivalent range of 27 to 105mm focal length, just about everything you need- for the price of an M6 body. I've never used a zoom, but I think I'm quickly getting addicted to it. And for some reason with this camera I just seem to feel like taking it everywhere- much larger than a Leica but not really heavier and so comfortable in the hand, and no film to load and unload... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now