Jump to content

W/NW the nightlife


yeffe

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 213
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<i>perhaps there are other people who long ago left behind a simple devotion to so called proper exposure and basic ideas regarding shaprness. There is nothing wrong with a pure descriptive image ala scientific method - but to many people, this is not particularly interesting anymore.</i><P>

Qualities that any modern autofocus camera can achieve with little help from the photographer seem like rather poor qualities with which to distinguish interesting work from uninteresting work. Sharpness (or lack of sharpness) in itself isn't meaningful. If it were, Robert Frank's work wouldn't be in museums and galleries, but photos of resolution charts would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<i>nice Mike...apparently 2003 was a pretty "rich" photographic year.....heh.</i><P>

Thanks. I seems to spend a lot more time in bars and such when I'm <b>not</b> in a serious relationship. Fortunately for my night-time photography, my girlfriend is heading to England for several months this week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because in some types of pictures sharpness isn't important (and rightly so), it doesn't imply that every single blur that someone manages to photograph - whether by choice or accident, and often under poorly exposed/lit conditions - is an automatic and bona fide work of art.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<i>Just because in some types of pictures sharpness isn't important (and rightly so), it doesn't imply that every single blur that someone manages to photograph - whether by choice or accident, and often under poorly exposed/lit conditions - is an automatic and bona fide work of art.</i><P>

I agree. Where did anyone claim that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The results that JK produces are beyond chance. His results are 'blurs' between reality and fantasy that you don't see in normal life and that could perhaps be created with some heavy/pretensious photoshop work. Yet his shots a lot of times convey motion and that makes them dynamic. At other times they create painting like images that I would expect from Van Gogh. I guess that it's clear that I like his photographs. And don't be fooled if you think that they are mistakes. There is some creative photoshop work behind them as well.

 

But, Nels, I think that you get it and that you were basically jerking his chain because he jerked yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...