Untitled

I've just joined this site and was really excited about getting involved, but I find that there are some very narrow views on creativity out there. Expression can take place in whatever form that artist (the term is inclusive of photographers) chooses. When an individual is forced into a mould based on the opinions of others, then he/she loses their unique, individual identity. Some people are great photographers and lousy artists. The converse is true too. Other people combine both mediums really well and speak their message through their images in that way, such as Lars has done.

 

I can't believe how some people seem to be genuinely angry about the fact that they don't like a message. Bizarre. If you don't like it, look at something else that you do...

Moderator note:

I've been away on vacation this week and was dismayed to see the old "is this a photograph or an image" argument. If you discuss manipulation on the POW forum - please discuss the merits or problems of the manipulation as it applies to the POW... Not the fact that you don't LIKE Photoshopped images or that a photoshopped image doesn't belong on PN or on the POW or is not a photograph.

Those comments will be edited or deleted in future POW threads. I'm only leaving most of those comments this week because it would confuse the continuity of the discussion.

For further clarification of the guidelines for posting on the POW - Please read further by clicking on the words "photograph of the week" in the forum listing.

Lars - I for one completely endorse what you are doing - it's new, bold, brave, and experimental, but brilliantly executed. Well done. There is absolutely no place for "photo versus image" debate - I also get it quite a lot of the time and this noise that comes blathering out misses the point, so I also agree with Mary. Congratulations Lars! Don

In Renesanse the Artist make plenty of sctches befor the picture werw done. From Idea to complet the picture with a frame.

Actualy modern painters produs 'Art in work like pictures'. The same code is visible in Lars photo.

During 'wet processing' we choose diferent granulations of paper; on PC we choose 'canvas'. For me the most important things in visual Art is: the final effect to the people. If it is something 'IN' the picture or photo' ouhgt to tuch them. How it is done is an other story, second hand level.

To make a photo of precise Swiss watch machinery you need at list Hasselblad or Linhof with Leitz lenses and hi-tech studio lighters.

To do a good impresive or expresive photo you can use one simply box-camera too.

Postprocessing with PC? Why not, if it helps us to make the story more significant.

Whats about the shape of photo, whats about the format of photo? Sharpness?

Long ago, in 70ties, I saw on Photokina in Koln very big (1mx1m) color photos, done by Prince Charles of England. Like Turner's water color paintings. Nobody said: is this a picture or photo, postprocessing or not. Everything find enybody ander the skin.

Photo versus picture? NO, both is an image, imagination, virtual life.

Regards to you and Bruce Hooke and Dale Mellor too. Franc

I find the image has a difficult boundary between the beach and the sea - the edge of focus if you like. Because of this, I thought it looked staged, perhaps on a set. This managed to prolong the enjoment of the image.

 

The tones, ( and texture) cause an overbearing, almost desolate feeling, with extreme forlornlessness. And the girl is bound by this. These are not there in either of the 2 pictures shown elsewhere in the thread.

 

I could not have created this image - and consequently I have to level praise at Lars - its well executed. For me (if anyone's interested by now) its production is of no consequence, good or otherwise.

 

Well managed Lars!

 

Best regards,

 

Shaun

gorgeous work - wonderfully manipulated!

wow i really like it!