40s Dodge

This image is not flipped. The word Dodge is clear on the hood, and is not mirrored.

 

The jury has returned and the verdict is NOT FLIPPED. Now end this flipping discussion or I will flip you off. Enough.

 

BTW: Great work in this folder.... and I agree that the best image is "Overdue"... that one totally blew me away.

The distributor of the Salt Lake print wanted the car flipped. Who am I to argue with a distributor?

 

By the way- this particular appearance is based on a pictorialism process called Bromoil Transfer Printing. Thanks for the comments...

Nice illustration. I think you're being a little coy about how much this image owes its look to the IR film and how much to Photoshop artistry. Obviously the related images in the series are composites. I'm not bothered by photo illustration except that in this discussion the techniques used are fair game for discussion.

Being there's a lot of critical views of this photo, I'd like to say that I think the photo is fantastic! Even if it's been tweaked in PS, it's still amazing. It has a very erie presence. I'd be proud to have taken this photo.

Classic picture, yes, Classic Car, yes, Classic composition, yes - I don't see that so much as positive, more as overdone x 3. While we are sharing opinions, I feel like grain should be getting smaller as the years go by, not larger - regardless of the film / medium. To reiterate, it is a technically proficient image worth commendation, but I do not feel that it has that extra shine that makes it jump off the top rated photo page. I certainly mean no disrespect to the artist.

The discussion about use of PS or not is devotee to the past, and quite boring in fact. More or less everybody in this site is using PS: from cleaning scratches, cropping or simply framing, to recompose entirely a picture from few others, in between de-saturating, reviewing contrast or light,... so what the point?! What is interesting here IMO is the use of this car in different situations, size, angle, grain,... (it is obviously the same car as the Salt LAke picture, and likely the same picture flipped if you look closely).

If Michael had kept the car with same angle and size this picture would have been totally different. Choice of grain is also great and clever (it also smoothen the composite border and somehow homogenize the tone).

I would add that I think also the sky is another picture itself, but contrarly to many other composites I could see recently in TopPage (here I fully agree with MarcG), this one is a successful and credible one (no obvious mistake in proportion), aesthetically as well.The grey classy car, the black tree and the white clouds works perfect together IMO. Composite or not, the result in both case is clever.

Is it ps'd? Yea, there are some clues.

 

But why the hassle. Would you demand a beautiful woman prove all of her atributes were God given before you admited to her beauty? Must a cook reveal his recipe before the meal can be judged to be good?

The artist simply declined to state whether the image was significantly manipulated. He has presented a work of art and is probably laughing at some of the really stupid comments made here.

Judge it for what it is, not what you think it should be.

"Definition:

 

A bromoil transfer is produced by taking a normally inked bromoil print and putting it face down onto a plain gelatin coated paper. The two are then passed through a press causing the ink to be transferred onto the receiving paper. The process enabled a wider range of surfaces to be used.

 

Multiple transfers could be used by re-inking the original and repeating the transfer, either to make further prints or to build up density or add colours to the original transfer print. The process was developed by Robert Demachy in 1911."

 

Found this in the internet. It explains to me why I was a bit confused by the "muddy" look of this print. Thanks Michael, for the information how this was done.

I think that you should rename it "Picnic" for all of those who ask what the meaning or point of it is. Otherwise, let them use their own artistic imaginations and decide for themselves what it "means."

 

Indeed, what on earth is a fine, new automobile doing parked out in a meadow under the trees on a fine Sunday afternoon? Who are the couple? Where are they? Are they married? If so, are they married to each other? Clearly, all of these questions must be addressed before one could possibly evaluate the quality of the picture.

 

I meant to say, The question of PS or not to PS is a REALLY big, smelly red herring on this one. Only her hairdresser knows for sure.

 

I really like this picture, and, no, I don't remember the 1940s.

Hmmmm. I like the picture but not your comments. "I shoot Infrared in a way that avoids the white foliage as much as possible. The film has greater potential than just closing your eyes and hoping for a neat effect.

As far as grain is concerned, I have sucessfully enlarged my images to 30x40. At this size they appear to be more like a charcoal sketch than a photo. Kodak liked the effect enough to feature 40s Dodge as a photo of the day on their website."

 

This would lead people to think this was a straight infared shot. In my opinion it is a composite of two images, neither one of which was shot in infared. This effect is quite easy to produce in Photoshop. Yeah, and I like old car pictures - and I like THIS old car picture.

It is in fact IR film...

Like the picture, but the mystery about the extent of manipulation has really had a negative effect on my opinion. It now looks like a composite (around the right fender, left wheels and underside, reflections in body and chrome), and the grain and depth of field don't seem to match between car and background. that, plus the blackened trees on IR film just doesn't add up. i suggest you do what most artists do (book artists and multi-media collage artists, at least) and just say what you did. It would take nothing away from the obious appeal of the photo and cause people not to look upon the photo--and your skill as a photographer--with suspicion or doubt.

I understand and *appreciate* that this is technically strong, but the image doesn't do anything for me.

Sorry, but I keep looking at the image and thinking that there is smoke pouring out from under the hood. I could get into details as to why the composition produces that effect, but the net result can't be argued with.

 

I don't think the grain/film effect lends anything to the image.

The lesson we learn from this composite is that if you make an image grainy enough, you can hide almost anything. Are we so bored that we no longer care to see real photography?

The image simply shows that photography can encompass more than just taking a photo and printing it. That was the purpose I posted it for.

 

I appreciate both the good and bad comments I am receiving. However, I don't think it's worth the time to compare this image to traditional photographs. The influence for this picture comes from Bromoil Transfer Printing (pictorailism era) as stated above. This particular process involves a press among other things.

 

See: http://alt-photo.com/alt-photo/bromoil/

POW has become my first attention every Tuesday morning when i turn on my computer, i was a little disappointed with this one. I have re-visited some 10 times but to be honest, this just isn't my "cup of tea" !! I have gone through most of the discussion either for or against the image, perhaps i shall say something why it didn't impressed me:

(a) i have no interest in IR so whatever the author did with this image simply didn't reach me

(b) i have no knowledge of Dodge nor any admiration with it so it simply doesn't click

© the image composition - fairly straigtforward, the foreground was not particulary well chosen - just like kind of dumping ground

(d) whether PS maniplulation or not is of no particular concern to me at all - i am judging on what i see (of course, i would appreciate to be told of the truth)

I just had to put in my opinion here. I don't believe an author of an image should have to provide any details of it. This image stands on it's own, and nobody should care how it was made. If it was made with a process that allowed it to look like this with no Photoshop, then great. But it still doesn't change the image one bit if it was tweaked in PS or burned by aliens from outerspace. It is a fantastic image, a very special one, and is very well done in all respects. I could see these as magazine covers. Good luck with this style of yours.

It's interesting how people like such different things, isn't it? Although I usually am not very interested in car pictures, I like this one, and I like some of the very things which others don't like about it. I like the foreground, for example, which is just nondescript enough to remind me of seeing cars like this parked in country churchyards or other parking spaces in small towns in the early fifties, when there were still plenty of cars from the forties still around. I like the sky as well, and have tried looking at it without that sky, and it just doesn't have the same effect. In this particular case, I am not all that interested in how the photographer got the effects he got. I just like the outcome, and that is enough.

i like the machine(car) witch is perfect connected to the natyre,the ambient is very strange and beautifull.If you set a man there in the front of car that cud be more great for photo.

If 10 photographers had the assignment to shoot and produce a print of this car -- we'd have 10 different approaches. Some in color and some in black and white - some photoshopped - some not and perhaps a poloroid transfer. The treatment here is beautiful and does indeed look like a charcoal sketch! The bromoil process is something new to me. What is a bromoil print?

I am glad this image was brought to my attention through POW. I'm here to learn and be inspired by other's visions. I love the grainy feel, the composition and the nostolgic quality very much... I personally don't need to be "moved" to appreciate an excellent image. Well done.

see the following links for examples and information about this pictorialism process:

http://home.earthlink.net/~trans40/hopperlist/

 

http://www.gryspeerdt.co.uk/

Thanks for the link... Wow.. Interesting process... Wonderful artistic results. Now I see how you got this look in this image.

I am still not clear what is going on here. I gather that this is

inspired by the bromoil process, rather than being the result of

the process. We know that PS can be used to create all sorts of

effects that have traditional roots, but I take issue with those who

say it doesn't matter. I'm interested in learning about as many

ancient and modern ways of creating a print as I can, but I can't

learn anything if there is no detailed explanation that makes it

clear why this image looks the way it does. If requests are met

with brief vague responses, then it does give the impression that

the maker is hiding something. I don't know if this effect makes

it easier to hide PS alterations, but I think that the steam / clouds

ambiguity can not have been intentional, yet there it is. Maybe

Kodak didn't care about any of these issues, but many of us

clearly do.

The effect is caused by I-N-F-R-A-R-E-D F-I-L-M. Just like the photographer

said. It's good. It rises above the average "this is my cool car" photos. Seems

to imply a certain anachronistic occurence in time or space.

To say it's "smothered by technique" is like saying Van Gogh "used too much

color." In the end it works for me and maybe it doesn't for someone else. In

any case, I think the photographer is comfortable enough with the medium to

justify his choice of tools.