Six Sandstone Steps

Nice camera work. Light, texture, and color are excellent. The composition bothers my eyes somehow. I'm not sure why, it's ok , and actually pretty, at a glance, but if I really look I feel sort of an aesthetic vertigo and also claustrophobic. It's as if I'm too close. I have no contextual space or reference and rather than being invited into the picture it's like I'm almost pushed away. Like I've walked into a wall. I think the long an narrow cropping is part of this. I feel cut off. I agree it has the look of a cinematic frame, but there it would be but a glance and we'd move on. I don't want to stay where this image puts me. My left and right eyes seem to fight each other. The farther away I get the better, but the beauty is in the details, and that creates a conflict. I need to get back to see it -- but then I can't see it. It's good to see a POW that isn't following the old subject and background paradigm however. And thank goodness it's not another stranger to psychoanalyse.

While I appreciate the fact that a lot of folks here really seem to like this shot, I don't see anything very special here. I mean no disrespect to Phil Morris, but I'm sure he's done much better in the past. I think it would work better if it was among a collection of shots depicting the locale from whence it came, but on its own I think it falls flat.

I am quite curious as to the light source. At f16 with asa 50 velvia, 15 seconds is a heck of a long exposure.

 

This is a very subtle, calm, and soothing image. I tend to look at the corners of the image first and I think that is where my view of this differs from some others. I see the stairs in this instance leading me down from the top into the middle of the frame.

 

The texture and subtle tones are very pleasing to my eye. It's certainly an image I can enjoy quietly, taking in all the detail with a glass of Absolut and ice in my hand.

 

I can deal with the black matte for web viewing, but wouldn't use it on a wall hanging. It is much easier on the eyes when viewing the scrint.

 

Bottom line, I like this image quite a bit, and I think there is much more there than at first glance.

Nothing Here? What have you people done with your imaginations?

Who embedded these rough stones into that firmly packed earth?

Whose contant steps have worn the rock after thousands upon thousands of passings? Druids en route to sacrifice? Ancient Romans returning to camp? Peasants bearing back-breaking loads of baled hay, barley or sticks?

How long have they been there? Where do they go? To a cave? A gothic church?

This is an incomplete image in that it suggests to me more than it presents.

No splash of pretty colors here, nor tidiness of the decisive moment. This scene could easily be the beginning, middle and end of a fable or fairy tale. Without a person present it speaks of humanity, of Man's will imposed on the earth, of his eternal desire to reach higher levels of existance.

So much more than six simple steps.

However, in real life the black border is inflexible: You have to mess around with your computer resolution and/or browser window to see it as intended.

More work.

Less play.

Not good.

The wonderfull, warm earth tones are very soothing and relaxing to view. This is a photo to contemplate at the end of a long day at the office perhaps.

 

I want to know where the steps lead to though, also; and find myself mentally ripping that frame off to try to find out what is under it and at the top of the stairs. Also, my first view of the photo and immediate reaction was 'drop that frame'. It adds nothing to the photo and, in fact, detracts, I think.

 

I would like to crop off some of the left side to make the 'subject' (the stairs) more prominent in the photo.

 

Congratulations on your POW, Phil.

Over the short period of time that I've been involoved with photography, I was always amused by people saying, "it's not following the rule of thirds!", "too contrasty" or, "needs more contrast!", "limbs cut off!", and my favourite: "Not SHARP!!!" on picture that is clearly art.

I don't understand why sharpness, contrast, etc is so important in a picture which is not intended to be used as a commercial photography.

IMHO, what's important is if the picture is portraying the photographer's artistic intentions, not whether it's sharp or not. (at least in art photography, that is.) Oh well, whatever it is,

I think this photograph is very well done.

It is a nice picture, but you need a good monitor to be able to appreciate it. The details are very nice and the lighting is perfect.

When I saw it first, I was not impressed, but after a while of looking at it, I did appreciate all the details. And, as someone said, you need to use your imagination, you have to think about what the picture is telling you, it has a story attach to these steps.

 

Of course, this is not a spectacular shot of an a magnificient landscape full of colors. I think this is why many peoples are not attract to the picture. It is a matter of taste I guess.

 

Now, if the picture should be the POW, I am not to sure about this, personnaly, I do not think so, even if I like the picture. But, this is just my personnal opinion.

 

Congratulations to Mister Morris, He has a lots of beautiful picture in is portofolio.

This picture is real and simple, but has an abstract character and can be interpreted comprehensively, depending on the viewpoint as well as the experience of life. As it was often the case, I like several other works from Phil's wonderful portfolio even better (for instance "Birch Bark and Bryony" of this style). Phil, congrats to POW.

Phil, I went through some of the folders in your portfolio and then came back to view this image. 1) your portfolios are fantastic 2) I really like the rugged, earthiness of this composition. Congrats on POW! Thanks for sharing your work and for being an inspiration. Cheers, Greg

I think this one embodies the idea of "mysterious"... "old"... "ancient".... we could be walking down into the tomb of Pharoah or up to the keep of the castle.

 

It makes me think of an Indiana Jones movie. What is around that corner? A secrect treasure? Or poisonous snakes?

 

It asks more than it answers,,, there is the mystery.

 

Wonderful photo.

After taking advice given herein, I drained a bottle of White Zinfindel and then started looking for the meaning of life and the reflections on humanity others see in this photo. And by golly there it was. The left half of the images represents the earth unspoiled by man, safe and dry from the some unseen overhanging protection, and remaining eternally unspoiled. To the right, the steps represent mans intrusion into this serene world, where those changes begat counter forces of nature welding the tools of erosion to cover the stepping stones with good rich soil in an attempt to eraise the spoils man has brought. There is a lesson here, but can man learn from it?

Like Julia, I'm most impressed by the sense of abstraction. Not every photo has to be about anything or immediately recognizable as a place or thing. This is beautiful for its color and form.

 

I completely agree with the photographer's decision to place the image within a black "mat." I find the photo.net-white background very offputting - it's nothing like viewing images against a white background. A reflective white background is entirely different from transmitted white, which causes eyestrain and changes the appearance of images on photo.net. The mismatched aspect ratio to the black mat is a bit odd but I can ignore it.

Finally a debate pertaining to the photo instead of the tools. I've got to admit that at first study, I had a hard time enjoying this photo but the more I looked at it the more I enjoyed it. And the posted comments have taken me a long way in better understanding what I'm seeing. OK, it isn't among my favorite photographs I've seen here but it is well done and I certainly send my congratulations to Mr Morris.

Honestly, I must have passed along this photo about 3 or 4 times before I decided to take a look. Now I find myself staring at all the incredible detail I never realized was there. The way you have made such a small area so expansive and enjoyable to view is just excellent. Very nice work.

Very good color and great texture. It has just the right amount of contrast. The shot speaks volumes of a time long past and does it very simply. Congrats on POW Phil

Marc Gougenheim,

 

 

You asked me what I'm missing for in this picture...

... I'm missing a PHOTO, man!! I can't see anything nice in this

picture! Sorry Phi

I was compelled to try explaining this photo's significance, but then I realized it's not possible to explain it in any valid terms to someone who has seen it, and declared it to have no value. Then I read Doug Burgess' response to the image, and knew I couldn't do any better. For those who don't get it... too bad. There are plenty more for you to enjoy and Phil seems to be doing fine without your approval. Ain't life grand... t

Thanks Phil! I was intending to install a mirror after setting up a webcam to keep in touch with family having moved to Hawaii just so I could "touch up" before logging on.

 

I really need a haircut!

I love the textures and the warmth. I was a very imaginative kid, and I used to love to stare at pictures just like this one, and imagine what might lay at the top of the steps, and what might I be running away from as I climbed them. So for me, I like it because it's a reminder of how the 7-year-old me spent hours daydreaming... a very low-tech but personal view of what this picture says to me.

 

It looks much more impressive when viewed "large". The frame certainly works better.

Pleasant Color? Attractive Details? Wonderful Contrast? Think about a 8x10 Velvia film exposed in studio after carefully color calibrated and lighting adjusted.

Creative composition? Decisive Moment?

Where the heck is something? It's in the mind behind view finder.

5000 years ago ( Yes, 5000 years ago ), a wise man said: the highest level of life is NOTHING. The steps in the photo tells about nothing, the nothing is probably time, no start, no end, noboday could get rid of it. How could he [Phil] know the mysterious philosophy of ancient orient?

I'm sorry to disagree with the majority here but I think this photo is rather poor. I agree with someone who said that many people make technical corrections to photos that are not inteden to comercial use. I actually feel the same when I take a color negative film for development in a photo shop and I find out that my pictures have been altered according to these standards, especialy in the silhuettes photos in wich they insist in putting the person clear and visible!!!!!! Although personally I think that a photo that follows the rule of the three thirds and with good contrast can cause a great impact in the viewer, sometimes that's just not enough. And I think this is the case. I think it's a very good photo from the technical point of view, and many people may like it but, personally, I think there have been better photos. I mean no desrespect for the fotographer since i'm no pro and this is just my opinion, but I think it's a picture with few impact and no emotion. At least to me...

First thanks to Photonet to have selected a picture of Phil Morris. Visiting his folders I could discover many very nice and interesting works. I think the main benefit of this POW, for those who did not know Phil, was to discover his works. Really thanks for that.

I suspect this POW is not only an award to a single picture but more like a special Oscar to the entire works that Phil has posted in PNet. All the rest sounds a bit like bullshit to me. The framing is nice, the tones are fine but personally I would have chosen another picture from Phil collection. With imagination, we can find any picture very interesting. It is not only a matter of quality of picture itself but also a matter of the own capacity of the person who look at it. Some pictures are more suggestive, some are less, where to stop the cursor? Probably it's a mater of marketing to make the client feel he is clever enough to understand or imagine what's behind. But don't forget that most of the time, and there are many example in modern art (I have in mind some sunset painted by donkey tail...), there is nothing behind. So lets' stop brain masturbation. Anyway Phil, very good works. Sometime your most enthousiastics fan can be your ennemy!

let's talk about nothing, and then let's talk about steps and let's see what they have in common because, when you think of it, they are the same: Steps don't really go anywhere, right? They go up and down at the same time resulting in a nothing. So, we can conclude that steps=nothing. If steps = nothing, then what does space equal? Space is nothing, the biggest nothing in the world, in the universe, because the universe is made of space, which is nothing, so the universe is nothing, only it can be seen in a grain of sand, as Blake said, who would have been a fine photographer if he had lived long enough to meet Talbot and Fox, or O'sullivan and Eastman.

Back to space. Space is nothing, the biggest nothing of all nothings, and yet, it holds everything: Our world and our moon. Like a big pot is empty, but it can hold several pounds of spaghetti and the water that cooks it. Jupiter was big, but it still had room for Shoemaker-Levy that slammed into it one after the other and made big colorful spots, but it was still Jupiter, right? Still the biggest planet in the solar system, right? But, the real question: Is it the biggest in the universe?

So, these steps, simple as they are, are really symbolic of the Universe because they go up, like space ships and rockets, to the upper parts of the frame, symbolizing the eternal. They start at the bottom of the frame, symbolic of the earth. And look: They are even stuck in the earth, and made from earth, as we all know that rocks are actually hard earth, cooked for hours upon countless hours by heat and pressure in the earth's core, finally becomming hard as an igneous rock. These rocks look like metamorphic rocks, or that they have changed, like the grains of silver in the latent image that were eventually replaced by color dyes and finally washed out by sodium thiosulfate fixers before reaching their final form: A color photograph.

so, where are we? Are we on steps too? the camera is at eye level, so what are the steps for? Even a child knows what steps are for: For going upstairs to bed, for coming downstairs in the morning, all sleepy-eyed. What children have descended these steps? Any modern children? I think not. That's a silly question and I won't even dignify it with an answer.

The steps are what Phil stumbled upon one day, or evening, we can/t really tell. What I like about this picture is that I don't care about Phil's other step pictures, or any of them. He posted it and now he's got to live with it. Bully for him. Bully for you, Phil. My hat's off to you.

And thirdly, why all this talk about the rule of thirds? Why not call it the rule of sixth's? that would be more precise, I think. Instead of putting everything in the third, just put it in the 2/6th position. What sounds more precise: 1/3rd, or 2/6th's. For that matter, how about 4/12th's? Or better yet, 8/24th's, or my personal favorite, 33 and 1/3rd/100ths. hey, you can't get any more precise than a decimal. 33 and 1/3rd/100ths decimals out to .33333333333333333 to infinity, a long way I think we would all agree, which brings me to the conclusion of this topic, that infinity, in the end, is nothing. Look how Phil has suggested the nothingness of space in this scrint: Did anyone notice the similarity between the black frame and the phenomenon known as The Black Hole? I mean the ones in space, not the other kind. Notice how the black frame draws your eye in, like a black hole in space will suck your space ship into itself and out the other side, beyond the event horizon. Have you ever wondered why people refer to the stairway to heaven? It's because of this, the steps leading through the black hole. Obviously. It's very clear.

Why anyone would question the validity of this post as POW is beyond me.

Actually, I take that back. The image is kind of monotonous in its color scheme: Just a bunch of browns. But that's cool, you know? My personal opinion is that those who see nothing in this photo are endorphin deficient. I'm not sure if I'm spelling that right, but you get the point. It means there are not enough. The Endorphin is a small creature that lives in your brain, in all our brains, honestly. And the more of them there are, the more likely you are to enjoy things like poetry, and knitting and the smell of the locker room after a sweaty football game. But, on the other hand, suppose you are endorphin deficient? Then you have no, or not many of the endorphins living in your brain. So, if that's you, you are seeking the thrills of the flashy colored photograph, or the growling bear, or the naked human body to feast your lustful eyes on. These images stimulate the sleepy endorphins to wake up and start jumping around in your head, becoming active and producing little quantities of morphine in your blood, which gives you a rush. So, I suspect that a person that finds this image dull is actually an endorphin deprived person who should seek the nearest bungee jumping bridge where they can clutch a copy of Phil's Six Sandstone Steps in their hands as they plunge into a bottomless canyon. I bet they'd see something then, huh?

Congratulations, Mr. Morris, you have a fine portfolio and many images worthy of the POW.

I feel compelled to say that this particular image wouldn't be my choice. As I have studied art and photography over the years, I have often sought to find my own definition for what is art and what isn't. For me, the criteria has evolved to be: "Does it encapsulate feeling and/or emotion without being kitsch?"

In my admittedly subjective opinion, I would have to answer "no" to that question. I don't feel anything when I look at this image. I don't wonder where it was taken or what might be going on around it. I don't marvel at its inherent beauty.

A great photo should appeal to all, whether a Novice, a professional or for that matter a critic.

For a novice like me this photographs means nothing, neither do I find it facinating. Phil is a wonderful photographer and I like peeping into his portfolio, but this one is plain ordinary.