Untitled

I have just looked at Rarindra's portfolio for the first time. I had to look at the images several times. The first time, I couldn't believe the beauty of the photographs. The second time, I'm thinking: "What am I really looking at?" The third time, my mind has decided that I'm viewing some very beautiful photo-illustrations.

 

My issue is that as I'm looking at this wonderful artist's portfolio in the context of a photography site, one of my reactions was that these are simply too perfect to be real. The lighting through the trees; the water under the children's feet; the whiteness of their teeth, etc. etc. etc. I decided that I'm viewing the beautiful images of an illustrator who uses photography as his medium.

 

It's obvious, not only from this discussion, that Rarindra uses Photoshop and the art of dodging and burning extensively, and has perfected these crafts extremely well. He also has the taste and sensitivity of an extremely talented artist. His images are gorgeous.

 

 

I sincerely congratulate Rarindra on his magnificent art.

I'm affraid I'll have to side with those who feel you have over-manipulated this POW. Not that I mind manipulations per se - I don't -, but I think, looking at your portfolio, that you haven't found the limit yet: I mean the limit beyond which a picture of a human being or a place no longer looks natural, and will lose its own soul. What I see when I look at this POW is the post-processing. I wish the real light of this scene could amaze me, rather than the processing technique that's now hiding it.

 

I think you are most probably a very good photographer, but right now, I can't see that in your works, because it's hiden behind artificial-looking technology. I hope you will from this week onwards trust your true photographic skills: the best picture is not the most spectacular one, but the one that moves the viewer, and for some viewers (like me) to be moved, they will need to be able to believe what they see. Best regards.

On a different note, and regarding composition this time, I feel the man is too centralized, and the picture would look better if he was standing more towards the left side of the frame somehow.

Marc G. If you think it's static now, and I personally don't think so as that net is so lit up and not centered, how do you think it would look with that net centered instead of the dude? It would be worse.

On the subject of composition , I feel the boy is too centered as well , it could be one of those shots that was compromised , sometimes we cant have everything , due to lens dimensions , timing , etc.

In this scene I would have tried to have the dock and person lower down in the frame , but then we would lose the reflection of the net , that I would like to keep as well, but it makes the composition abit awkward as is, my solution would be to add more top space and to the right , enough to balance it out more.But maybe the original shot is not large enough to do this , perhaps PS could add more space if needed .

Well, Rarindra is without a doubt an excellent photographer. But, he is also a magican in post procesing. When I first saw his pictures a was overwhelmed. But then I wonder, what would this photos looh before PS? I belive they would look beauyfull, becouse on every single one Rarindra captured the right moment. I know that this maight be a little controversial, but would Rarindra be able to take that photo on slide?

Nevertheless, beatyfull image.

To answer you, Michael Seeward, I'd just say that I agree with you in principle, but in my mind the version that I suppose would be better in terms of composition did not have a centralized net. Having the man on the left does not imply centralizing the net. Rather, the net would still be on the right side. There would just be less space at left, behind the man. Bottom line, the POW seemsvery unbalanced as it is, and by the way, I'd have thought a squared composition way have worked best here - cropping some at left, including perhaps a tad more at top and/or bottom if necessary. Regards.

Wow - talk about 'photoshoping the light.' Excellent computer skills, and a very good

photographic base from which to begin.

The lighting appears like a stage spotlight. It draws you from the surrounding shadows.

 

Many painters work years to get effects like this.

Hi, The colors look very interesting but it would be nice if you can post the original one too, as to how it would look in contrast to the touches you have given. This one is fantastic.

Regardless of all the arguments of whether or not Prakarsa's techniques make these images true photography or not, technology is going to continue to advance and the public is going to be watching to see how artists use these new technologies... Apologies to the purists but I doubt that the public is waiting with baited breath for another coffeetable book of work that looks like Ansel Adams! Rarindra Prakarsa's works are breathtaking and before I was a member here I used to log in every week just to follow his/her progress. The image being discussed is quite simply a fantastic example of this new marriage between art and technology and deserves very much to be Photo of the Week. Glenn

My first initial impression was, 'This lighting looks too unnatural.' Yes it is very dramatic and drama is a good thing, but the bright spot on the net looks way too hot and his blue shirt looks way too blue. The effect these aesthetic choices have on my brain, is that I question the reality, the realism of the scene. The best fantasy and surrealism, use 'believable' lighting scenarios. Realistic lighting draws us in and helps us suspend our disbelief.

EISH! It's a masterpiece! Had it on my screen for about a day, just marvelling at the lighting. The net looks like spun gold! Simply breath taking!

I have been shooting photography since I was in the 8th grade. And that was just yesterday. I have had my darkroom for 9 years with alot of darkroom technics, burning in, cropping,etc. I have never been able to get a photo like Rarindra. I quit. I still to this day, choose film over digital. But after review of these photos, maybe I should switch to digital. But a photo should be, what one see's through the lens. Why are we using software and super imposing the photos. Rarindra photos look like oil paintings than they do photos. Please help me. Is choosing a 15,000 dollar canon mark 2 digital better these days than using my 4x5.

I would like to respond to Dennis: isn't it important what the result is? In the end it is the result that counts, that's how the photographer wants you to see what he/she saw. Probably it is easier with digital to get the results you want, as you can experiment a lot without wasting anything in the dark room.

 

Anyway, I love this picture, the light is great, it shows some kind of serenity. Wonderful!

the photo is having very good lighting .even the image is centered its having a nice perspective look and infact gives the subject as moving .Nice work dude

A very nice picture, great light and composition, but it should be always a but, the golden net is with no time/movement, the same shot but with a shutter speed of 1/16 or 1/8 could have let us feel some of movement/dynamics in the flying dolden net.

The sharpness of the man's blue shirt contrasts perfectly with the soft whispy quality of his net. I also like the juxtaposition created between a humble lifestyle of a fisherman to the rich golden tones around him. It is as if he is casting for prosperity. I love it.

Looking to the image we will think about the beauty of it, then we start to think how he do it? then we start to dig on other issue about manipulated or not.Well up to certain level..I don't see anything wrong with that.. do forgive me, sometimes i forgot to look if the person checked or unchecked that section...as so far I concern, everybody here at PN is doing a PRESENTATION about their marvelous works and I admired them all! The important think is the creativity and reach the ultimate satisfaction of our soul.and that is what ART all about..and I admired the soul of art inside of this person!so MR Rarindra Prakarsa..you definitely has a class of your own ...simply breathtaking! Bravo! best regards

Love It!!

I think the crucial part of what one feels immediately towards this photo is not exactly what medium or modality it represents, but how the appearance relates to the viewers. This appearance has a critical factor - texture. Craft the same statue in wood and in bronze, and they would look very very different.

 

Digital enhancement can do a lot to further process a picture in the photographer's creative vision. Essentially when we capture motion through long exposure or take the picture of a building with an ultra-wide angle lens that differs from our normal vision, they are not that "real" anymore, hence what appears real or not is not an absolute, but rather a variable threshold to which all of us would not share. There is however a rather common effect of digital enhancement, that is the texture of the picture would be changed. Photographs have a certain texture determined by the ability of the film or sensor to capture tiny details, whereas artwork gives a different texture depending on the medium. I believe that photographs gives people a more intimate touch because of their closer resemblance to reality, whereas artwork gives more imagination and romanticism. The degree of post processing bridges the two, giving a mixed feeling with different expectation of texture.

 

I have seen some Balinese artwork and being in the same part of the world in Singapore, I can see the kind of influence Mr. Prakarsa would have been under or would have contribute. I wouldn't say it is fairy tale or unreal, as much as I believe that the impressionist artworks in Europe comes from scenes the artists have seen and tried to depict. Such is the mood that Mr. Prakarsa enjoy from his vision and would like to share with the world about the beautiful part of Indonesia.

 

With regards to the photographic components of this picture, I would really love to see more texture and details preserved in the blue shirt and the face of the person. That will very much improve the aesthetic interest. I do post processing myself and with limited photographic and post processing knowledge, I find the same problem as a bottleneck. There needs to be sufficient resolution, sharpness and clarity, with subtle and judicious post processing to be able to adjust the hues, contrast and levels without ruining the details. The lack of details at the face is perhaps a very demanding criticism, but such is what i think is critical for a great work.

 

Contrary to the blue shirt, I do like the pants. It shows very thin clothing which is worn in this part of the world which is hot summer through all seasons. The quality of the light is demonstrated when it shines through the pants and outlining the fishermen's legs.

 

I'm also fine with the differences between the actual subject and its reflection. There is a natural tendency for the reflection to be darker than the actual scene with a different white balance, depending on the color of the water in the river.

 

I'm also fine with the overblown highlight of the net.

 

There is however something I was puzzled and would love to hear from the artist himself. It appears that the fisherman is casting the net into the water, rather than pulling it up from the water. I can't figure out the few vertical streaks on the right middle portion. They can either go for the reflection of a structure that is hidden behind the net (which thus is an distraction) or is water that is dripping from the net (which again appears unlikely and unnatural). I can't really explained why it looks like that.

 

Also, around the fisherman and the net, there is a lot of reticular (net-like) streaks, that do not look like water splattered from the net. I wonder if they are artifacts from post processing.

 

There is no doubt about the mastery of light and tones, whether real or post processed. And I would say there are many other works of Mr. Prakarsa that I feel is very much better than the above selected work, and certainly love quite a number of them.

Definetely good critism from Mr Schpaaa. Thanks.

I found so much heart and wisdom in your pictures, they are such a very beautiful poems, that I wish ever I can learn something from you, the colors, the people, the light are so amazing!!

Can I say just congratulations?

Just wanted to say I love your work...it's AMAZING! Thanks for sharing all of your wonderful, serene, and breath taking photographs to everyone! =)

I met with Mr. Rarindra's photos in another photo site earlier. I was so in love with his photos

that I followed all his photos and made my PC's desktop one by one. It is true that the photos

he has presented is really unrealistic. But who is looking for realism? We just want to escape

from the realities of life and to dream. Your photos, Mr. Rarindra, makes me dream. They

make me happy, and feel good.

Thank you very much for making me feel like this.