Untitled

I am giving you all what I am not ashamed of...

Words are cute little things helping us bring the world to manageable proportions. But no matter how much I tried I couldn't come up with a name to encapsulate this image.Anyway, giving it a name to the exclusion of everything else would diminish the picture and rob the viewer of the freedom to fantasize. Hence Uhtitled...

Yes, this works. Take a stand about differentiating glamour/soft porn/Nude art into different categories here.

Beautiful and sweet image. Tender, loving, intimate, and moving. Wonderful both to look at and to think about. Thanks.

Thank you, Fred. Frankly speaking, I don't expect this image to be overrated or overcommented knowing that I am stepping on dangerous grounds here with what many would take as an explicit child nudity, therefore your support is of importance to me. Unfortunately, this image taken out of the context can and, probably, will cause many to unleash their wrath or to just ignore having to come to grips with one more "uncomfortable" image. I am used to it. But there is so much to tell here. I just plain do not understand why it is regarded as a taboo subject to be explored.

I think to a great extent it is society's (I'm quite sure it is an American shortcoming, was hoping that European sensitibilities were farther along) inability to make fine distinctions. There is a tendency to see the world in black and white. Because some children are abused (a truly horrible thing) and some are exploited in child pornography (another awful matter), any treatment of a child nude and/or vulnerable gets cast in a disapproving light. That, to me, is the sign of a small mind, who can't take the time and effort to see the difference in treatment and intention. Anyone who would look at this photograph and see something other than intimacy, vulnerability, and beauty is the one who has the problem. A reaction such as that, to me, would signal that that person is indeed the twisted one who would see this as pornography or exploitive. It is so tender and lovely and I encourage you to keep at it and not to worry about those reactions that might be adverse. A bad reaction often says more about the person reacting than it says about what they are reacting to.

I subscribe to every word you said. Thank you again for the encouragement. I will certainly keep posting more of my pictures. The problem is that everything I intend to show here exist in large format prints and every time I think about digitizing routine and Photoshop I shudder. :-) But I love this site. I met lots of wonderful people here and their comments and suggestions keep me going.

Hey, you guys,Please, don't be so reticent with your comments. Pour on.... :-)

I am curious - why did you decide for the blue cast? Does it have a specific function or was it just from the hip decision?

Sorry for being on first name terms, but I am afraid my keyboard doesn't have two dots above an "a". I mean no familiarity, no offence. Thank you for browsing through my small portfolio - I hope it will grow with time. This is a great place to be, share and learn about photography and I am eager to do all of the above.As for the blue tint you asked about, no, it wasn't a hip decision, if I understand that expression correctly.You see, I am no digital photographer and, hopefully, will never become one (wry smile). After all, what can beat a 50x50cm print ? Only a larger one ! I had this particular image printed in four different tints - blue, red-orange, sepia and just b&w. Now, red was too aggressive, too suggestive, sepia and b&w were nutral, but bluish tint sort of toned down the emotion, brought about a dispassionate note, some coldness maybe... Anyway, It is hard to explain, but suddenly something just snaps in your head( goodness, I do not know why I say your head, I mean mine, of course) and you get this "right" kind of feeling about a photograph. I try to preserve the image pretty much the way it looks on paper. Don't believe in digital manipulation. Of course, lots of things I do are not perfect. But I am learning. That's why I am here.

. . . but what would be the difference between "digital manipulation" and having a photo printed with a tint? Where, exactly, do you draw the line between something that is "manipulated" and something that is not. For me, honestly, we begin to manipulate when we pick up the camera (by excluding objects we choose from our frame, by setting the exposure, etc.), so I'm never sure, speaking of shoot-from-the-hip reactions, if a bent against "digital manipulation" is such a reaction or a thought-out philosophy. --Fred

Well, let's say it is the stand I take to justify my own inexperience in manipulating images to a certain extent. But again,it may well have come from a simple habit of prolonged experience of working with the analog medium. Digits, pixels aren't things to be put on walls for a viewer to admire.I guess the technology has got lots of mind-blowing opportunities in the offing but, when it comes down to the shear size of a final print, and I am talking about technology accessible to me( a major factor), good old-fashioned film beats everything hands down.You got me here with manipulation, though. Have to agree, everything not created by God or Mother Nature or any other providential mighty hand is secondary and therefore manipulated and neither true nor real. I think there is some personal inability to accept the almost unlimited opportunities offered by PhotoShop to bring an image to near perfection that challenges reality and leaves film a runner-up. So I am just doggedly sticking to it. Out of pity. ) P.S. Have you ever tried to process a 2,5Gb file on PC ? I did. Once.

All I'll say is I encourage you to keep doing what you're doing because you are getting splendid results. And I'm not even as interested in the technical aspects of what you're doing (especially since I am limited to seeing them on screen) as I am the esthetic and emotional aspects you're exploring. I, for one, find your work inspiring.

Thank you again, Fred. I am afraid I didn't have the chance to explore the portfolios of all those who rated and critiqued my pictures. I will return the hospitality as soon as I iron out all the kinks with my new e-net provider.)

Ok, I understand that the decision for the tint was reactive and emotional. Makes sense. It is often said that a good photo needs contradictive elements. Here it could be the warmth of the relationship and the cold tint. Sort of brings a new dimension to the story.

First nema use - no problem for us Nordic countries people.

A photo that speaks - seems to have a story behind it. Not sure I like the blue, but that's your decision. Don't worry abt the nudity - something that worries Americans but not many others (I'm not American). Good luck in your work. P.