Wayang

Congratulations Marc. It is a beautiful image & I thought I'd post now to avoid having to wade through PAGES & PAGES of comments as I'm sure this POW is destined to produce...:).

Marc,

 

 

finally a great picture to POW. So many weeks I didn't see something very nice on POW like this one.

Could you remind Marc, two weeks ago when I took about that current POW? I said "I can't get to see anything in that stair, to deserve to be POW"... I was talking about "soul". I was missing "soul" in that picture, and this Wayang's picture I can see it! Your picture have a nice "soul"! Thats it! Congratulations for this POW... you really deserve it. Keep up the good job and sorry about my english

I'm on Marc's side: artifact is one of the art's substances. There's nothing wrong imitating "reality" or extracting from nature shapes, lines to make another, human and artistic, nature.

The only complaint about this exquisite, geometrical image is the fuzzy silver cloth that I find formally extraneous and a bit distracting. It prevents too the full readability of the left hand.

hmmmm, I don't see why this scrint has been selected as POW. Have the elves been drinking again?

 

No, wait, that's not what I meant to say.

 

There are better choices than this for POW in the photographer's folders.

 

No, wait. Not that, either.

 

How about: The photographer better get used to negative comments like that, because they are part of every POW. Of course, I will disagree with all of them:

 

CONGRATULATIONS MARC! A WELL DESERVED POW! Hang in there dude!

Nice textures, tones and lighting ... except the dark area on the left which merges with the model's skirt. Also the framing has cut off part of the material that the model is holding on the right hand side of the image, I find this a bit distracting. Not Marc's best, but still very good.

This is nice. Very clean, very classy. Has a Far East-meets-1950s Vogue/Harper's Bazaar (back when those two magazines were absolutely cutting edge) look and feel to it.

Congratulations Marc! This is indeed well-deserved recognition of one of your most outstanding works. Very stylish and glamourous. And I must say, the very first time I see such a hat in a non-rustic manner - never knew it could be that classy and fashionable too. Enjoy the ride! Regards,

"[ Due to a slight delay in the Inter-Elf Communication Protocol, we do not yet have the "write-up" to go along with this week's choice. But, we are sure you will be more than able to discuss this photograph regardless of that. So, enjoy! ] "

Worst POW selection ever, but best Elfian comment I ever read ! Keep on drinking, Elves ! :-)

Besides that, Gong Xi Fa Cai to all of you - i.e happy chinese new year. Quite an amazing coincidence, yesterday was Chinese New Year...

Doug, I will try to hang in there, and also try not to post too much this time. I have defended many POW choices lately, but this one is just hopeless - I give up...:-))

Cheers, and thanks for all the past and also for the future comments: good and bad, they are all welcome... (Just be gentle...:-)

...have I seen this as POW before? This is great, Marc, but I immediately got the feeling of deja vu when I saw this just now. Is this only my imagination, or what? Seriously.

 

Anyway, fantastic job with the light here. Especially the shape that it makes on the ground, which benefits the photo in terms of mood and movement, and gives the photo ample amounts of each. Even though I would have probably left out the border had it been mine, thank you for making it clean and simple enough not to detract.

 

So congrats, and even though I still like your Industrial folder more, this stands among the best of your fashion work that I've seen. cheers

I like this photo a lot. I wonder, Marc, whether you would be willing to go into a little detail on how you took it from Kodak E100S to this exquisite toning. Was it done digitally or in the print process? I know the basics of digital desaturating and toning to some extent, but have never come close to this. I'd love to begin learning how. And congratulations--it's a very deserving POW.

 

David.

absolutly great work and styling

Worst POW selection ever, but best Elfian comment I ever read ! Keep on drinking, Elves ! :-)

Marc

*burp* You buying? Bacardi Cola, bit of ice, no lemon, pleazzze.

"Worst POW selection ever..."

Are you really that humble, Marc?

IMV,R,HO (very, really, humble) a very clever shot, for once... !And happy to see that, at least, the elves of the site do appreciate your work!

Congrats on POW Marc, You've got style and this shot has got alot of it. Great shot.

Can anyone tell me what makes this photo less kitschy than the ones on the top pages? Personally I can see little that distinguishes it from theirs. Another studio confection that has little more than technique to commend it; I cannot help being amused by unintended elements of the absurd in the set-up,caused by the viewpoint and the lighting - the awkwardness of the legs, the peekaboo chin, and the anorexic right arm. This is an exercise in retro fashion photography that uses a tired idea in the absence of capacity for originality. Its the kind of image that leaves me gasping for fresh air and the light of real experience. ..Sorry, lads, not being one of the sycophantic tendency, I cant jump on the bandwagon of the back-slappers..

Understand that this is a studio shot and that its just not your style, dude. I know, from viewing your fantastic portfolio over the past few months, that this is not the kind of work you would do, but all people photography need not be of the street or "real" variety. Theres nothing wrong with a staged shot, as long as it is executed with skill and style. I think this one is. I'm just happy to be able to appreciate both. cheers.

 

ps. Your shot of that serious-looking kid in the suit surrounded by adults is still one of my favorites on this site.

The lighting on this one is exquisite. I just find myself visually sinking into it and absorbing all the wonderfully varying lights and shadows. The soft tones add so much.

 

If I had to find a nit,,,, and I really had to search to find it by the way, it is the legs... I don't like the tiny bit of a line of light on her right upper leg... not sure why but it bothers me.

 

Nontheless.... my warmest congrats Marc. POW is well deserved, not only for this shot, but for your entire body of work as well.

"The bandwagon of backslappers" Wow! awful early in the week for that kind of talk...LOL. I liked this image in October when it was originally posted and I still like it know. Rather than defend it against the above charges, thereby having to attack others to do so, I will comment on this image based on it's own merits, or lack thereof. As I previously mentioned in my October post, I find the diagonal composition energetic and lively, imposing action on an obviously still subject. Some of the positioning appears a bit haphazrd, but I would venture to say that there isn't a thing in the frame that isn't where it was intended to be, from the peekaboo chin to the anorexic arm. The arm, now that it is brought to my attention, does appear a little thin. I'm not sure if a slight change in angle could have given it a bit more girth. I imagine the positioning of the legs appears awkward due to the angle of the camera combined with the angle of the light, but I just got on the ground to attempt to duplicate this position and was able to do so with only a couple cracked ribs so it couldn't have been to uncomfortable for this little model. of course, I did have to press my Medic Alert necklace to get some help off the floor. There is more depth of field here than meets the eye and that is well handled also. The toning (while not my particular cup of Saki) does give the image the intended feel of 1940-1950. This image had intent (that it fulfilled), has aesthetics, and is technically competent. that is a far cry better than the kitsch on the top paegs that Marc is constantly railing against. Of course, this is my opinion only. Your opinions ) may vary. thanks for listening, and good day.

Congratulations, Marc. This is an excellent stylish pose and photo. Could easily be a still from a period cinema/theatre scene. Wonderful.

I love stylized portraiture and fashion photography and this one is certainly very well done. Elegant lines, beautiful tones.

There are a few areas that puzzle me a bit, probably due to the constraints imposed by viewing a smallish JPEG:

1. The area below her supporting (left) hand - is that lace covering the fabric? The apparent blurring seems otherwise inconsistent with the rest of the shiny fabric.

2. The apparent blurring around the outer edges of the fabric and toes seems superfluous. Perhaps because of the spotlight effect, which would seem sufficient to enclose the model, echo the line of her pose and lead the viewer where you want.

3. The shadow of her crooked (right) arm is fine but the shadow of her leg seems somehow inelegant. I'm not sure whether it's the knee or the dress that spoils it but I'd rather see a less chunky shadow line there. Perhaps you could retouch it and knock down that bulge.

By admitting to having done some digital retouching you've piqued my curiosity about the original. Not that there's anything wrong with retouching - I'd just like to see a before/after for comparison purposes. I sometimes indulge in some fairly wild digital remaking of photos and am always interested in the techniques used by others.

Damned fine photo. I wouldn't bother to pick on it if I didn't think it was worth the effort. Mostly I'm jealous - wish it was mine.

You know what bugs me about many POW forums? Its photographers who fail to participate in a dicsussion of their own work. Something tells me we won't have that problem this time! ;-)

 

Anyway, congratulations Marc. I'm rather busy at work this morning, so a more detailed comment on this particular photograph will have to wait, but in my mind, you are deserving of this award as much for ubiquitous presence and voluminous contributions to this site as you are for this particular photograph. To put it less pretentiously, thanks for participating actively, honestly and sincerely. Again, congratulations.

I think this was a payback to Marc for all his lengthy comments, week after week, on POW. This time you are the subject, Marc. Hold up your shield, here come the spears and arrows. I think its a fine shot, worthy of the recognition. Is it kitsch? What is kitsch? I know what it used to mean. But, on Photo.net, it has become a term used by photographers who can't quite seem to make POW or top photos pages themselves. You can call it kitsch or you can call it a photograph that people actually care to see.

I'm afraid I've got to agree mostly with David above. I guess it's not my style or to my liking. What is the point? Let me guess, art does not need a point? Seeing Marc's other work and his articulate comments around photo.net I would not think he'd work with that attitude. Am I really the only one who finds the match stick-like, emancipated-looking arm to resemble something you'd see on some death-starved child from a famine area? I'm sorry but I find that aspect, and the way it is so central and stark in the image, not pleasing to look at. Posing an Asian-looking woman in more formal ao dai dress combined with the working hat used to toil in the rice fields? Screams kitch to me. What's next? A Chinese-looking guy with a braid and fu-manchu moustache with his hands in his sleeves? Maybe a rickshaw?

Technique-wise a beautiful image, very well-executed and shows brilliant talent. But subject matter-wise it appeals to me not.

Sorry, upon closer inspection I see the dress is less a Vietnamese Ao Dai and more a Chinese Qi Pao, or as Marc says, an evening dress. Nonetheless, my point is still there.

A few replies to some of the questions above...

1) About the toning: I'm almost ashamed to tell you how simple the process is... It's a digital toning, simply obtained by adjusting carefully the level of colorization wanted for an image. Basically, go to Image > Adjust > Hue / Saturation, & check the colorize box, then adjust cursors to your liking. Merit = 0 as far as the tones are concerned. But it's quick and reasonably good, whereas the wet lab is better if you master it well, but takes time. Since in the end, the present image was meant to become a scrint and to collect opinions over the net, I uploaded a rapid PSed version. Meanwhile, I have come up with a more carefully adjusted and higher resoltion PS version. I'd be glad to post a small version of it, but I still don't know how to achieve this... Maybe Doug woud care to help later on that...?

In general, all the resulting files I'm happy with always end up on Kodak Royal photo paper via an LED printing process. Results are really unbelievable, very striking and sharper than anything I know of - read: sharper than traditional prints from negatives, no dots, no noise of any sort, and fantastic colors. (Color control at printing stage being nevertheless a bit critical...)

2) "The area below her supporting (left) hand - is that lace covering the fabric?" No, Lex. Nothing special there, just this silver material.

3) "The apparent blurring around the outer edges of the fabric and toes seems superfluous." Agreed. I came to the same conclusion and the final version doesn't have it anymore. Unortunately, I hadn't uploaded my final version to PN and didn't expect ths to be a POW. The final version does'nt probably make much difference at screen size, but it does look better once viewed larger, both on screen and on paper.

4) "The shadow of her crooked (right) arm is fine but the shadow of her leg seems somehow inelegant. I'm not sure whether it's the knee or the dress that spoils it but I'd rather see a less chunky shadow line there." - Agreed again. Same here. The trouble is this: if you buy the light, you have to buy the shadows that come with it...:-)Imagine adding another light source, and I guess we would agree we'd get a horrible shot, no matter where this light would be. Change the angle of the existing light ? Go lower ? Then the shadows will be much nicer, but the light will be horrible overall imo, and I'd lose my oval shape. So there might be a better way to light this scene, but if there is one, I can't figure it out. The limit in studio is one's knowledge and understanding of the light. I understand what I understand, and that's my limit - quite unfortunately. A better lighting or a better set-up (possibly involving a slanted ground) could probably make this shadow look better than it looks here. I just don't know how. Regards.