jeroen wesdorp 0 Posted October 31, 2002 Thanks for having a look at my first photo to fall into the fine-art category. (Where else it should go, beats me.) It is part of an ongoing project of finding interesting shapes, textures and colours. All comments, suggestions and questions are well appreciated! Please, visit the LARGE version. And to my fellow Stieglitz circle members: it has taken a while, but now I have finally some new work to show you. Thanks for your patience and feedback. It's a pleasure to participate with you. If only we, myself included, were still more active... or are we just a slow-going, careful and considerate group? The latter would certainly not be a bad thing. Regards, Jeroen Link to comment
mg 0 Posted October 31, 2002 First thing: I love the subject, really. Odd, but fun. Then, I would wish a tad more texture anda warmer sunset-like light. It is also quite strange to see shadows left and top of the metallic elements - may be worth rotating 180 degrees. Finally, I find the crop a bit to tight, especially on the right. Regards. Link to comment
jeroen wesdorp 0 Posted October 31, 2002 Hi Marc, up early? I agree with your points for improvement. Honestly, I thought the same myself ;) The wood is very old and grey though. So suppose I caught some warm sunset and loaded saturated film, would not only the bold and nuts be more striking? Would that be sufficient you think? And another question, with more texture, do you mean more accentuated texture (e.g., another angle of light). Or do you think it needs to be sharper (stopping down further, cleaning my eyes better...) Thanks for commenting! Link to comment
tat 0 Posted November 2, 2002 Nice try, I wonder what I'll look like in black & white and without cropping. Link to comment
jeroen wesdorp 0 Posted November 3, 2002 Thank you all for your kind comments! But what do you know, I just found out that my cheap one-hour lab print was already cropped to accomodate a fancy white border. So I scanned the original negative, rotated it 180 degrees following Marc's suggestion and cropped a bit differently. Now there is more space around the "straight" bolt, in this version on the top left. I'm working on a different monitor though (neither is calibrated), so the colours are somewhat more magenta, I think. I'd be interested in your opinions on this new version, crop, colour and rotation-wise. Thanks for visiting! Link to comment
dougityb 0 Posted November 3, 2002 the revision is an improvement. The square bolt on the top anchors the image and all of its flow. Ive rotated it one more time, and maybe even flipped it. It reads different, but the shadows make more sense. I don't suggest it's better than the revision, but it is interesting to me how as a horizontal it reads the title better. Link to comment
Wayne Melia 6,092 Posted November 3, 2002 Still like the original orientation best. Maybe 180 deg, but better for me as a vertical. The "apart" part is stronger because the 2 sides can fall apart by gravity, whereas in the horizontal, gravity pulls them back together.Actually having the straight bolt on the bottom with the angled on top adds to the unstableness, I think.The extra space on the rescan is good, but agree the magenta is a lttle much (maybe 1/2 way on the colour?)All in all a nice piece. Cheers Link to comment
dougityb 0 Posted November 3, 2002 interesting points, Wayne. I see the horizontal's stronger association to the title in relation to the bolts, whereas I guess it was intended for the wood, which makes sense. Link to comment
Wayne Melia 6,092 Posted November 4, 2002 Well there you go, eh! I was completely tunneled into associating the title with the wood, but realize it could be either way, and agree that the horizontal is far more appropriate in terms of the bolts.Such tunnel vision is one of the reasons I am best to stay in the very shallow end (or out of) the fine art pool. :-) Might add that there appears to be more detail in the rescan (ie: texture on the washers). Whether it's from the actual scan or acutance from tonal treatment, I dunno; but I like it. Link to comment
jeroen wesdorp 0 Posted November 4, 2002 Thanks for your brain stimulating contributions, Doug and Wayne! Right at my weak side, the title. To be perfectly honest, I find adding a title one of the more difficult photography related moments. Perhaps I should just stick to Untitled or the automatic PN number, both are a tad unpractical though. Your revision, Doug, is the original orientation of the "railtrack-block", that is what it is a small part of, only flipped. I think my initial thought was that the two bolts are slowly driven apart by the weathering of the wooden beam. That's what is happening in real life, so I reflected that in the title. So the parting moment is mainly a reference to the wood, which I think is stronger in a portrait orientation. But clearly, growing apart is also a reference to some sort of human bond (hey, we sport many different kinds apart from marriage here in liberal Holland - although the current "Backlash" may soon sweep much of our well-known quaint manners away...), which would be about the bolts. Indeed stronger in landscape. So it could be either, really. But I hadn't noticed that both the vertical and horizontal orientation emphasize the other element. Interesting. So I guess I'll just have to find two bolts aligned vertically or a horizontal crack in the wood. Then both "aparts" would be adding to the meaning, right? Back on my own monitor, my recent revision looks decidedly magenta... damn. Has anybody an idea how to calibrate my monitor colourwise myself? Wayne, about the sharpness, it could be that I applied more unsharp masking or later in the process, after resizing. The print is pretty sharp. Link to comment
glenn_polin 0 Posted November 5, 2002 Jeroen, Since everyone else liked this, I think I could play a role by saying that I don't really like it. It doesn't appeal or speak to me in any way. Your revision is better but still leaves me cold. What I have been waiting for is the understanding of why I am unmoved. Technically, it seems like a "good enough" picture. And yes, I would whip out the macro lens and photograph this. So I think it is composition and your relationship to it that bothers me. It feels like a photo with two somewhat identical objects of interest in either corner, and no real relationship between them. And perhaps no relationship between the photographer and the subject; just frame the two objects and shoot. This all is probably reading too much into the photo but I keep looking at it and wondering why I don't feel anything, and that's my (current) best shot at explaining why. Link to comment
jeroen wesdorp 0 Posted November 7, 2002 Thanks for your comment, Glen. Always nice to have some disagreement! You are right though, this photo will not evoke grand emotions in any viewer. But it wasn't really intended as such. I liked it for it's interplay of rusty bolts and weathered wood, the juxtaposition of alignment and non-alignment, connection and disconnection; but that is where it ends for me to. I don't know, do better photographers have emotional ties to texture/abstract photo's like this? I guess some must do. Next time I'll try to work on that. Do have any suggestions for improving the composition, or the impact? And for what it's worth, this is no macro shot -oh, if only I had such a lense! The bolts and washers are actually quite large, over 2" for the washer I think. Link to comment
niranjn 0 Posted November 7, 2002 Jeroen, This is an excellent picture. Nice concept and well executed. Regarding the crops, I like the portrait orientation, but with a little bit more space around the "straight" bolt. Excellent portrayal of the crack as an inky black "bottomless" pit. I would have preferred shadows that actually make sense :-) Also, a stronger wood texture/grain. The magenta cast is also not pleasing, you might want to tone that down. This looks like the wrong film/processing was used, much like the trees and logs I have shot with Agfa Ultra which turned out pinkish occasionally. Link to comment
glenn_polin 0 Posted November 8, 2002 I just noticed that you had 5000 views of this photo...I must be wrong about the lack of emotion, the photo must be evoking some kind of emotions to get that high of a viewership. I'm afraid my opinion is really at deviance with the vast majority...again! Link to comment
chuck_dowling 0 Posted November 14, 2002 I like the original a lot. Good composition and the contrast between the wood and iron is just perfect. I don't like any horizontal version of this because trees grow vertically for the most part and so goes the grain. Again, very nice! Link to comment
bernhard 0 Posted December 4, 2002 Marc said it all, Oldie but goodie. The two simple elements give it a healthy tension Link to comment
s_wan 0 Posted December 29, 2002 Composition is a bit too "straight" for my liking, and not so keen on the overhead view. Would like to see this in B&W (as suggested) and from an angle other than perpendicular to the wood. Link to comment
Recommended Comments
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now