talksII

This is a well-made photograph. It is simple as that. Everything works very well together to create the single effect. I could have possibly done without the eye shadow, but what the heck. No need to quibble. It works well enough.

I had a peek at the artist's portfolio. There are several versions that for various reasons do not work, seemed forced. Then there is this image--as right as right can be.

This is a beautiful image. What else is there to say? Nothing.

Oops! Make that 1972 rather than 1969. The latter year was when I got my first invitation to run the Chattooga with my undergraduate research director in the chem lab. Unfortunately, I declined, and then suddenly the river got famous--and crowded. (Still is.)

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm827562240/tt0068473

I do like the picture on one level, Andris. I truly do. I also wondered how on earth you got her to be still so long without making any waves. That is when my imagination started coming up with alternative ways to get the model to be still. I guess that sometimes we bring our own nightmares to the viewing of the photo--not that I have drowned anybody lately.

Lots more, Alex. Lots more.

I swear I can I hear banjo music. . . .

--Lannie

Thre are no waves on the surface and the girl has elaborated make up. This is the set up photo. It is to explicit. Pls consider modification below I add to hide these circumstances.

The processing here renders a nice, clear, tonally-tuned black and white image. Her eyes feel overworked and the d.o.f. is effectively used for atmosphere. The photo seems to me to center around a photographic gimmick, which seems obvious. It sort of shouts, look what I can do, by the photographer. The gimmick, rather than helping make a point and helping me see something more deeply, keeps me at bay and calls attention to its gimmickry rather than supporting something more penetrating.

I still think that a more ghoulish version had more potential--even if thoroughly revolting. Everything is too darned still here She isn't even breathing on that water. That girl is dead, y'all. That doesn't exactly turn me on.

My apologies go to those who were looking for a more erotic interpretation. Women lying motionless on their sides in lakes and rivers don't do it for me.

--Lannie

funny shot. Not funny ha ha but something funny and peculiar in the photographer’s attempt to provoke some sort of emotion in the viewer with an image as contrived as a still from a B horror flick, artificial and campy, something that on its face cannot possibly be believed.

I wouldn't want a photo like this to look too real, and so I think it works. I am sure the girl in question and her young friends love it. Its halloweeny in a harmless way, like Halloween should be to kids, imaginative and creative but not overly graphic. The dead girl is effective because of the processing that keeps it being 'just a photo.' Its like a scary move that's..'just a movie' but scary enough to be effective. The background is important to creating the mood I think.

This image has been done very nicely for the most part. Overall, the division of space has been well handled in this crop. The tonalities have been handled well and the vignetting works with the image. The way all of the elements juxtapose has been well seen with no mergers or tangencies demanding our attention. The only technical issue, and it might just be preference, is the treatment of the eye closest to the water. Both the eye and its reflection seem just a bit light to me and thus not as believable as it might have otherwise been.

But I do think that believability is where this image falls just a bit short for me. There is that intangible edge, something always in Sally Mann's images along the river with her children, that I am missing here. I have considered whether it was the makeup, the somewhat awkward posture, unrealistic head position--not floating and yet not believable that it is resting on something--or maybe all of these, but I don't feel it moves beyond just being a photograph for me. It is subjective, but something that falls a bit short for me.

Technically, a very nice image that is otherwise missing meaningful content for me.

.....And Lannie, what were you trying to do with your version? :))

(I just read MH's comment, posted while I was writing--nice counter points in the comments!)

FYI: The blotchy things on the reflection of the girl's face seem to have the same floral pattern as the portion of dress above the water's surface, so I guess they were copied there (which is not necessarily a bad thing).

@martin h--I think the pattern is just the dress under the water there, not a copy, as it floats (note air bubble next to face in dress--where it connects to the pattern in the water) close to the surface. I don't think the reflection of the face is any trickery, just what was there.

You can also see the dress extend outside of the shadow/reflection of the head in the water--to the left. Appears she is sitting possibly with knees up-based on the shape on the left.

Stunning :)!

Technically, it looks very flawless to me. In that sense, it's an extremely well done photo. I have no idea how much photoshop it saw, and frankly I don't care at all. And as Alex said "This is a beautiful image. What else is there to say?".
A lot, there is a lot else to say.

Like John A and Fred, the beauty to me stays superficial. Is the girl resting, or dead. Are her eyes haunting or dreaming-absent? I don't care. The image does not persuade me to find those answers. So, it leaves me with the question "what's it trying to tell me?" without urging me to find it answered. Photography should be about communication, and I just fail to find the message here.
Maybe it is the fact that it's square/centered that "locks up" the composition. Due to the shallow depth of field, there is no doubt what the subject in the photo is, but there is nothing contextual. There are no dynamics, no directions; no hints of what's going on. Just a lot of silent stillness and quiteness. But not the meaningfull kind of silence to me.

Anyway, I'm of two minds, overall, like many others: Sumptuous black and white tones and textures all around, but those big eyes, which look so soulful at first--like the rest of the face--take on a lifeless quality after further examination. So maybe it's a picture that is successful in some ways, but not in others.

Another thought about the position of the girl's head and body, which doesn't seem completely natural. Many modeling pictures are taken with the subject positioned in ways that are mildly to extremely unnatural, and they aren't necessarily faulted for that. Maybe this one shouldn't be either?

This is a wonderfully rendered photo with beautiful tones and presentation. I just don't like it. There is a morbid curiosity to it as to what in heck is this pretty lady doing with her ear in the water with eye makeup streaming down her expressionless face...but that's about it. As is so often the case when photographers try to get artsy and lofty, the title, never mind the image, gives no clue what in the heck is going on.

It seems that the photographer is making the reflection, and it's shape, a big element in the composition. That's fine but a tighter crop would strengthen that as a previous poster showed, and at least, graphically speaking, it would be more interesting. This is the textbook case of a beautiful photograph of a fuzzy idea.

I am afraid that I have to side with Wouter Willemse on this one. I think that, technically, it is a wonderful photo, extremely well done. And I agree that it makes absolutely no difference if that technical perfection was created with hours of photoshop, hours of standing in the water trying to get that perfect shot or just by chance. What counts is what comes across to the viewer when the photo is presented. And just as it is impossible to write a story that everyone can identify with, so it goes with photos.
I am really impressed with the quality, but this photo just does not reach me emotionally (although I seem to be in the minority here). I have no curiosity about why the woman is in the water or what may have happened because it looks as if it were staged to create an effect. There is no story. There is just the admiration for the technical perfection (a quality I wish I had). Maybe that is enough?

Here's an alternative interpretation. She's standing transfixed in a pool of her own tears. Cry me a river rather than stand in a river.

I don't feel that there is much about the "reflected" girls face that is real at all. I think it's a photoshoped reflection. Don't get me wrong, I strongly believe in making changes to images through the magic of photoshop, but this one was not done too well. The one reflected eye is missing and the other is as sharp as the original above. That eye would have been blurred if reflected. I think the hair should be blurred more. Note the loop at the top of the head is supposed to be reflected in the swirling water with no blurring what so ever.
There is a very obvious technical flaw along the left edge of the water surface midway down the picture and some on the right as well as the photographer in post production worked the water surface. I would like to suggest a crop, but there is nothing to crop. The picture is not really a vertical image, yet not square either. It seems a bit strange.
The picture is not the winner that many above indicate. I guess it's good enough to force comments from quite a few people, but to me it's just not quite right. Not my cup of tea, as they say.
Willie the Cropper

This is Amazing!! Love the idea, love the eyes- the way the photo could tell a million different stories. Simply Amazing!! 

I dont this the reflection is photoshoped at all. I think there are 2 many fine detailed present in the reflection to discount it not being genuine. The portrait itself is strong and intruiging, it has been very well executed. What disturbes me about the image is the presence of eth sky in the background, to me it is a distraction from what is a very good image.

Landrum,

I see real dead people's eyes all the time. They do not look like that.

/funny

But I understand your post. Her dysconjugate parallel gaze definitely portrays that death look.

Oh, and Andris.

I think it is an awesome photo. Wallhanger, thank you for share it with us. You do have several other wallhangers too.

I really like it. Some call it contrived & set-up. It certainly is. But, yet it's well thought out & executed. A good balance of the parts of her which are above & below the water. The photo evokes a bit of a tension in an otherwise dead calm scene

Awesome photo! The first one to go into my favorites. It does not matter to me if it is photoshopped or not, it is still took a high level of skill to create.

It's Goth subculture! Looks almost naive for that part. I could compare it to the girl from the movie "Circle", a japanese production. Only, the girl from the movie looks too scary for my opinion.