nickolay_lavrik 0 Posted May 31, 2003 "An hour not spent on shooting is spent on digital alterations" Critique and ratings welcome. Link to comment
stefan_hunger 0 Posted June 1, 2003 I'd say it's too obviously digitally altered. But I am not a fan of digitally messing with photos either, so maybe I should not critique this picture. Link to comment
nickolay_lavrik 0 Posted June 1, 2003 I agree that you shouldn't critique the photo if you feel that you can't be objective. It looks like the fact that someone does not like digitally altered photos often justifies 1 or 2 for aesthetics. I have been lucky and this is only second time when my photo is nailed by this approach. Link to comment
laura2 0 Posted June 3, 2003 Gorgeous! I like it, no matter how it was done. It looks like a cartoon, almost. (No offense! I think it's cool!) The fact it's not a straight line to split the colors helps loads too. I like how the center of each flower is the mirror-image of the background color of the other side. VERY creative! Link to comment
akis 0 Posted June 3, 2003 I like the originality, and colors you used. Nice composition and idea. Link to comment
cliff_krauter 0 Posted June 4, 2003 Interesting Idea Nickolay, however I think next time you should try maybe altering the highlights of the flowers only. Once the image looses it's photorealistic quality,...it's no longer a photo right? Hope it helps and take care. Btw- I appreciate the nice comment you left about my photo. I did the same, some time ago on your "sunset for no-one" thanks again Link to comment
jame_cohn 0 Posted June 4, 2003 I think this is very creative.. I like the idea behind it.. I have played with digital alteration and I find it can almost be as much fun as taking the photo in the first place. Link to comment
nickolay_lavrik 0 Posted June 4, 2003 I would like to thank Laura, Polychronis, Cliff, Jame, and Robert for the comments/ratings left here. My goals (within this folder) are obviously far from creating realistic images. It's experimental stuff. I am glad that many viewers evaluate/ appreciate images regardless of the techniques used and the relationship with what we normally call REALITY. Being a physisist and dealing professionaly with various aspects of optical as well as non-optical imaging I consider traditional photography only as one of a number possible ways to create IMAGES. Away from my reserach I am interested in SUBJECTIVE perception of IMAGES and their emotional impact. I agree with Jame that digital processing can be a lot fun while traditional darkroom work that involves creativity is virtually sweating. After trying the both I prefer digital processing over multiple exposures, filters greased with vaseline, lights with gels, etc. Nonetheless, I am interested in hearing all opinions, curious to know what the viewers like and what they don't. While positive comments make me happier critical ones make me think ;-)) Link to comment
StuartMoxham 10 Posted June 5, 2003 Hey nice work. I think this is a great idea. I would have maybe used a plain black background but htats just me. IMO this image works very well. Link to comment
roberto4 0 Posted June 5, 2003 Yes Nickolay, our reality is only the optimal path we receive by our senses. ( physical they are many posibilities ). But our conscious if hard manipulated by mind so let create an other realities ... by photography or ... Link to comment
daisy apple girl 0 Posted May 8, 2004 You do really amazing work. Your whole portfolio on here is nothing short of impressive. 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