Alive

Kyle Martens, the ratings on Photonet are not the final word on art photography, so dont get too hung up about what they say.

 

Those who say the image doesnt have impressive tonality cannot be serious. Surely it is a pure aesthetic joy to look at. And if the rule of thirds had never been given that title and set in granite by photographers of unassailable veracity in every institution of photography in the world, this photograph would still have a nice composition. You people need to re-contemplate your mindlessly anarchic enthusiasm for breaking "rules" for the sake of it. I wish these "rules" had never been definitively laid down, because 9/10th of photographers nowadays are obsessed with the insolent creation of photographs which break every rule the book, yet amount to a grand artistic zero. Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel (and making it square in the process), we should build on what we know from the past and from past photographers, and reinvigorate photography with powerful depictions of relevant subjects.

 

And, Marcelo Dapino, should all photographs really tell a story? Ill accept (as your opinion) that you want to see the mans right hand, but I think photographs can convey something other than stories.

 

This image, for example, is extraordinary, yet for me, doesnt tell a story as such. But it is loaded to bursting point with drama, it subtly but irresistibly encourages my mind to dwell on spiritual overtones mingled with corporeal connotations, and really does make me contemplate my aliveness. It has soul and essence if ever a photograph did. If I look at it long enough the out of focus left hand does start to impinge upon my interpretation of the image, but does it really matter in the overall scheme of things? I cant fault the composition; I really do like it.

 

I would hazard to guess that it is not so much the management of Photonet that is turning the way of Popular Photography as the members who view the photographs. If you really look at this photograph, think about it, and then apply your interpretation of it to your own life, I think you cant help but come away with something special.

 

Still, if anyone sees an image like this in PP (or any of those mags), please let me know.

I dont profess to be an expert on B&W photography, flash photography, or composition but this strikes me as a fine picture. The colors flow from light to dark leading to the upper left quadrant of the image. The flowing motion of the fabric compliments the flow of the tones maybe this is what the elves meant by fluid.

 

Darkroom magic and auto-everything metering aside, this is a decent exposure. If you add 1 stop to get more shadow details, you might blow the high lights in the lower-left section, not to mention the sky. I dont use flashes in my own work so I cannot say if it would improve this image and by how much. Frankly Im not thirsting to see details in the mans face. BTW, My monitor is hardware calibrated with Color Vision.

 

As for the Rule of Thirds, I think its one of the most valuable guidelines in photography, but should be applied judiciously in each situation. In this photo, if you move the mans head lower or to the left, would make the image ineffective. I often break the rule in some of my photographs simply because it doesnt work, but I do it consciously and reluctantly. To categorically abandon it would be ignorant.

 

 

to the bitter people making comments about bad composition: by your "text-book" analysis of what "correct" composition is, you would have to call 50% of Henri Cartier Bresson's work trash. This work catches a fleeting moment with a beautiful subtlety. Nice work.

Samuel,

In some ways you echoed my thoughts. Just as breaking a rule does not necessarily add substance (except getting the artist excited), I hope you believe that following one doesn't either. When you see a photograph or any thing for that matter, you respond first, and the deconstruction comes afterwards. For the most part, the deconstruction to me tries to explain why you responsed in such a way, and provides a rational platform for your emotions. A criterion such as "excellent use of 1/3rd rule" may also become visible to you in the deconstruction process... but I have seen it repeatedly mentioned here in the POW selection criteria. That just irked me for a moment. I guess I was looking for something more substantial that suggests that the selectors have responded to the photograph and spent enough time with it. I am sure there are many things that can be said apart from what was said.

Anyways, that apart, I like this photograph. It's a hard photograph to shoot...and the photographer deserves praise.

I think that the fluidity of color (tones, actually) that the elves mentioned is what this photo really has going for it. As someone mentioned above, the movement of tones fits well with the movement of the clothing.

I agree with the comment that the face is too dark - particularly the neck area - but I disagree with the comment that the right hand looks chopped off. If we had the hand visible, it would spoil the impression of the robes flowing off of the man and melding into the background.

Nice work.

Congratulation once again! I cannot just say anything because I was there when this picture was taken. I saw this guy, the place, the whole situation and you know what... it was so usual for me but now I can see it wasn't. I'm not gonna to talk about too dark face maybe it is...but the subject. Grate catch! Show me how you see it once again!

I don't see myself qualified to make a judgement on technical strengths. This photo to me is striking - I can feel the emotions that are protrayed - an open stance, upturned face, wind in the robe - to me you have captured and portrayed a feeling very very well.

Nope..

Samuel Dilworth said:

 

"And, Marcelo Dapino, should all photographs really tell a story?"

 

Yes, if the photograph is said to tell one of freedom and of being alive as is the case here. Otherwise, not necessarily. A photograph can be, for instance, aesthetically pleasing and be worth for what it is. This particular POW is very pleasing to me, but it doesn't convey to me as strongly the feelings that others see in it.

 

Samuel Dilworth said:

 

"I?ll accept (as your opinion) that you want to see the man?s right hand, but I think photographs can convey something other than stories."

 

My opinion that the photo could show the right hand doesn't have anything to do with textbook composition as was condescendingly said in other posting (I've never read a book on basics of composition -maybe I should.) Rather, I feel that an open right hand could help to make a stronger point towards conveying the message (of freedom, etc) that some folks see in the man's expression and which I don't.

 

As far as the face being dark: I don't think so. This photo actually reminds me of Pierre Verger's work in northeastern Brazil. Inky blacks, very contrasty and very powerful.

I just don't understand the 2's, 3's, and 4's for this photo. Are there technical issues with the image? Sure, a few. Personally, I'd like to have seen a little more detail in the face.

 

Just look at the photo as an expression though! It's simply fantastic! Excellent job Chris.

The only thing I don't like about this photo are the two fingers from the left hand that are visible. Just seems to unsettle me, otherwise it's a fine effort and I like the angle of the face and the way the light is falling on it.

Forget the "rules of composition" and whatnot, this photo is strong because it captures an ethereal moment, and the title "alive" is very apt for the expression portrayed.

I know this man. He was my high school guidance councelor. He always told me to keep my head up and reach for the stars, but he never looked me in the eye. Very interesting.

I know this man. He was my high school guidance councelor. He always told me to keep my head up and reach for the stars, but he never looked me in the eye. Very interesting.

Yeah, right:))) I think I know the person that wrote the last comment. You almost got me. I was ready to ask for a name and the school he works at, so I can send him a copy. LOL

This photo fail to take advantage of the sun's angle at the time of photographing, resulting in a loss of facial details.

No single good photo is made without braking the rules. What does make this photo is behind the rules. You don't really need to see the face (you're not a criminal expert, right?) -- just enjoy the mood. An excellent shot.

its ok, there should maybe be a little more contrast around the face- it might jusr be the scan, but the face gets lost in shadow

CONGRATULATIONS CHRIS!

I use Ansel Adams' criteria for a good photo: I looked at it "for more than a second."

 

It is striking. I agree with a previous poster about the fingers on the left hand (they disrupt the image a bit), but that isn't enough to detract from the presentation as a whole.

 

Well done.

It's a good shot. I do however feel there is to much drastic contrast between the white robe, the blow out sky and his very dark skin. The background, to me, is highly distracting.

Very nice photo - well executed !

One of my favourites. Rated very high in plfoto.com as well. Congratulations for Chris.

absolutely flawless composition.

the coments about fill in?

that would have given this a very artificial "pretty"

 

absolutely flawless composition.

the coments about fill in?

that would have given this a very artificial "pretty"