Jump to content

Zebra Grevy


marina-cano


From the category:

Nature

· 201,273 images
  • 201,273 images
  • 631,986 image comments




Recommended Comments

Marina Cano, it is an excellence catch of the horse movement.

The rising dust adds the liveness of the horse movement with a very nice voice of the background music.

 

Link to comment

Marina, I'm speachless!! That's an outstanding photo, really amazing!! My best compliments ...

Regards and Have an Happy New 2007 full of success!

ciao

Domenico

Link to comment

Hermosa captura, y hermosa luz Marina. Feliz a�o 2007 y que sigas haciendo hermosas fotografí¡³. Un saludo desde Galicia.

 

Link to comment
I think pictures of Zebras playing in the dust are great. But the photoshop manipulation that is repeatedly presented in these images is amateurish. A quick check of the image in a rudimentary editing package quickly shows a background that is poorly dodged out. The picture looks great because its small on the screen so the imperfections are not visible. I would prefer to see better photography first and much, much less photoshop dodging.
Link to comment

 

Thanks for comments again.

 

John, are you against the all kind of Ps manipulation? Do you think

that I abuse Ps? How do you think is the original zebra's picture?

 

I'm grateful for your commentary, your pictures are documentaries, but mine (i try it) are artistic. That's the difference about ps work.

 

Happy 2007

 

Link to comment

Una bella foto, nada mas....y nada menos. Ni caso al John ese, he visto su manojo de obras de arte y prefiero felicitarte a ti las navidades.

Lo mejor para para ti en estos 12 meses proximos. Nos vemos. Fauna y sensibilidad a veces coinciden.

Un saludo

Link to comment

Fantastica imagen Marina!!

 

Me parece una fotografia genial en todos los aspectos, luz, encuadre y nitidez.

Una gran foto!!

Enhorabuena por ella!!

 

Feliz a?o nuevo!!!!

 

Saludos....

Link to comment
Everybody has their own photographic niche and manner in how they do images. In this case I take exception to the image because its just too photoshopped, and that you do not make an effort to explain to the viewer what is going on. The end result is a trick which attracts people and which by the way, is also a reflection of the preferences of photo.net. For the most part the viewers are not interested in the manner how this was achieved. It is the end result that they like and actually to a certain extent, this is how it should be, otherwise we would all get trapped in endless technicalities and discussions about photography, and like many, would forget about taking the actual image itself. But, the question I ask: Should photo.net be about photography or the manipulation of images? If all that people like is dodged-out images of Zebras, you will have a good thing going. My premise and observation is that the original image without the manipulation might actually be a much better image, but not neccessarily the most popular. To be artistic you have to take risks, not to present photographic baby food.
Link to comment

This image really grabbed me. My first reaction was, WOW, how did he get the combination of elements so perfect? Was there a car parked on the other side with its headlights on, and so much dust, or is that fog, or is this a studio shot with a fog machine or ? Realizing that it is Photoshopped was disappointing. I agree with JOHN's comments, but that doesn't distract from the impact of the image and it certainly qualifies as "art" in my opinion.

 

I've always had the problem on photo.net with trying to understand how to react to the differences in the computer composed images vs. the viewfinder composed images. There is obviously a difference and the serious photographers often resent the computer-talented "photo" artists displaying their images as "true photographs" or failing to mention they are heavily modified photos. Perhaps the answer is to have a "photo.net" and an "image.net". Those images that are "developed" on the computer but are essentially unchanged in composition are on "photo.net" and those in which the artist has composed them in the computer are on "image.net". If this is not practical, I'd vote to see a further separation or identification on "photo.net" between the two genre. It is obvious to me that the highest rated photos are often those with heavy Photoshopping, but which are often very subtle in their use of such modifications. (Maybe I'm wrong?)

 

In the end, they are all a form of art, something visual that stimulates a nerve or chord within your brain, and/or soul and/or heart and enhances it's meaning or enjoyment to you. If it evokes an emotion or stimulates a memory within you it has some value. The question is technical I guess. For those of us that visit Photo.net mainly for the learning experience in photography, we want to know HOW an effect is achieved so that we can incorporate various elements we have seen into our own images.

 

Sorry for the long comment. Your image struck a chord for me.

Link to comment
Marina, Even "pure" photography is a "trick". Your PSing adds another element to the trick in a positive artistic way. I remember a critic of Mozart once said his music had "too many notes" and was therefor inferior. Music, photography, art and all forms of expression should not be limited except by the artist at his/her discretion....There is the little box to check, "unmanipulated", for each Pnet post. As long as this is not checked...DO WHATEVER PLEASES YOU!.... OH, I almost forgot, beautiful zebra picture!
Link to comment

Ken, I think you moved the discussion away from the actual point of it.

What you said is true... the Austrian emperor (I guess) said there are too many notes in the music of Mozart. But that was a comment from somebody who did not understand, who could not feel, the beauty of Mozart's music.

Here is different. Nobody denies Zebra Grevy is a beautiful image.

I think James and John only said that the way Marina got this image is a bit too "technologic", too studied to touch.

I think we are talking about the same difference there is between an "artificial", good looking, bright red apple and a natural organic tasty fruit... or, if you prefer, between the emotions you experience watching the movies "Ghost" and (for example) "Breaking the waves"...

 

You say "Music, photography, art and all forms of expression should not be limited except by the artist at his/her discretion".. Nobody here is trying to limit..

But if you "standardize" the pictures using PS, I don?t think you can talk of art of photography. I can call it art of painting with computer if you prefer.

One thing is to take care of a fruit tree, to water and to protect it from the cold... A different thing is to give to the tree any sort of chemicals and red food colouring to get shining attractive apples.

 

To make a beautiful picture you must be able to SEE beauty and you need the technique to freeze it by your camera.. (Mozart felt the beauty and wrote it down in his music)

You can learn all the rules of composition, you can deeply study photo techniques... but take pictures full of feeling is something else.

With PS you don?t necessarily need to see beauty... but you know that if you use some PS tools, your average "flat" picture will catch the attention and the final image will look amazing. A black background, the perfect light, the dust, a sunray in the right place, a huge moon perfectly positioned in the sky? a slow (artificial) tear on Demi Moore cheek... and everybody is "7/7" touched.

 

Unfortunately, in my opinion, there is a perverse mechanism in photo.net that pushes many of us to study and look for this kind of impact pictures?

 

By the way.. Marina, your portfolio, with many unmanipulated pictures, is amazing..

Link to comment

Gracias Jose, yo tambien te deseo lo mejor para estos siguientes doce meses.

Un afectuoso saludo.

 

John, James, please read Ken Aitchison comment, he explain exactly what I wanted to say. The appointment is perfect on Mozart. I agree completely with him.

 

 

Often I work my pictures in Ps, and never mind to say it. But this one not. Contrast, B/W and sharp. That's all. Is this a lot Ps manipulation?

Believe in it and relax.

 

 

Link to comment
In your previous comment, your first sentence states: "Ken, I think you moved the discussion away from the actual point of it."....I decide my own "point of it". My point was made as "I see" the point....just as photography or any form of art should be.....On the other hand, I do respect and admire what others do with "non manipulated" images (if there is such a thing..are filters, dodging and burning etc., manipulation?)....Anyway, I believe art in any form is what "you" or "I" consider it to be. As long as there is no misrepresentation of the medium, I don't understand comments like "too much photoshop", unless in the opinion of the critic that the image looks worse as a result. Photo Shop and the artists that attempt to use and master it are now "part of the picture". Oh, and one more thing, in regards to John's earlier comment, the quality of an upload to PNET need only be as good as necessary to "communicate" the artists intent on a computer monitor. To criticise based on examination with editing software is tantamount to examining a print with a microscope and complaining of large grain. Enough said by me. Regards, Ken
Link to comment
I agree with JOHN's comments about the massive use of photoshop we see in a great part of photos inserted in PN. For these the right gallery's category is DIGITAL ALTERATIONS, but most people prefer to insert them in Landscapes, Nature etc, etc. I don't agree with Marina when she said that without PS we have only a documentary image: what about the ability of using natural light, the ability to capture a moment, a glance, a feeling, to choose a point of view? Before the coming of PS did we have only documentary photos? I don't think so. Best wishes for a Happy New Year to all of you. Ferdinando
Link to comment

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...