THE RAPTURE

left behind?

You or me? And, by the way, where the hell have you been?

looks like we are both still here. i have been fighting two old enemies lately - depression and self doubt. beginning to see the light though.

Sorry to hear that. I know what a huge battle that can be. I wish you well, and assure you that if there is anything within my power I can do, you need only ask. I'm glad to see you back. Regards, DM

Your comments and rates are appreciated. Best viewed large.

I think I am missing the point. Is this a fallout shelter?

No, Tom, it is just an old restaurant kitchen that went out of business and was left as we see it. The Rapture concept just came into my mind because of the way a few remnants have been left behind. The napkin holder, a thermometer and some other paraphenalia. Sort of like whoever was here just floated out of the scene. I attempted to further that feeling by the processing that makes it a bit more surreal. Based on the ratings and your comment, I guess I'm the only one it worked for.

Honestly, you're the only one it HAS to work for. The rest of us are gravy. So much stuff I like gets bombed that I sort of gave up on ratings and meaningful feedback. Sometimes I get an honest appraisal, but mostly just a bunch of numbers.

About this shot, I think the area to the right of the wall is pretty much dead space, but the darkness draws our attention to it. I wonder if a shot that is more perpendicular to that wall would better capture the stray items on the counter while reducing the lost, dark area. Just a thought. I like the concept.

Thanks for your thoughts. One of the reasons I suggested viewing large, is that it seems to reveal a little bit more detail in the dark area. One can see a fire extinguisher (some symbolism?) tinfoil on the table and a bit more of the table and background. I felt the darkness was effective here to the overall tone, but as I said, it does not seem to capture the imaginations of other Pnetters, so your concept might be more appropriate.

David, I like the idea and the image. I agree, though, that you might try cropping a bit of the dark area on the right to focus more attention on the counter and the abandoned items. I understand your reasoning, though. Regards...

Thanks. I appreciate and respect your thoughts on the matter.

I only got here through your invitation to Michael. I imagine I would have gotten to it eventually but I've been so busy with Jesus and cars and some other photos I've been working on at home I haven't gotten to everything. So now I'm here, for what it's worth. Let's start with "you're the only one you have to please." Horse pucky. (Sorry, Tom, I'm just being flip. I know you're making an important and valid point.) True, to an extent and with qualifications. People have different desires around their own photography. Some, as Aristotle talked about centuries ago, think artists do art for catharsis, a process by which they examine and express their inner feelings. Some, as Plato talked about more centuries ago, think artists are trying to represent reality (neither he nor I thought that was possible, but that's a whole other discussion). I sometimes use it for catharsis. I got a lot a emotions stored up inside that need outlets. Photos provide one. Slamming walls sometimes provides another. A kiss here and there helps too. But I also like to communicate with photos, I like to stimulate discussions with photos, I like to nudge people into feelings or thoughts with photos, etc. All that requires an audience that, to some extent, either understands or feels something or questions something or cares a rat's behind about what I've shown them. I think it's simplifying things, and I've heard it often, to discount the viewers in one's life as having no relevance to how well a photo works. Anonymous internet audiences are another matter. Whether one should care about them is up for debate and can be dealt with on a case by case basis. But some viewer somewhere oughtta matter sometime, yes?

 

OK and now a word about your image. I like it, maybe not as much on its own if it were the only image of yours I was exposed to, but certainly within the context of your work it has great appeal. I think that's valid. Many photos and works of art make much more sense and have much more appeal given the artist's body of work than they do standing alone. I always try to check out someone's portfolio before commenting on an individual photo and wish more people would join me in that because context can be everything. It can tell you whether someone is purposely making something grainy or doesn't know what ASA to use and doesn't know when to stop raising levels in photoshop. That can help enormously in making a coherent critique. But I digress. I also think this photo has merit on its own. I'm not sure Rapture helps me or anyone else out, but I don't look for titles to tell me much other than sometimes about the cleverness of the titler and in some cases it gives me a clue as to the lines along which the artist wants to point me with his/her image. Regardless, I like the way you've split this image almost down the middle. I like the way the little white thingy on the counter is shooting out at me like a flashlight or something and the way it relates to the white divider almost dividing the photo in half. I like the mystery of the dead space on the right. It's a little quirky and breaks a few rules, so I like it even better, especially coming from a quirky (I can say that about you now, right) guy like yourself. But not everyone will like it. But some will, I'm sure. I said you probably want to please at least someone or someones in your audience, I never said you had to please everyone in your audience. If you wanted to do that, you'd stick to swans in still lakes in red sunsets with thin naked women on the banks. (Secret to sevens!) I like a lot of your stuff and this in particular because it has you in it and because it works as an abstract. I'm not looking for great meaning or soft lighting and I'm not wondering what must this guy be thinking photographing a bunch of empty plastic gallon jugs just under a wall affected by light coming from some unknown source outside the frame. I'm just looking at it and taking it for what it's worth. There's plenty of interesting stuff here to allow my eye to roam around and do some exploring. And I like getting lost a little in the darkness. I even just spotted that lone upright jug on the floor below, the guy who never gets picked to be on the team (see I can make up symbolism too when I want to). I'd stick with this one. I just realized, there is some truth to what your audience thinks doesn't matter. That's considering you're in a process. And I think you're in one. You're exploring some new avenues, techniques, ways of looking and presenting your stuff. So maybe right now the viewers really don't matter and you just have to take chances and make some mistakes and allow those creative juices to flow and ultimately judge how you feel about stuff you're doing and if it's leading you where you want to go. See, you were right after all Tom. Sort of, 'cause at some point I guarantee you'll want a response. Now, aren't you glad you asked!

I've already said it, but you are a hell of a critic. I didn't ask you to address this for several reasons. One is you've already given me a great deal of your time and input, and I did not wish to impose. Secondly, I felt that if you wanted to say something about it, you would have. I love your philosophical answers like the one you just gave me. Damn I wish I knew the stuff you do, and had your eloquence.

 

Okay, I know I don't have to explain anything, but I'm doing this for me. Okay? To me this image is full of inane, mundane, mystery, randomness, memories, loss and hope. The mystery is the darkness. Incidentally, I could have had detail in the dark area. I chose not to. Note the light in the lower right. Reflections from the window (again). It's like an aura. Randomness is why these things, these objects?? Cups, napkin holder, thermometer and red object as well as those jugs. Why are they where they are. This was someone's business. A place of hopes and aspirations to that person. It obviously did not make it. Loss? Hope? What memories are intrinsic? I felt these things when I saw it and when I made the image. My disappointment is not so much in that no one else saw that, but in my failure to be able to make them see that. I thought I had it. Turns out I didn't.

 

As for "Rapture," I am referring to the concept that some Christians have that Christ will return to earth and take the righteous with Him, and those left behind will suffer untold misery and eternal damnation. So, He came, and the place is empty. Only a few remnants tell of the person's having been here. Lucky dog, that guy.

Fred Goldsmith's critique compelled me to rethink my earlier reaction and comment. After taking a much closer look, I think he's right about the quirky aspect of the dark right side. Can't quite believe this unusual but fascinating image has created such an interesting conversation. That's a great compliment to your work. Joe

I have kind of pushed the issue because I really wanted to try and see why this image did not elicit more of a response. I'm not talking about the 3/3 type stuff, but the fact that it was largely ignored. That's even worse than the bad ratings. Especially when you really think you have your mojo going. I'm not belittling anyone (not this time, anyway), I just wanted to get some opinion from sources I trusted and have known, because it is easier to digest when you know where they are coming from. Fred has been exceptionally kind to give me some of his extensive knowledge. I also appreciate all of you who volunteered information. I'm trying hard to learn from this one.

from your last response and from your telling me what you were seeing and hoped to communicate is that you didn't quite communicate it. You did, in my opinion, create a good photo with a lot of interest. But I don't think, without the words you took to describe it, you communicated what you had in mind. Not to worry. That's damn hard. So, the challenge is to figure out, not necessarily with this shot anymore because it might be impossible given the photo you took, how actually to communicate the things you want. And, generally, you get your point across quite simply and effectively. You usually make it look so effortless. One of the reasons I like photographing people is that I feel at home saying what I want through others' eyes and faces. Sometimes what I want to say is simply what they want to offer. It's true that I very often don't take a photo with an agenda of communication in mind. You've set yourself a hard, but not impossible, task here. A couple of fer instances. What if there were the hint of a person, the real owner ideally, in darkness stepping out the back door. What if there were a more personal remnant of people left behind, an old sweater strewn on the counter, a pocketbook, even an account book that belonged to the old owner? Would that give me the sense of abandonment you wanted me to get? Any other ideas? Again, for the next photos that you have a message you want to convey, you might think about signs of life that could help. But you're so good at taking these kinds of shots that I imagine you'll be the one to come up with the best way of saying what you want and it may not have anything to do with life or touches of humans. Nevertheless, for me, that's one reason I had so wished the owner of the used car church had been there, or even his dog. Adds a whole other dimension. That's why I got pissed off (but kept my big mouth shut) at the guy who told you to ignore the few of us who suggested you catch the African-American woman's face in your protest shot. I, at least, wasn't suggesting a portrait (like he falsely made out we had), I was suggesting seeing her face. Big difference. Eyes, faces, lips convey a whole lot of emotion and expression. There are photos that don't need humans or other animals. I'm not saying they all do. But the presence of some connection to humanity often helps. Actually, I'm just thinking that, in this case, an open back door (I'm not even sure if there's a door back there, I'm just imagining there could be one) with a peek at the outside might convey a bit more of what you were after, the abandonment theme. Anyway, that's it for now. I bet a few more people have yet to show up here and you'll get more reactions and you'll be on to the next gem already.

Now this is bizarre. I just finished typing the above about your being on to the next gem and I go to your bio page only to see that one of your new pics has a big sign with the word GEM on it. Now you're scaring me. I think your communication skills have already improved way more than I want to even consider!

Now I'm not sure if you should be a psychotherapist or critic. Honestly, you've helped me get over the bad feelings I was having about this one. You're a precious find, and I thank you for your comments and advice. Even the stuff I don't agree with.

 

As for the Gem, that's hilarious!

 

 

how do I feel about this photo? Yes, the right side is empty and kinda "dead", but that's not necessarily bad - it all depends on what your intention is/was. It could be viewed as an area of the photo that makes it look worse than the photo could look; or it could be viewed as an area that gives the RH 2/3 of the photo contrast and life. The dark area could be as Yin and the light area with the bottles and cups as Yang. Personally, I have no preference either way - both versions are 6 for aesthetics, IMV8O. Either version has something captivating. I like the pile of bottles and the cups on the counter - they give the photo life; the dark area gives the photo rest. I also like the post-processing treatment you gave it. I'm giving you my honest opinion, I'm not trying to be diplomatic. Maybe the dark area could have been lit by an off-camera flash, but would it look better? I like that the dark are makes the counter pop out. Cheers, Micheal

 

I forgot to add the cropped version. Here it is. M

Thanks for opining. But damn it, I don't want you to like it. Why can't you be like most everyone else and dislike it? Then you could say, "Dave this isn't working because it sucks and da da da da da dee." Or something like that. LOL

 

Okay, well then thanks for liking it.

Horse pucky, indeed. David, I, too have a soft spot for the relics of misplaced optimism, and A find much of it in my collection of derelict signs.

 

http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=457254

 

Check'em out of you have the chance. While they aren't always especially artistically rewarding to photograph, they do all have a story, and are worth

being captured.

 

Anyway, I'm done. Keep shooting,

 

-Tom

have it your way. How about: Dave, this sucks, because there are no pretty mountains surrounding the counter, and a stream burbling down the counter top. I see no moose or bear prowling the place and it shows both day and night in one shot, which is not possible. I'm giving this shot minus three points. Yahoo, that was fun... Cheers, Micheal

Thanks. I feel much better now.