jasonschock

I think it deserves a six. College rocks.

On a related note, David Hockney's book Secret Knowledge proposes the theory that Renaissance painters used camera obscura to make perfectly proportional sketches from a modeled scene. (Up until about 1420, there were only flat, idealized faces and no depth of field. Then, suddenly paintings had incredible detail, depth and realism. What the heck ...?)

Of course, art lovers had a friggin cow over this little revelation. Many simply do not accept the theory (despite lots of evidence for it) that their beloved artists were "cheaters".

So, basically we have the same debate. Assuming the masters did use the camera obscura, is the mastery/artisitic quality/beauty of their work degraded? For all we know, they used wax dummies in their scene, too, because, hey, who the hell can/wants to sit there perfectly still for so long while a tempermental and tragic artist precisely traces your every pore?

So, oh, jeez, oh gawd, oh me oh my, the masters -- the Masters!!! -- painted images of wax dummies! Gasp, sigh, moan! Deception!

[Hand to forehead]

What is arrrrrrrrrrrrrrt!?!?

In the words of a photo teacher I had, on being an artist: "I lie, I cheat, I steal." Are the old masters' works any less great now that we know that they lied and cheated?

I say no. Because that is art. That is the nature of art. Once we get over the fact that we all lie, cheat, and steal, we can begin to appreciate the artistic qualities of an image.

That is all.

And for the rest, well yeh it's a bit crap isn't it, just a dummy in a wig.

-- Chris Battey , December 03, 2002

Chris gets my Refreshingly Humble Photographer Award.

I just want to immortalize this quote for everyone to see:

Anyway, it's good to see you're finally commenting on other people's photos now, John. Thanks for giving back to the community in a positive way.

The color and exposure is great.

 

I find the image lacking any punch, though. I think it lacks expression and emotionally, I am left with zero affect. The caption "Come Together" would truly fit if, for example, the figure had their hand reaching out to the glass with the whale reciprocating some contact.

 

Volker, your portfolio shows that you have an eye for color; there are some nice shots in there. Keep it up.

I'd just like say that this image is a good example of how to use Photoshop *transparently* to create photographic art.

 

I've seen such horrendous, obvious overuse of "Twirl", "Watercolor", "Spherize", "Liquify", etc. that I want to let a rabid rally monkey loose in my pants.

I have a feeling there's a lot of people on photo.net who come here for the pretty pictures. The happy, yummy, feel-good-to-my-tummy photos.

 

The ones with rich colors, impeccable lighting and touching moments. Of puppy dogs, bouncing babies and dramatic sunsets.

 

This isn't one of them. It's a news photo. It's a representation of what goes on *in the real world*.

 

Perhaps it's out of context when not accompanied by a headline and story. Which brings me to my question: How to improve photo.net to so that people are more aware of the context in which they're rating a photo?

 

Maybe the lighting isn't perfect, the color is crap and the expression ugly. If I had asked for this to be rated as "Fine Art", I would expect to get ripped up. But it's news, folks. It's an image that is intended to tell a story, not to be pretty.

Thanks for the comments everyone.

 

It's actually in the middle of day, Rajiv. I metered for the light coming off the water and everything got subsequently darker.

 

I never really though of it as a looking like a night shot until now. Thanks.

Wicked shot, Simon. Obviously smacks of Endless Summer, but now updated with shortboards and at G-Land.

Vuk -

 

It's a pretty standard surf photo techinique. You have a camera in a water housing that often sits on a grip stick with trigger. You swim out into the lineup with the surfers, place yourself precariously in the wave (occasionally getting sucked over the falls and dashed on coral reef), and stick your hand out of the water as the surfer goes by, all while maneuvering within the wave so as to not get run over/sucked over.

 

David, and other surf photogs, make it look easy.

All shots are better when they're perfect, Carl. :-)

I think you could some dimensionality to this shot if your simply panned up a bit to get that picture frame in the image. If it was the slightly blurred image of a woman, it'd be even cooler. The horizon tilt adds an element of dischord. Why not play off that a bit more?

 

As it is, the shot only says "Here is a picture of some roses." If you're only going for the tone in the flowers, crop in tight on them as the surrounding stuff only distracts.

Funny shot, Mark. It's got great impact.

 

One thing - Brighten slightly and bump up your contrast to make the colors punch out.

I agree. There seems to be too much blackspace around the subject. I would crop in on top, bottom and right, and also rotate the image slightly right.

 

Nice tone, however. The lighting gives it a sort of "mystery machine" feel.

Definitely crop out the signal light at left.

Best thing would to get your flash up and to camera left. I assume you shot this vert with the flash mounted on the hot shoe. This gives notoriously wack lighting.

 

Two solutions:

 

1) Get a Stroboframe flash bracket that lets you turn your camera vert but also move your flash to a better angle.

 

2) Get an off-camera flash cord. This will let you position the flash with your left hand while holding the camera with the right. You can experiment with different flash angles this way, though I find that for ports, above and slightly left usually looks the best. The idea is to aim your flash so that the shadows created will be hidden from the lens's vantage point.

 

The shadow is hard because your light source is small (i.e. direct flash, no diffuser). You can buy neat little plastic diffusers to put on you flash (and you'll choke at the cost), or you might try to just make your own from a translucent plastic milk jug.

Pretty good shot. Good contrast. I'd like to see more sharpness in your images. My guess is that your camera lens isn't so hot, so you might try a little Unsharp Mask in Photoshop.

 

I'd leave the crop alone on this. You might remove just a *little* more black, but this blackspace is what makes the subject punch out.

 

Just keep shooting lots to develop that creative eye.

In this case, putting the flower off-center is not helping. The dark background adds nothing to the photo.

 

Try a square crop around the flower, lighten the image and boost the contrast.

It's a little hard to rate these kinds of shots. As far as news photos go, these are a dime a dozen (no offense). There's nothing remarkable in the expressions to give it any edge really. I have to give you low marks for the cliche factor.

 

Good marks, though, for being on the spot and making the photo, like a good PJ. Good sharpness, as well.

Very good, tender moment caught here. I think most eds would be hesitant about running so much blood, but regardless, a good vignette.

Nice moment captured. Two things to make it better:

 

- Pan camera to the left to get more of the boy

 

- Fill flash so we can see their faces

 

Keep shootin.

Like the subject says.

I can't really tell what's going on. I think that's a woman and a dog in the background, but what are they doing? This photo leaves me with questions. I would try to get a larger depth of field so that the background is sharper.

Cool to be printing old photos! This shot would benefit from higher contrast (try a 3 or higher filter) and some tighter cropping. Get rid of some of the water and dead space and this could look pretty good.

I think if you came around to the right a bit, you'd be able to better see what these guys are doing.