root

Afraid so.

After almost two months, the roofers are scheduled to do repairs and put on a new roof later this week.

How are you?  (I really should stop by my old stomping grounds here from time to time.)

 

Thanks for dropping by.

 

I'm more inclined to reproduce what I saw. Too much saturation hurts my eyes.

how's the RFC queue working these days?

The more I think about this, the more I like what it has to say. First there's the tripod which stands unused because although the typical compositions at this site wait patiently for you to set it up and compose carefully, you've removed the camera and now are in "decisive moment" mode. Are you too late (or too early) given their distance, or is the timing just right because it captures the essence of what I see as the photo trek mind set - let the "leader" determine where and when you'll meet, stay together, point in "that" direction (because it's the "good light) and we'll all congratulate ourselves because all our shots are different, even though those differences are inconsequential.

 

I once participated in a camera club field trip at a nature preserve. At one point, we all pointed our cameras at the setting sun - maybe a dozen of us all lined up. Nobody got anything worth keeping (I would have seen it at a monthly competition if they had), yet there was a shot there that I missed and have regretted ever since. Stand to the side and shoot the photographers all lined up illuminated by the light of the setting sun. It would have been a keeper for me because it would have reminded at least a few viewers how we often tend to follow each other around like sheep.

The thumbnail doesn't do this justice because you don't get the sense that this shadow is shooting the group way off in the distance - an interesting variation on the photographer/shadow theme.

 

Then there are the priceless comments . . . but I've said that before.

 

The sheep sort of jumps out at you, doesn't it. :-)

 

Dodging, burning, spotting, color correction - a lot of work getting the whole set to hang together, actually - but the essential lines, shapes, etc, are as recorded.

I haven't tried reprinting yet, but I've processed quite few of these using the color match adjustment. The luminance and fade adjustments were necessary on a few of them, as well as more extensive dodging and burning prior to final color adjustment. The final saturation is a bit more pronounced than what you see here and I'll probably get around to replacing these uploads at some point. Thanks for your continued interest.

Hi Jack,

 

This one in particular illustrates the challenge of presenting them as a group with consistent color throughout. Notice that the lower left is warmer than the upper right. Most look like either one or the other, as if different filters were used arbitrarily. I'm struggling to figure out how to make the whole series more uniform, but at the moment, it's beyond my PS skills.

Hi Hanna,

 

I submitted duo-toned versions of this set for solo gallery consideration. The directors loved it; the three jurors passed on it (and will be sending me written comments in a few days.) I haven't given up on it though.

 

Thanks for visiting.

If the buildings get early morning or late afternoon sun, this could rise to the truly great. Maybe even earlier or later if the building, street light, (fountain?) light up so you get mixed lighting. The interior lighting on the left and right might screw it up, which is why I like to shoot these kinds of things on Sundays when they might be closed.

 

I still like this a lot as it is.

What's really freaky about this is the perception initially that you're looking through three windows at a "true" panorama. Then you get the idea that the reflections switch left and right. Then you see two fountains, so maybe you actually are able to see through the outside windows . . . or maybe just the right one. . . .

 

Argh!!!

I'd be curious to know how you read it for content, in addition to it's graphic features.

Was that from memory or did you look it up? And did you actually see something that inspired your reference, or did you just get home from church and decided to sit down at the keyboard while you were still "washed over", as it were?

 

Seriously, is this your favorite in the series or . . . .? I need to pick 4-6 to submit to three jurors for a solo show.

Just finished reading the chapter on framing in Michael Patterson's "The Photographers Eye" which helped me understand the difficulty in composing in a square format. I suspect that it was chosen here in an attempt to crop out something distracting after the fact, rather than seeing a harmonious whole in the viewfinder.

 

The other issue is the light (or post-processing). Too much dark gray, which diminishes the impact of the textural interest.

Looking at your PN portfolio, I assumed you lived out in the hinterland, hours from any decent sized city, yet this shot was taken only a few minutes from where I live, just up Georgia Avenue.

 

It's good to see a restrained use of HDR that is used to better reproduce a scene, rather than render it a garish mess. What I especially like about this composition are the clues that support the natural occurrence of what is an otherwise incongruous scene.

J. Scott Schraeder used to be an active PN member, and I gather that the art fair circuit (or craft fair,I'm not sure which) was an important source of income. Don't think he's doing it any more, though.

Yesterday I went to the Art League to receive an "honorable mention" award for "OZ #3". The winner was a labeled as a digital photograph - an abstract that bore no resemblance to anything in my visual experience. Most of the other photographs accepted into the show were labeled as "digital" - some clearly altered, others unknown.

 

Although these works are selected by credentialed people from the DC museum, gallery, and academic institutions, it's not clear from their rather brief generic statements what they truly value, and perhaps more importantly, what they expect people to do with the work they selected for each show. The less adventurous stuff tends to sell better, even though people are very complimentary about works that they seemingly don't have the courage to buy. I'm beginning to get the idea that since people have more shelf space than wall space, books might be a better way to get your "vision" out there. I'm almost at the point where I consider "I would put that on my wall" as an insult, and am trying to be more adventurous in curating my own limited wall space.

 

I attended a "business of art" seminar a while back that warned us against craft fairs. Art fairs are supposedly the "proper" way to sell your art, but I wonder which venue makes more of a profit for the photographer? (not that you necessarily have a choice about which venue will accept you. You probably don't.)

Do a book, Dennis. You get to decide the ratio of text to photographs, but not whether or not to do this.

 

I never lived anywhere longer than four years at a time until I was an adult. We did live in a house that had a porch on three sides, and my grandfather took a photograph of it when we first bought it in 1953. I've driven by a few times since then, since it's only a twenty minute drive, but it just now occurs to me that his shot shows off the house quite well because it's winter and the leaves on the huge oaks don't obscure the view. Maybe I'll drop by sometime in December and bring my camera.

 

The other local house I lived in (during high school) was sold two years ago, demolished except for the brick front facade, and rebuilt, doubling the size and no doubt the price. I ignored "no trespassing" signs a few times to document that transformation from as many angles as I could think of.

I see you're back . . .and rebranding yourself in B&W. I like the color version of this a lot, but I'm sure you have your reasons.

Well, it looks like I have egg on my face.

 

At least we got a meaningful discussion going. You can imagine how I feel about all those Flaming Pear plug-in shots right about now.

 

. . . and I have taken water reflection shots early in the morning before the wind picks up. The wind wasn't the issue. It's about a straight shore line, and having a shooting line that's perpendicular to the horizon and some distance away from the scene. If we have a place like that anywhere near where I live, I haven't seen it.

Aaron, I think the ripples are part of the software plug-in designed just for this purpose. I don't see any elements that aren't repeated precisely across the line of symmetry. It's as if the scene has no depth at all, which it obviously does.

Have we really lost the ability to read a photograph and distinguish a true capture of a natural scene from a fake flipped reflection? Are we only able to attract "critics" who like this because they've never seen, let alone shot, anything like this before?

 

Horizons aren't that straight. Reflections aren't that symmetrical.

Dennis, your humor always comes through. Definitely a keeper.

 

I'm guessing it's installed at an angle that prevents traffic approaching from the right from getting a good look. Too bad for them.

. . . an extension of some wall art on a restaurant underneath the

Whitehurst Freeway, Georgetown, Washington, DC

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6257316

 

I uploaded this a second time with a provocative title to generate another kind of discussion and would be interested in knowing what you both think.