jun_ea

If it wasn't manipulated, the allegations would be rather unfair to the photographer.

I thought that this was a straight forward photo, but I'm seeing all these allegations that the photo was "manipulated". I can't tell. Could somebody confirm whether or not this is a manipulated photo?

I really like the subtlety (and simultaneous richness) of the color in this picture. I wonder how you got it to come this way. Congrats.

AMEN, Landrum! Thank you for saying all those things. Thank you for setting some of the record straight. Upon ignorance, denial, and deception, you've shone the light of truth.

 

Jeffrey, as I understand it, the numbers of death responsible by the US and Vietcong are reversed. Furthermore, in Cambodia, the CIA overthrew a moderate, well-educated, pro-independence monarch and replaced him with a corrupt military dictatorship. The Cambodian countryside was carpet bombed by Uncle Sam with more effective fire power than the two A-bombs dropped in Japan, causing massive death and destruction, a crippling of agriculture and the general economy, widespread famine, the displacement of several million people, and utter discontinent among the peasants who consequently came to see the KR as their more responsible countrymen, which gave the KR enough support to win the fight against the better armed US created military dictatorship.

 

Fast forward five years, the KR has become responsible for the deaths of several hundred thousand Cambodians (not millions). The communist Vietnamese government influenced by exiled factions of the KR invades Cambodia, drives the bad KRs into hiding, effectively liberating the starving Camodians, establishes order and a much more humane government. The US, in turn dismisses the new government, continues to recognize the KR as the official government of Cambodia (for rationalizations I cannot comprehend).

Roland,

 

You've chosen a great subject matter and a perspective not commonly taken when it comes to this war. The images easily compell one to despise such acts of violence. In a way, the subject speaks for itself.

I don't think the disagreement is not as simple as "digitalist" versus "traditionalist". I may accept both apples and oranges, but I'd like to know that an apple is an apple, and orange is an orange, so that oranges can be compared to oranges, and so complementarily.

 

What do you think of this? Joel-Peter Witkin's photographs are extraordinary not only be he dreamed up such magnificent and bizarre images, but he created the sets, found the props, went to the morgues to find the corpses, spent hours handling them, sought out and befriended the incredible people who graced his works, directed these people, and then took the picture. Somebody else could dream up equally bizarre and beautiful images, but this person's process entails acquiring stock images from others and cutting and pasting elements of those images together to realize his the initially imagined image. Do they deserve equal merit? Personally speaking, it doesn't seem that hard to dream up bizarre/surreal images.

 

And with all due respect, Beau, and I do mean that sincerely, even if Michaelangelo painted the models individually rather than collectively, he still "painted" them. He didn't just paste them up.

 

Somebody had pointed out earlier that separate images pasted together have a tendency to look surreal without any effort from the artist. I think that's good point.

 

As for the image, it's nice. It catchy. Maybe even "lovely". But some of the remarks left earlier like "spectacular", "7/7", "Too wonderful for words", "Perfect!" kinda weirds me out. I say, keep it real.

I'm going to abstain from commenting on this work for the time being. But I will applaud Rich for daring to stick his neck out to say something different (that's not to say that I agree with him). So many of the earlier comments gushed with sugary, over enthusiastic praises that seemed to lack grounding in honest, attentive, objective, and yes critical appreciation that makes a discussion meaningful. It was a bit oppressive.

Juan,

 

EXCELLENT work! It's a beautiful and striking image. The nature part of it is exceptional. The human part is a good idea, but might do well with a minor adjustment. As it is, the "pose" looks just a little too much like a pose. He is uncomfortable and not "one" with the surrounding. All of the circular shapes imply this oneness and harmony, but he is stiff and holding himself in that position with too much effort. I think you might get a more natural looking pose if he was to lie down but hold the same circular fetal shape. It seems that you will have future opportunities to experiment. Good luck and congratulation.

Congratulations! This is a very nice photo. Great idea. It delivers a clear sense of the ethereal and angelic and femine.

 

However, I am slightly puzzled by the choice of tonal difference between the left and right sides of the background. What effect was meant to be achieved?

 

I want to qualify before I say it that the following reflects only my own personal sensibility. I believe that having the right side of the background be darker takes away from the strength of the image. It think it would stronger and clearer if the two sides of the background didn't have this split of tonal difference. Additionally, I personally would prefer a more realist effect because it's "meatier", to use a very American expression, and delivers a denser emotional impact. But each person has her or his own individual preferences.

 

Congratulations on your fine photographs.

I meant "geometric predictability" and elegance. :)

Great photo, Beau. What appeals to me about it is the texture, form, and sense of movement. The squares of the blocks on the wall, the bb board, and the court floor have a geometric predictability about it, but the boys and their movements are unpredictable and exciting, especially the one in the foreground. With the grainy texture, this picture has most to do with form. I think if the baseball ball and bat and football were more apparent, it would be a different kind of a picture. A bit more literal, perhaps. I don't think it's necessary. You're thinking sports. I'm thinking urban and life in it.

 

Another person, commented on losing more foreground and getting more of the height of the wall. I wasn't sure I agreed when I first read it, but now I see that it would emphasize the boy in the foreground, which I think is the most interesting part of the picture (not the football} and the blocks on the wall which you made you take the picture in the first place.

You've been great in replying to forum questions, including mine, so I decided to checkout your page. I'm glad I did. Your work (is this your primary dedication?) is EXCELLENT. Glad to see another "street" photographer's work at PN. Images like this with its gritty poetics and balance of realism and mystery are what makes me take pictures too. Cheers.

The extra grains caused by poor scanning, imho (and I am humored by the ubiquity of this expression at P.net), does take away from the photo. It would be nice to see the actual print, as it is a lovely image. As commonly the case, however, I am more impressed by other photographs in the POW winner's portfolio than the actual POW selection. I personally prefer "one for me", "going home", "homebound", and "dawn", for example, to the POW. What I find to be most affective in these photographs is the uniqueness with which the photographer sees the things in this land which I assume is where he calls home. I say this because there is an abundance of photographs taken of India by people from elsewhere, and most often from the west. I find Ramaiah's photographs to be refreshing because there is something different about it. I don't know how to describe it really, except to say that I get the feeling that he seems familiar with the place and its culture, and that there's something of a deficiency of exaggeration that is pleasing. Perhaps, to relate all this to the whole debate about technical issues and approach the question of graininess, technical concerns are sometimes less important than things such as the uniqueness of the poetry contained in the image. I have seen images elsewhere that were technically flawless and very well composed and yet ultimately struck me as being hollow and some what generic, and thus of less value. I guess what I'm getting at is the visceral power of a photograph. I'm curious to know what others might have to say about this.

 

Congratulations on the POW. I enjoyed looking at your photographs.

Beautiful photo, Eirik. The light is truly what makes it unique. I, also, can imagine the how impressive it might be displayed in a large format.

The honorable and repectable thing to do was to raise questions with the artist and wait for a response. To call the artist a liar from the onset because you believed so strongly in what you think seems a bit inappropriate.

 

I want to congratulate Cuong Tran for the excellent photo, his very meaningful first return to his country of birth, and hope that the preceding inappropriate accusations haven't dampened the fun of winning POW.

Amazing. I enjoy wildlife photos, but they usually don't fill it to the rim for me in producing satisfaction. This one does so. The composition is classical/traditional, but the effect of it despite the "simplicity" is potent. The colors of the flowers and the amount of light on them is what makes this a magical image. So satisfying and simple. Is there a way that I can be an apprentice? I'm kidding and serious at the same time. I live in New York, but if there's a way I can learn from you I would certainly consider it seriously. And by the way, have you won a POM yet? Well, off to more photos. Thanks for this visual feast. I've not yet posted images on the site for lack of technical resource but might try to do in the future.

 

Juun Hwa Ea

Nice job here. I really like the arc in her back, the light reflecting off her skin, and that body (mmm). Her left arm in that position and cropped off like that I question. Does she have natural beautiful skin or was something put on to get that smooth glowing quality? Thanks.

I really like this one because of its surrealism and the beautiful gold tones. It looks like the man is in a cave and beneath a sky simultaneously. It also looks like a place unearthly. Where was it? And where was the light coming from?

I dig bold geometry. The so called "black spots" add to strength of the image because it is harsh like the many rectangles and triangles as well as the implied hard surface of the steel. Also, it does give a 3d effect, as someone said previously, which makes it unique. Oh, and also, it foreshadows that black hole further down the road.

Audrey. Your images from China in general seem to have a quality that insinuate to me ink brush paintings. I don't know if this was intentional or not, but it readily elicits an identification of each image to the place easily. Nice work.

Abosolutely disgusting! I can't even look at it. But intriguing.

Congratulations Lei! On this POW and for an powerful and inspiring portfolio. You have a lot of goodies in your basket! This photo isn't your strongest in my opinion, but it does have quite a personality and offers much for debate. In answer to the Elves question "...does it bother you and do you feel the image is broken in two parts, or do the action, the background and the format succeed in restoring some sort of unity?", my answer is yes to all parts of the question. The imperfect, off-beat and quirky qualities of the image speaks to the very nature of street performances. Street performances are frequently performances meant for a stage (equipped with curtains, good lighting, and a polite audience) but placed into an almost totally uncontrolled environment. The performance is taken out of its ideal context. In most cases the performers compete with the surrounding traffic of noisy vehicles and people running by and sometimes walking through the performance while carrying conversations at their normal voices. Most performers often compensate by exaggerating whatever they do. I agree with the observation that the white-shirted boy and the light panel are visually distracting. Without these two elements the image would probably be clearer, more harmonious, and more elegant, but these two elements also speak of the noise of the environment. The very theatrical and dramatic facial expressions and movements of the performers are contradicted by the nonchalance and obliviousness of the passing pedestrians. It's a messy situation. It's filled with noise, dichotomous actions, and visually disruptive but functionally necessary objects (i.e. the light panel). But isn't that what you'd find on most streets. Well this is street photography no? For these reasons, it would appear that this photo fulfills the theme very well. It would be nice to see the musicians eyes aimed directly at the singer though (i.e. without the distortion caused by image compression).

 

Again congratulations.

 

Juun Hwa Ea

I don't mind the criticism that was made, and don't believe it deserves to be trampled on. I do disagree with it though. A little closer and you might exclude the little boy on the left running away from this beautiful procession/recession of kids. The little boy and the bit of space to the left gives added visual dimension, makes it look all the more interesting. That works also as irony/humor in light of the main theme (i.e. nun and school children). It's a beautiful and rare picture. It does harken back to a time in the past almost in a haunting way. That nun especially.

 

Juun Hwa