jastrzebski

Is definitely pornography. Well done though. Not too obvious, yet just strong enough to attract desired attention. Even if not everyone admits to himself that this is pornography, somewhere deep inside he knows that it is. The girl's pose, face, her nudity - all that makes it pornography. And this is the major reason why it got so many comments in the first place. Some people who like to watch porno prefer to call it art this way they feel more noble. There is quite a lot of that on photo.net. Take a picture of a naked woman, put it on photo.net - and it ALMOST NEVER fails to produce a very successful photo ! What is the difference between an artistic nude and a pornography ? If you have some talent and take a nice picture of a naked woman it is a nude, if you happen to have less talent and it is just a naked women on the photo - do we have pornography then ? Or maby the artistic nude is just an aesthetically pleasing pornography and nothing more ? I think that is the case in vast majority of such cases here on photo.net. This photo, be the way, is good from aesthetical point of view, but the pornographic element inherent here, disqualifies it for me..

Thanks for your comment, by my intro remark I have meant something else: 1. that technicalities does not equal aesthetics 2. never heard of "Gothic people" - ancient drama of a tragic actor is the power behind my photographs. 3. The weakness of photography as a pictorial art lies in easiness to produce quasi aesthetic work.

And, Oh, yes, I would have forgotten .. Aesthetic is universal no matter what is or is not in the eye of the beholder. Marek

I have seen your work, thanks for 1/1 ...

This is what BW photography is all about (in master's hand of course).

This is a very pleasing work. Breaks the rules in excellent way. Is it digitally manipulated ?

As good as Mya, maybe better, a formist work. I envy you that one.

Perfect photograph. A master shot. For me the best in this folder. Yet I would like to see more light here, more contrast. Technicalities like scratches are unimportant. What lens did you use, standard 80mm or a 65mm one ?

There is a Breughel painting - people playing in winter - (you can see in Kunsthistoriches Museum in Vienna) that instantly came into my mind when I saw this photo. It is very picturesque. The shadows are essential in this composition. Make it alive, fill it with static action. Yet it was not obvious to me that they are form trees.

Only do not tell me that this photo is unsharp :-))

There are so many superbly sharp ones, technically so perfect... , so

many with beautiful mountains or autumn trees or ..., whatever,

repeating the banality, the kitschiness, Don't you think that this

is the weakness of the photography as an art ? Seen even in the most

perfect photos. The same motive or subject seen for 1000000-time. And

it is not the same as master painters painting a still life again and

again. It is not the same. The similarity of expression is much

bigger in photography. Personal influence much lower. I tried to

escape that. Or limit that. Even If I have failed, at least I have

tried.

Do not worry. Technicaly minded people are obsessed with sharpness. Oh, where is the golden age of softening duto filters ??! I often specially make photographs unsharp to limit detail distractions and augment composition and emotion inherent in the photo. It is a good shot, the bird remains are too central and too 'en face' for my taste, though. Or maybe if you crop it to a classic 6 x 6 square format it would be more powerfull.

Our cities after World War III, I imagine.

I like the way you composed it. Rocks fill the whole rectangular space - no sky - that makes it almost an abstract work.

but too narrative for me. For me a photograph is a composition made of formal elements - subject, topic, emotion can be those elements too, but story/narration destroys the balance of composition totaly and is against my idea of photographic work.

Hello,

 

do you like it ? do you hate it ?

It is great photo 6/6 from me. Since it is 'despair' I understand it had to be blue and low in high tones, yet I could not resist to change it slightly into less narrative but maybe more formal composition.

This photograph has it all: form, balance, color, orginality with the theme being only a pretext for that all. You are true master.

Somehow it revokes memory of early Greenaway's films

For me that is the best photo in you folder. Simple & balanced. The emptiness and infinity in the centre is forcing to regard the photo a whole. I should have rated it 7 for aesthetics, alas ! I have made my judgement too fast.

Perfectly vertical photographs you can see in an IKEA catalogue. The slight tilt here, accidental or not, better suits the decay of human condition that we see on this photo.

Hello !

One of the best photographs that I have seen lately. It is hard to comment on such a harsh beauty.

Ben's comment above is absolutely right. Yet it is a great photo. Somehow it's aesthetics brings into my mind pictures of pre-war pictorial masters from my country

Limted to 3 colors. This is what I like in a color photograph !

Big sky and yet paradoxically it seems well balanced. Congratulations.

.. a photograph from my old "Tragic actor" series. I hope somebody

will like its aesthetics.. ANY comments greatly appreciated.

Great natural composition but spoiled by the kitchy dog and much too much of contrast. I would love to make it my way, where is this door ? :-))Sorry for this half acid comment - it originates form my idealism, you are far better photographer than the others here that I do not care to comment on.