aplumpton

With more than 840 photos uploaded since his joining Photo.Net less than a month ago, the elves might have worked a little harder to find a less cliched shot. The particularly dark grey sky, notwithstanding any reality, is depressing. Giangiorgio may not have had any intent on an artful image, but he probably has more stimulating photos in his portfolio that might have been chosen instead.

Yes, the POW is of interest and not so usual for its placement of the subject with low angle of view and to the left and with the positions of arm and hand in the overall image, whatever rules of composition are invoked. I see little of the well known rules (golden, thirds, etc.) but I am brought back to the question of what does it communicate? Perhaps one needs to know more about the subject. Maurizio is very good at B&W photography is evident in his nude studies and in what I think is a more successful portrait. This image,

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6877100

is for me what he means about human beauty. The young girl is framed really well in the vertical format and her expression seems to be highly natural and unforced. My impression in looking at her is that her beauty goes much beyond that physically apparent. Og course, the simplicity of the pose leaves less work on the part of the viewer and easier to interpret than that of Nicole. Just saying that the POW is a symbol of naturalness or beauty is not enough I think.

Anders, I admit difficulty reading through your Valéry reference related in part to the work of Leonardo da Vinci, not so much because of the fact it is in French, but more so because it is assumes much specialist familarity with the theoretical subject of discussion. However, apart from the familiar aspect to many photographers of desiring to produce a work of art as being more than what it appears to be, as stated by Valéry, the following declaration of his is I think equally important to this discussion, and to the scientific basis Maurizio mentions as being important to the artist-inventor:

"Men of science calculate and measure within the sector of their comprehension, whereas artists proceed in a much freer manner, but as if they had already measured that which they have created" (freely translated from "Les hommes de science calculent et mesurent en faisant usage des catégories de l’entende­ment, alors que les artistes procèdent de façon plus libre, comme s’ils avaient mesuré").

In other words, attempting to create art by golden rules or other mathematical concepts appears to be more in the approach of the scientist than the artist. Maurizio seems to have both experiences, so a reliance on science to express creative qualities is probably natural to him. But where does that leave the artist's approach to this POW?

The artist in Maurizio may well act more spontaneously than his discussion seems to indicate, but that is just my assumption. In my own case I have made some images (unfortunately one I have in mind is not in my portfolio) that when examined or appreciated by breaking down their composite sections show a very close relation to the golden rule. I found that a bit shocking. The past is the past (1990s) and a bit hidden, but I will try to find one or two such images that have exhibited that and post one at some point. It educated me on how my (or one's) mind works in photography.

I believe that we have these building blocks of beauty, order and disorder in our minds and they may come into play more or less unconsciously as we compose our images, and depending upon how we feel or think at the moment of image capture. Referring to the photo of Nicole, I think that Maurizio may well have composed it (or reacted to its evolving compositional change with time) in a fairly spontaneous manner. Those who admire it beyond its technical qualities may be responding to what they effectively see in it (that what may not show at first glance and may not appear later to others less impressed) and that may or may not be related to Maurizio's intention. Mathematical or other constructs of beauty or order may well be less important than the mood of the subject, her hand-face gesture or Maurizio's feeling upon perceiving the photo. Things like the golden rule and other known patterns are probably not what relate to this image.

Robin, this is a very fine composition and subject matter. There may not be much relation between the obelisk and the well developed tree, but when the image is opened up to its larger size the viewer is absorbed by the texture of each, the fine B&W tonality and the good sky (did you use a yellow or orange filter here or is that a function post production?). Perhaps the small lamp-post might have been better separated slightly from the needle, but that is just a minor point. Nice work.

The important discovery of the action of mirror neurons in monkeys about 20 years ago by the University of Parma research team is one of many new things I have learned in this POW discussion, in this case from Dr. Maurizio. Apparently mirror neurons, alone or in combination with other mind processes, enable us to understand other people's actions in terms of our own movements and goals – and to empathize with them. Just imagine if human intent and behaviour can have similar responses in the minds of others, then perhaps, as V. Gallese says, "we can grasp the meaning of other's behaviour from within" and then I think interact in a mutually rewarding manner. Taking as example Maurizio's photo of Nicole and the question of empathy or understanding, when a critique is offered it may or may not trigger a mind response that is similar to that of the proposers. Perhaps if that view is not even shared there may be a mind process that allows us to understand the opposing view and to assimilate it, with the advantage of added value to us. What is clear I think is that even the most subjective and unusual critique is important to consider and perhaps it may be some part of an overall more objective view. If someone agrees fully with my critique or applauds without apparent limit one of my photos I will just think OK, that is nice, but I really would like to hear a contrary argument, as only that will prompt me to think about what I have said or created and tell me something I might want (and need) to know. Shakespeare, Warren and Maurizio give us a final insight, even if we have thought this before in somewhat different way: The purpose of art is to give life a shape - and also to that of our dreams.

Maurizio. Thanks for your comments and kudos also for your touching season greetings photo of mother, father and baby, seen on some member photo critiques. Ciao!

The second to last discussion of viewer with artist points out the importance of the artist in accepting critique and replying in a positive way by counter argument based on elements of an image. Jorg V in a prior discussion showed that type of openness and willingness to discuss. English is probably not Maurizio's first language so going into details of the artistic intent may be not so easy for him. Appreciation of art is very subjective and while I see the strong points in Maurizio's image mainly based on its technical rendition (tone and luminance, play of dark and light areas) I have yet to see the type of positive compositional or emotional attributes as Anders H. mentions in his three circles analysis. The Gehry quotation mentioned by David T. is good for some who like Safdie or Foster, have already made their indelible mark on art through their architecture. "What I like" is already known to others. Maurizio no doubt knows the personality of Nicole better than the viewer and his desire to capture that expression is no doubt meaningful, but does that communicate as successfully to others?

Paul,

Just found this one. The house is not scary at all, just abandoned for some time with the eventual lack of maintenance and overgrown shrubs. The cedar shingles (or whatever) are still fairly consistent. The cloud patterns and the backlighting are good, the latter especially on the gate, but I think in your desire to increase the drama with contrast you have introduced in PS artefact lines between the roof and sky that spoils it for me. 

Jorg, thank you for your comment. I do not shoot portraits very often and this was a fortunate capture.

The original is from a 6x7 cm Konica 750nm infrared film negative that I printed fairly soft in the darkroom, then photographed the print with my digital camera and reduced the contrast and opened up the shadows a bit in Photoshop Elements 9, including those of her eyes that had been printed too dark in the original print.

The infrared effect on the vegetation is I guess what gives it a dreamy ambiance, coupled with the little girl's expression (she had ignored the presence of the photographer and was in her own world). The picture fits into the theme of an exhibition I am working on for the summer and I will probably either print the digital file or dedust my not often used darkroom and make a new print. 

Technically, I think this is a competent shot, perhaps needing only a bit more opening up of shadows in the hair region and perhaps a less obfuscated view of, and more expression in, her right eye. But I have difficulty in seeing much beyond the fine technical quality. The attractive girl has struck a personal pose of her own, perhaps, but not one that does much to communicate anything very revealing and it appears awkward despite her apparent position of contemplation. Portraits and figure studies are not easy stuff to pull off, even with help in this case of the tattoo message. It would be interesting to see her in a pose that better shows strength or a scenario demanding it, if the intent of staying strong is in fact that desired by the photographer and model. The idea of the photographer is good, I simply think in this case that it creates a few more questions than it gives answers.

The lyrical or romantic view of nature is perhaps hard to do with straight photography without post exposure. Or is it, maybe that might be a good subject for a future discussion? Looking at some of the paintings of Barbizon, like T. Rousseau's 1850 Barbizon landscape with its yellow-orange tones, or Daubigny's Rising Moon, brings Robin Smith's point really home. Inspired by John Constable, the later movement at Barbizon took the close to nature and evocative Constable approach (realism without formalism which Corot put into a French context) and applied it with more subjective freely perceived warm colors that perhaps J.M.W. Turner had initially shown fellow artists decades earlier. Jorg's photo has a color palette that is similar to some of those images.

It is said that we are always comparing new experiences to the bank of images or knowledge we carry in our minds. So probably are many artists and photographers. There is a warehouse of already seen images that I am inspired by and wish in some cases to produce in part in my own way. Whether, or how, this influenced Jorg in his Photoshop creation I don't know, but such influences can be good as Robin mentions. And quite naturally, the results can be appreciated in very different ways by us. There is no right way, except that of the particular viewer.

I have to go to the dentist this month, but unlike Endof's possibility, she already has her own large painting on the wall. Distracting, but not quite as peaceful.

If you open up the shadows a bit more and apply white balance to the clouds to reduce saturation of your recent experiment, the result is as follows. A question of subjective appreciation, perhaps, but I think that the result shows the marked difference between the healthy trees and those that seem to have been attacked (as the leafless branches seem to show).

This may not be your aim of an experiment to produce another image from the original photo. Your experiment yields a more mysterious or brooding atmosphere than that below. Perhaps Fred's point regarding absence of drama or impact in the original is maintained in these modifications. We all see different things or place different values on acknowledged points of interest in an image. My own approach is one to prefer fairly minimalist compositions, which I guess is one reason I find very appealing the uniform simplicity of your POW image.

Sounds quite interesting Jorg, but the image does not show up on my screen.

Cropping out some of the right side does remove some visual interest but that I think is more than aptly compensated for by the added impact of the more central composition. I initially took the sky for granted but if it was to disappear and replaced by foliage (or more dramatic sky) one of the losses would likely be the uniform reflection below the duck (or whatever bird) and a loss of that point of interest. Also, a sky with individual clouds would I think obfuscate that and also detract from the simple but effective composition as it is. Just my personal feeling about the result (and these specific points are unchanged in viewing the more "painterly" final representation). Now I have to try and understand Jorg's life-depth relationship, which I thought was just a typo for life-death (the trees on the right appear to have died, just like my dead orangey colored branches of one of my cedars at home, while those of the left look like newly formed branches and this facet of the original image might also be accentuated in post process).

And thank you Jorg for providing your initial image capture and discussing your work. A number of former POWs have received much less discussion from their authors.

Fred, my apologies if I misinterpreted your critique (I remembered your former remarks regarding central compositions), but antagonism (your word!) is far from the intent and I don't know how you could possibly think that. Beyond me. I was the one I think who began a constructive discussion of Jorg's photo (other than earlier very positive acclamations) and if you carefully read my remarks to Jorg and those in regard to your comments you will note I think that the objective is clearly one of discussing various aspects of photography and art and as politely and civily as possible and certainly not what you may think is some form of antagonism. I don't think we can go very far in constructive discussion if you use that type of language in friendly discussion. Best wishes for 2016.

Jorg, interesting articles on the Golden rule and the two thirds rule for art composition. You are right that their use is best instinctive and not one of calculation or apps. If I am not misinterpreting Fred in his reference to the central focal point, that different form of central composition or even square framing is something that some viewers like and others less so.

Rudolf Arnheim, a former professor of the psychology of art (Harvard, Univ. of Michigan) has analyzed centrally directed compositions in his text "The Power of the Center" over many centuries of art and shows the impact that some such images deliver. Perhaps Fred's lack of attachment to the final photo is mostly based upon this central composition, his opinion of such and the perceived impact, rather than on the post processing.

I agree that painter like photographs are not always successful but while I agree with Fred in that regard I feel that this one is appealing, even if the tonal variations in the original have been overlain with the orange alteration. The original and final products are very different. I would be interested to see what Jorg might do with the left side to right side "live" versus "dead" tree contrast he mentions, using more limited post production alteration to enhance those aspects, while not forgetting the representation of life and peace of the loon or other bird (very small but immediately noticed, which is a plus in this composition) in its center. The simpler final product, and for sure my otherwise somewhat dramatic IR conversion, do not show that contrast in my opinion, but the original image might be interesting for Jorg as a basis for a different image that retains and amplifies other aspects of the original.

Jorg, I hope you don't mind if play with your original photo to see whether an extreme B&W representation provides drama in another way. Here is a simple B&W conversion with heavy pedal on the IR effect slider. Exploration only, and in no way intended to question your very fine P of W image. Cheers.

Thank you Jorg. I can see the value added in your post exposure treatment. The original image is a nice largely centered composition but the overcast sky and the mass of evenly lit trees provide some feeling of mood but work somewhat in limiting drama. Thanks to your Photoshop creation, your original photo gains appreciably in that sense, in my opinion. Happy new photographic quests in 2016!

A pleasing image and one no doubt based on a thoughtful perception of the subject matter. The subjective rendition will no doubt please some more than others, but that is the nature of art and photography. Because that is so subjective, it is hard to critique the image. I like its gentle evocation of fantasy, but without reference to the initial photograph of the scene or other treatments of it I cannot provide any other constructive comment to the photographer.

If the two little ones had been facing the cameraI think it would have been too contrived as a result, but as it is it is a very original and important shot of a family. The pleasure of the older members are nicely supported by the concentration and efforts of the two smaller children on their jumps, adding a humorous element. Lucky "sitters" for this family portrait.

The difficult to see 6 characters in the back are really the picture. Their gross underexposure and stances in fact create the enigma and one can see opportunities in this sort of very low key imaging that elevates the photo above one where all the emphasis is directed to the boy. The photo without boy and the irritating table (or at least the foreground one) is interesting and if ever revisited (or a similar such scene) by the author might profit from a slight increased exposure. Low key images with dark areas of unknown is one future motivation and approach I take away from this viewing and for which I am grateful.

If you go to her site and see the original image blown up you can just manage to detect the presence of six faces of people active within the frame that otherwise appears as almost black. The fact that these characters are not easily discernible works against this photo being successful in my mind. The subject seems lost. The intent to keep the background a mystery is not questionable I think, it is a good aim if that was the intention. However, opening up the shadows a bit more without disclosing everything would I believe increase the impact considerably without removing the enigma concerning the boy's interest. I hope that the author has considered that variable.

I am left quite surprised at the fact that several critiques made before the image was chosen by the elves were all highly impressed by the photo. Friends? Others? (acknowledging of course that a fully objective view is impossible). Considering that the comments here of the POW are not at all similar to the first half dozen, one wonders if the elves felt that the prior appreciations were good enough reason for pulling it out as this week's POW? In any case, the very differing views are most interesting in themselves and "stir the pot" in a constructive way.

Very fine control of light, but you might have paid much more attention to the pose of your model, whose right shoulder and arm look very unrelaxed or unnatural(as if amputated). But continue with your lighting and colour balance which is very good!

I like photos exhibiting minimalism, but usually find that the most successful ones use assymetry or intriguing or unusual compositions and/or the use of positive and negative spaces in order to work. Here the subject is a bit minimal in content but it uses most of the frame and the main interest are the fine colors and tones as otherwise the centered and symmetric composition seems to me to be a bit bland and déjà vu.

Jack, thank you for your poetic interpretation. I am now seeing the herd and hearing their foot beats.. Perhaps I should in future come closer to the subject. The salt patterns in and about the concrete cracks can perhaps provide other compositions when seen closer than this (a section of a pier about 6 or 8 feet wide).