nicolerenee

We've finally got the internet hooked back up and what do I do? Gotta jump on

to PNET and see what's been cooking. Of course, my first few shots get clunked

with a couple of 4/4's within minutes :)

 

Ah, yes, welcome back. It wouldnt be the same without them!

John:

 

Im not leaving forever but I do have to get rid of my internet for a while so I'll have check in periodically when I get the chance, heavens knows when that will be. So dont dispair! I shall return...

 

Micki:

 

You are completely crazy and I have trouble following just ONE line of your thought process let alone fifty or so but I absolutely ADORE you and all of your quirkyness and great big heart :)

 

Gordon:

 

I'm glad you seem to be enjoying life all on your own.

 

Everyone else:

 

Great thread, keep those enormous brains pumping but dont bust a spring!

Thanks everyone, hopefully the absense wont be for too long :)

Recocile our place and absurd nonsense? Gordon, what freedom is there in the idea that we are some cosmic accident with no purpose and when we die that is the end of us? Sure, science and mathematics are logical, at least mathematics is...science seems to be becoming less so, but they cant give answers for the most important questions in life. They werent meant to. If thats all there is, where in the world do you get the concience? It cannot be explained away. Oh there is so much MORE than that.

Gordon, celebration for not having a soul? The idea saddens me. The fact that two humans procreate and create an individual (if no soul is involved) isnt miraculous its mathematics. Apparently there are so many hundreds of bazillions of combinations that there may be no two alike in human history. Just as no two snowflakes are alike. Not a cause for celebration as far as I'm concerned.

 

Fred, it has deffinately been a crux for nearly all great thinkers. I think it's really fairly simple if you look at it from a common sense standpoint. Not that I've got a bigger brain than the thinkers do ;)

Would love to talk to you about it sometime.

It certainly seems viable on its surface and has quite a bit evidence that seems to back it up as well. What I would as is this; what is it inside of someone that determines how they handle the consequences life throws at them? How does a young child who has seen his mother beaten, himself and his siblings abused, grow to love? Even to find work at an early age and adopt his siblings to become like the father he never had? How do people in war torn countries who have seen unimaginable injustice and violence continue to hope for peace and justice and safety? There is something more at work inside a human being than just a reaction to circumstance. Something outside of logic and philosophy. Something that determines right and wrong, good and evil, hope and desperation. Something more than mere survival instict, herd instinct, or society. If not, there is no hope and no point in trying to make a better world.

Fred, if all that I am is just a result of what happened to me then I'm not really much of anything. I become a consequence. There is no value to me if I am nothing more than a result.

 

As far as the woman goes, I meant to introduce the question of where the line of responsibility is drawn. When do I stop being responsible for the reprocussions of what I "create?" Do I? Is there a line at all?

Pete,

 

I think you have a valid point which raises another question. Does a woman stop wearing revealing clothing because it causes a married man to lust after her? Is she responsible for his perversions, thoughts or actions? Where does the responsibility lie? (just an example)

 

Also, is it possible that photographs in general and not JUST nude ones, whether of children or not, can result in people feeling exploited at a vulnerable time? Will the family of a dead girl feel exploited that the newspaper printed photographs of her body and the grieving mother just to sell more news papers?

Fred,

I agree absolutley that our circumstances and experiences influence and inform our beliefs. But isnt there something behind that that moves us in one way or another? What I mean by that is, say there are two women. Same creed, color, background, family circumstances, sexual preferance, life experiences etc... yet one finds the courage to climb out of the mire and become a sucessfull *whatever* and the other becomes a depressed, alchoholic divorcee who neglects her children.

 

Isnt there something inside us that decides how we deal with those circumstances and what we believe about them? Something that isnt based on where we were born or what cultural preferances we were raised with? Something that is mine and mine alone, no matter how many similarities I share with anyone else? I think there is.

 

I am more than the sum of all my parts.

Point taken :)

Zoe:

 

I agree with you about O'Keefe.

I've just read through this entire thread...whew, Im tired.

 

Firstly, I find the human body (in all its glory) appealing whether its male or female. In fact, I am more appreciative of the female body in general. I find the curves and hollows, the fine textures and lines of a womans body more appealing to draw, to consider, and even to look at in a nude photograph in most cases. However, I do not find myself sexually attracted to the female figure. I must admit that a nude photo must be very well taken and celebrate its subject for me to enjoy it on any level. A good one to note is Fred's recent submission of an older gentlemen nude. He isnt a macho man buffed up and lit to dispaly all his muscle-bound glory, but there is no denying his inherant manhood and there is a tenderness about the photo that draws the viewer into it with a kind of vulnerability. Nudity can serve as a vessel to enhance the mood or intent of the photographer. A photo of an older lady (or gentlemen), with all her physical *imperfections*, can be just as beautiful in its way as a perfectly primed and in the bloom of youth hard bodied model.

 

We cannot control what viewers choose to do with a nude photo, but I think it is our responsibility to take the photo in such a way that it illicits the response we intend (if that makes any sense)

 

I also had a look at the link for Sturges images and find it important to note for those who didnt read it, that this man photographed in comunities where nudity is considered the *norm*

Aside from that, the photographs I looked at seemed to run the gamut. There were very tender shots of families, innocent ones, statuesque nudes on beaches, and even (lets face it and not try to call it something its not) sensual shots of young ladies facing puberty. While the photos are stunning, the only ones that may have affected my ingrained puritanical sensibilities are the ones of the pre-pubescent girls and boys. (Many less boys than girls on that site and all in the background from what I noticed)

 

Now, do I let culturally ingrained sensibilites rule my decisions about those particular photos? No. I consider the setting (the community *norm*) and also the feeling of the photo. There were no, what I would call, pornographic, shots but there were certainly ones taken in a way that called attention to the fact that these young ladies were headed to the begining of their sexual awakening. I dont believe they were handled in a crass or degrading way but more to draw attention to the beauty of a body and soul that was begining a transformation into womanhood. Something like a budding flower. Would some use them for less than honorable purposes? Im sure they would. But that is an issue with the individual and not the photograph.

 

As far as signifiers are concerned, is it possible to know someone merely by their conversation and conveyed beliefs and appreciate their character without knowing any of their physical qualities or history? Isnt there something *quintessential* that has nothing to do with hair, eyes, or sexual preference? I believe its called the soul?

Unfortunately, I will be saying goodbye for a while. I dont know how long it

will be before I can update all those people who've been kind enough to take

an interest and help me learn more about this great craft and visit and chat

and teach and critique, but someday I WILL return :)

Our internet will be down, maybe for months, maybe not, but I'm hoping to stop

in every now and then when its possible.

For all those people who've helped with opinions and ideas and experience,

THANK YOU. And for those who've gotten used to me popping in and leaving my

own two cents, I havent forgotten about you.

 

thanks....

Thanks John :)

John...actually its a sand shrimp...a favorite snack for sturgeon (big nasty dinosaur looking fish)

 

And thank you :)

 

As for the subject, I'm in general agreement Arthur. At the same time, I think its also something that escapes us and isn't completely controllable.

My gallery represents little pieces of me. Even all mushed together they wouldn't be a completely accurate representation. Deffinatly a good hint, though.

Pete...less to do with quality and more with advertising.

You guys make my head hurt...I'm glad my brain isnt as big as yours. If anyone needs an asprin, just let me know ;)

Thanks to everyone for responding :)

 

Robert: Thanks for pointing to the site, I havent got the chance to go yet but I'm looking forward to what I can learn there. Part of my problem is my camera isnt equipped for a tripod :( Everything I shoot is "from the hip" and getting multiple exposures I can blend is kind of hard.

 

James: Thanks for the suggestions and advice. Film is a longer ways off for me right now that a new DSLR, but that I will keep in mind.

 

Mike: Thanks :)

 

Albert: I am deffinately trying! Hopefully there is visible development :) Strange that they seemed underexposed to you. Its really the hilights that are the problem. I've used the camera shading trick as well and I was actually wearing a baseball cap that day! I also used several different settings to try and get the right ammount light but I guess I just didnt end up with things the way I wanted them.

Since I've learned the manual settings on my camera, I havent used the auto and almost never use the flash since it seems to blow everything and not just the hilights. I have a range of about 12 in the EV mode of the menu to change how much light is coming in but it still wasnt enough to get that range. I've played with some of the photos in my software so far but my favorite shot (loved the comp) looks like its just too blown for my program to recover.

 

Is there any cheaper software than Adobe that has the capablilites to regain the detail and change the exposure? Right now I've got PhotoPlus 9.0...it was only 30 bucks :)

Thanks Edward, that was some good input! I suppose that most of my problem is stemming then from the time of day and equipment. I have ONLY my little PS and a fairly cheap software. I deffinately cant afford photoshop yet and even the dslr I want is a ways off. I wish I could find a balance, since the dappled sunlight is so beautiful to see but it may just be my lot to wait for clouds until I have some better equipment. I guess since the park will be around for a while its not a total loss.

I had the chance to go on a hike recently with my Church family up in the

beautiful Gifford Pinchot State park in Washington. We hiked up the Lewis

river to gorgeous waterfalls and crystal clear pools. I was so exited to take

photos of the place and snapped about 275 shots, falling behind most of the

time.

When I got home, I was bummed out to learn that even though I changed the

light setting several times for most of the photos I took, I still ended up

with blown out hilights and zero detail in the shadows. I dont know if this is

a limitation of my camera (Sony Cybershot DSC-T33) OR my own incompitence or

if its just a problem with shooting in forrest areas during the bright light

of day.

 

I posted a couple of the photos asking for some advice and critiques but I

didnt recieve much help.

 

Is it impossible to get hilights that dont blind you AND detail in the shadows

during mid-day in forrest conditions? I didnt have the oppertunituy to shoot

during morning/evening and had to go with what I could get. Maybe I need

better post-processing software or are the little PS cameras just not capable

of that much range?

 

Anything helps here, I would love to be able to improve the shots that I've

got and get some better ones that would do the place justice next time.

Shay, the best answer I can give from experience here is this;

 

1. You cant make everybody happy all the time and NO system will suffice for everyone

 

2. If you take the trouble of asking a photographer you admire to have a look at some or all of your photos, I think you will be suprised by the response. I've had more than one respond with VERY helpfull advice that has improved my work 100 fold.

 

3. If you are interested in ratings, take less time to study the anonymous ratings and pay more attention to the direct ratings that leave you with a name so you can ask that person to explain their ratings. I've done this also with great results.

 

4. Remember that the people who work on this site have a lot on their plates and instead of just complaining, maybe some advice or solutions on how to fix the problem would help get things done faster. (this isnt to pick on you, everyone has to rant and rave every now and then, I've done it myself, but unless people can come up with some helpfull answers complaining doesnt fix anything)

 

As for me, I would prefer that ALL ratings were direct so we could follow up and dismiss the anonymous ratings alltogether. Of course, that leaves the problem of revenge ratings which helps to remind us that there is no easy, quick fix.

I can understand someone being confused about why another photographer would delete an image they had critiqued, especially if it was thoughtfull and fair, but it also has to be seen from the view of the person who took the photo.

 

Personally, I am a heartless culler. Every so often I go through my images and "cull the herd" and I would be lying if I said it wasnt sometimes painfull but if it doesnt stand the test of time I get rid of it. TO tell you the truth, I've cut images from my porfolio that had some very complimentary comments and high ratings as well but I just didnt feel the photos stood up against my other work.

 

I've visited portfolios where there are some 200+ photos and while its great they have such a plethora of work, I cant take the time to study the photos the way they deserve and give constructive comments or praise. I dont want the extra space taken up by something that doesnt work for me. I've never deleted a photo because of negative comments. But when it starts doing nothing more than taking up space and competing for attention with some of my better shots I get rid of it. Not to disrespect the people who left critiques for me, but to help me have a clearer view of what I've done and what stands the test of time, and what has worked for me.

Well that deffinately helps. I was hoping I hadnt set my hopes in the wrong place. I'd read the reviews of the camera and it sounded pretty good to me so...maybe that was more along the lines of his preferanes or his clients than actualy technical defects.