kelly_perl

Tom--Congratulations on POW. I like this just the way it is and the title adds to it. I believe if the blue cast is what you see, the blue cast is what you should get even if it's not aesthetic. If not, well, you have some decisions to make.

 

My original take on this when it came through rotation is that you had penguins being amusing and gasp, a tad graceful. That's the story. What more tale can a penguin tell?

 

Perhaps if these flightless birds had skin cancer from the springtime ozone hole or had dropped dead we'd have an "Antarctica is dying" story. But not yet.

Good idea, beautiful sunset colors, I love power plants. Straighten it out; the smokestacks are crooked. Also, the rhs has some dead space and may be best cropped out.

As I'm not a member of Congress or a member of law enforcement, I cannot in reality deny or abridge anybody's free speech.

 

I was being sarcastic in my first post and perhaps poorly understoo. I'm not for the flag amendment. Thus my second post lays out my point. Use your national symbols with care, because they can be desecrated.

 

Everybody says to me "freedom of speech" and if you read both my posts you can see I respect freedom of speech. Moreover, I have not gone down to shut down Jenn's studio, nor have I advocated shutting her down. I have said under what circumstances I would respect desecration of national symbols--and those conditions do exist. But I will not say what Jenn is doing is not a desecration of the flag, or if you prefer, a disrespectful action toward the flag.

 

As I am the only one on this thread who advocates these views, it somehow is OK to excoriate my views, and me, in the name of freedom of speech or perhaps just for fun. Let me remind you that I also have just as much freedom of speech as you folks do. I'm not stopping Jenn or y'all. I'm exercising my freedom of speech, disagreeing strongly as to what Jenn is doing with the flag. If you object to my tone, allright, we can talk, but all I've seen are content objections so far.

 

I'd love to talk more, but I'm late for goosestepping practice.

Nice panning; I think the photo would look better if you straightened it out. Even if this is going downhill, it doesn't *look* downhill.

And I don't think I've ever been as proud to be a fascist.

 

 

 

 

This is my favorite of this folder. At first it looks like the proverbial cheap zoom trick but you see very soon that isn't the case.

 

What makes the shot for me: a) the colors; b) the contrast between moving foreground and still background.

I found good link about flag respect. It's part of Federal law. You can find it in U.S.C. 36 Section 176. This links to the respect/disrespect, but the entire code is worth a once over. The main site is usflag.org.

Flag respect is not a matter of what "I feel." It's not a matter of being a fascist. It's laid out in the code.

Anyone who makes an artistic statement better be damn sure they know exactly what they're saying, especially when it comes to national and religious symbols. What if our model were wrapped in a China flag with a Taiwan flag lining? What if she used a Communion chalice, nude, to shower herself with holy water, showing she was cleansed of sin? Wrapped her head in a Torah scroll to show enlightenment? Place Korans over her breasts and genitalia to illustrate modesty?

All these are extraordinarily provacative statements, of course, and involve desecration of national or religious symbols and objects. The photographer of the China/Taiwan shot is making a very powerful statement about China/Taiwan relations. I would support such an artistic statement only if I'm convinced the photographer knows what they're doing and cannot make their statement any other way. As for the religious statements, I'd add the condition that the person have an intimate connection to the religion, e.g. a member. I understand such statements should only be made a few times at most in an artist's lifetime, and quite possibly never.

Jenn, your photo doesn't make my national symbol test. You haven't convinced me you can't make your point any other way. It's also sad that you didn't even think that it might not be kosher to use the flag like this before you did your shoot.

Bottom line: we should all know what we're doing in our photography. There's never any excuse for carelessness or sloppiness, especially in the use of national symbols.

It's shots such as this that me think an anti-flag burning/desecration amendment might not be such a bad idea after all. That's what the low originality score is all about.

 

Which is too bad because this is a really well set up and executed shot. Composition is there, your model can pose very well, you do wonders with skintone.

This might work better if you cropped the model's head out altogether--or cropping at the chin.

Nice, if a little cramped composition. If you cropped the top, uncrop it a little. Good 90 degree lighting. Otherwise, you need a faster shutter speed. Background . . . eehh

composition is good, but the photo is too black balanced for it to be a big success.

David--First, let me commend you for such a good hand held long exposure. As most of my photography has been grab and shoot I'm right in your camp.

 

This is a nice shot. To make it better, you have to concentrate more attention on the immobile guy in the foreground for he is crucial to the story. Getting as many moving folks as you can helps too. Try cropping the extreme rhs just a little; it's dead space. You don't want things to breathe. Try a crop to the "T" on the LIRR "Tracks" sign. Best, Kelly

 

P.S. Santa is classic!

I love the composition and light. The obvious movement blur could be OK, but for it to truly succeed I think a broader gesture is required, say just when he begins to really blow. That just might make it a wallhanger.

you're instincts are right: this would be a so-so shot without the guitarist. See how it looks with the columns on the extreme rhs cropped out. I think you need more asymmetry in the composition.

Tris--the Paintshop sky doesn't work for me; looks like post tornado rather than post nuclear. The vans parked out front and the Muni wires do work. (BTW, most of that electricity for the Muni buses used to come from hydro up in the Hetch-Hetchy)

 

Composition is fine.

 

All in all, I'd prefer a straight or more subtle production.

rule of thirds parrot is cackling, but I think the composition is about right. You might want to crop out some of the dead space on the lhs or rhs.

 

Nice job.

Beautiful!

 

Crucial to the shot is not only the red leaf, but also your shallow DOF. Not your father's winter ice shot to be sure.

James--The "symmetry" is fine. You avoid a static image because YOU are off to the side in the shot and the difference in clothing in the two women. Blurriness doesn't work so well, though if you kept it in the faces I think it would work.

As documentary, good photo. The red color is just right. It's the right color too ;-). It took me back to those days when I hung out on Sproul Plaza 20 years ago and joined the occasional protest.

Yee Jian Song wrote:

Berkeley is not a gathering of radical lunatics. We do not disagree for the sake of disagreeing. While others may consider us to be radical, I feel proud that any discussion in Berkeley, however radical, is always backed by reason, by conviction . . .

Surely you jest.

While Berkeley may have been on the side of the angels in the Free Speech Movement of the early 1960s, it very early degenerated into political theatre. Political theatre so rigid, in fact, it makes Kabuki look like improv. Most people can't understand it, either. People do disagree for that sake of disagreeing, in the 1960s, 1980s, and now. People do elevate petty spats to the greateast national importance. Everybody pushes their own agenda on every cause, appropirate or not.

The Sparticists hate the Maoists . . .

That students should come to the defense of a government that would summarily dismiss 54% of the Cal student body should the Taliban wrest hold of the government of University of California is a black mark on these protestors and those who support them. The protestors would have to eliminate that URL on the bottom because the Taliban also banned the Internet.

Hint: An act of war was committed 9/11. Appropriate responses to acts of war include bombing. A non-violent solution was not appropriate.

If anybody goes Ghandi on me, just remember what he said and did throughout his life applied to colonial and civil disputes; that is, internecine dispites, not international disputes.

Actions I'd like to see Cal students take up:

Committee In Solidarity with the People Outraged by Daniel Pearl's Murder. (CISPODPM)

People for the Solution of Hindu-Muslim Subcontinental Conflict (PeSH-MSC)

Oh yeah, but those require real solutions.

Scott--I love this picture; it's among my favorites in this folder. Shooting it B&W was a nice touch and what makes the shot. The diagonal "cascading" from the upper left hand corner gives the shot dynamism. The elves should have picked this as POW. Best, KEP

James--

 

I really like this and admire your courage in posting bondage pix despite a number of "uh . . . it's not my cup of tea" comments and worse.

 

 

This is just about my favorite in this folder. The lips and the DOF trick make the shot; the rope bondage is softer. I've done the DOF trick inadvertently on my Coolpix 885 a few times but hadn't considered it a trick yet.

 

I'd like to see two things--some more light in the shadows and more emotional involvement. You look a little detached. I'd like to see more emotional involvement, whether on a partcipatory or aesthetic level. Maybe some domme pix will work? Best, Kelly

Daniel--

Actually, the world really does need pix of the Petronas Towers, if only to show the world Petronas is more than the sponsor of a midpack F1 team.

You have a nice shot, and the best night shot I've seen of the towers, but you haven't caught the essence. Nobody has. Go to this link to see what I mean. I hope you shot bricks of film.

Another observation: the towers themselves are lovely, but the park it's set in is ugly. It doesn't look as if these guys can't build a skyline. Is this actually true, or do they just not have anyone to capture it properly?

An historic note: "Infidel" architectural firm Cesar Pelli & Assoc designed Petronas on an 8-pointed star motif, a classic Islamic design. Cesar Pelli & Assoc. also designed the plug ugly World Financial Center complex in NYC, perhaps as a rough draft. Kudos to the WFC structural strength, though: the buildings withstood the WTC collapse next door and most of their windows were unbroken.

Hope it was a productive & good trip.

Ken--a kid photo that is good; emotion without being sentimental. You've got it right on composition and lighting, too. To amplify what one of the commentors said, I say hire a bunch of kids and go through all the corporate motivational slogans.

such color, such detail--a great shot!

Fabulous--and rather unexpected--chiaroscuro