robert_jones8

Oh, I'm sorry. I meant "unsolicited feedback that actually improves the image." The comments and alternate versions I saw did not. Then, it just becomes one-upsmanship ("If *I* had done this photo, it would have looked like *this*.) Now, if we are talking about Bernini's improvement on the theme of "David" over Donatello's, that is one thing....

It looks best UNROTATED and UNCROPPED! Good Lawd almighty, what a bad taste in my mouth is left by unsolicited "improvements" upon the original. That's how Gus Van Sant ruined "Psycho."

 

Incidentally, I loved it, even when I thought from the thumbnail that it was corrugated pipe.

 

Ti salud!!!

Marc: You rule. This photo has all the technical aspects as pointed out by others, but most of all it's got STYLE! This hearkens back to when women were beautiful and feminine and elegant, not the slovenly underfed runway matchsticks they are today. I AM JEALOUS OF THIS PHOTO!

 

Cheers,

Robert

I've always found David Hockney's print somewhat put-offish, and distant. Too much technique and mosaic, not enough guts in the subject matter. Well, this conveys the visual message with fewer photographs. The borders are a nice touch, adding dimensionality. Plus, the b/w is a welcome change to this particular method.

THIS ought to be photo of the week. "Heroes," I hope you read me Lima Charlie on that one. God Bless America.

Finally, someone on photo.net who TRULY understands composition, motion and dimensionality in a photograph, rather than just giving us the same glossy rehash of the National Geographic and Magnum stuff that's being touted as great. Si, this photo reminds me so much of Charles Scheeler, yet it's 100% you (whoever you are). Damn, this is great! I think it's the first 10/10 I've ever had the privelege to view.

 

BTW: What does it mean? Who cares?! The meaning is the image ITSELF.

So much better than the current "photo of the week," but, then again, that requires breaking with the conventional frame of mind on photo.net, in which the "oooh, aaahhh" slick colour photograph is to be preferred over the quiet, charming and poetic photograph that needs not scream "look at me!"

Hey, you can't do that! When you have non-white people in a picture, their facial expression is supposed to be either haunting, malnourished, bereft or profound. Anything but smiling! That's not politically correct, and also not artistically correct, because if your subjects are smiling, it's not art! (LOL) Personally, though, I love this picture. What joie de vivre! Cheers, Robert

PROOF that a photographer can be inventive and make a great image without the aid of digital trickery. Danke vielmals!

I can almost see Kim Novak jumping into the water. (Or Mel Brooks getting strangled with a phone cord). Nice colours.