touchel berne

Yes, I got it. You should tweak this a bit, it looks a bit flat.

Reminds me of Di Chirico. It could use faceless people.

I love this.

Fails to mean much as a street photo.

Great photograph, poor typography. The typography suggests confusion. The photo suggests depression. Overall, it doesn't work very well.

I believe that you needed to be closer to this, clarify the composition.

This is interesting work. I have a recommendation: approach this technique in a more graphic fashion. I like how the body is indicated, and it strikes me that if this technique were more focused on composition rather than motion that it would be more compelling.

If this is a photograph, then what I've attached is also a photograph, is this a photograph? Sorry to be some kind of purist, but this is a very clear cut example of the use of photography as a tool to create an illustration. It belongs on the cover of Bullfinche's Mythology.

I like the idea, it's very graphic, but I'm bothered by the photograph's lack of naturalness. It doesn't work as illusion. Her hair seems a bit too done up, the lighting feels a tad artificial, the eyes are spread open a bit too much, etc. Even her facial expression feels a bit too forced. If these details were a bit more subtle I think it would work much better.

It fails to be fantastic enough to be unreal, or real enough to be fantastic. It's good though.

What was it for?

Attached photo.

Technically this is fine. You're off to a good start. But as a photograph this fails to have any kind of center of interest. Keep your eyes open, look for patterns, try to anticipate what's going to happen next and be ready to photograph it. In the photo that I've attached, for example, I noticed that the girl who is the subject was shifting around with a lot of unease. The picture I wanted was one that would convey that. I waited until the girl was in a position that expressed her unease best and then took the picture. I don't think this is a particularly successful photograph, but it illustrates my point pretty well (and it happens to be on a bus).

I like this one. Definitely has that "individual beset by overwhelming and sometimes contradictory pieces of information" thing going on that makes the representation of modern life so interesting. What really makes this, I think, is the position of her hands.

I find this one really compelling. Overall, I think your black and white folder is more interesting than your color one. I'm trying to figure out why this is, but I think it's because your b/w stuff is more about subject matter and composition and therefore is more substantial as photography. You make Toronto look really appealing by the way.

My feeling about this is that it might be a bit too opaque. I'm unable to form any connection between the theme and what appears to be a man laying on concrete next to a small, dead chicken. At least I think it's a chicken. So, as a fairly sophisticated viewer of photography and contemporary art, I have to say that it doesn't really work for me if you are trying to illustrate a theme. It works if it's only meant to be an opaque and mysterious image. I DO LIKE IT, in case that's not clear.

I like this photo. It's kind of exciting. I'd like to encourage you to use photoshop for simple contrast/levels adjustments though. I understand the purist position, however if the use of photoshop is limited to the types of things that you can do in the darkroom, then I don't believe that there's any significant compromise. Now, if you were to colorize it, or add UFO's to the sky, that would be silly. But making levels adjustments is solidly within the gamut of purist photography. This picture definitely benefits from it. I like that the streetlamp is blotting out the man's head. It's a good city picture.

Paolo, this one, for example, has the feeling of friendly interaction that the other one (Two Friends) is missing. It's more descriptive and tells me more about who these people are and how they feel. This one's better, though the two carabinieri (or whatever they are) would be better out of the picture. Assuming that the three women were stationary, perhaps you should have waited until the two police/soldiers had gone into the restaurant or wherever they were going.

Paolo, this photo doesn't really express much. If it's a photograph of two friends, there's no real indication that they are friends, they're not really interacting with each other. They may as well be two pedestrians walking side by side as they cross a piazza. Otherwise, it's well photographed.

The size of the posted image is ridiculous. I had to save it to my computer and bring it into photoshop to get it to a point where I could see the entire photo at once. I want to like this photo more than I do. The problem for me is that the idea of the photo is a bit of a cheat. The clothed woman turned a way from the nude is coincidental. The clothed real woman isn't reacting to the statue, she's just standing there presumably looking at something to the right. I love the genre though, museum shots, check out Elliot Erwitt and Abelardo Morrell, both of whom have put out books on the theme.

This seems like a good photo to me. I like it. You have a really relevant picture here that perfectly conveys the reality of racial profiling, it's a powerful photo. BUT, I'm unable to really enjoy it because you post these things too small. If you're concerned about people taking the image from the site, remember that even at 450 pixels across (72 dpi), the image will be totally useless in print. As I'm typing this comment, the web site is displaying this image at about 450 pixels across, but since you only posted it at about 200 pixels across or whatever, it shows up completely pixelated. Please start posting larger images so that they can be better seen. Thanks.

I think this is the strongest image in your folder. Yes, I think the sandles are necessary.

Having now looked at the rest of Lasse's folder, I think that this image is probably the least original and interesting of this body of work. He seems to be pretty influenced by HR Giger. The images that he comes up with without appropriation seem to have a greater sense of purpose and unity. They seem less arbitrary.

* Aesthetically, why is everything cloudy and murky? I don't get that. If you're trying to suggest the industrial revolution, why not do it more directly? Why obscure the human form? Aside from the figure and the wheel, the whole thing feels very arbitrary. The square shape is an afterthought. The result, I think, is not really a photograph, more of an illustration - maybe for an article on the health issues effecting women in the workplace. Lasse should consider putting together a portfolio, in fact, and showing it around to magazine art directors. But this isn't really photography, it's the use of photography to create something other than a photograph. I, personally, don't like it very much.

 

* To suggest that it was somehow inappropriate to have made this image is really absurd. Far from being upset by this, Leonardo himself would have recognized the appropriation as a very commonplace thing (though he would have wondered how you got access to his private notebooks). Artists in the renaissance appropriated like crazy. In fact there are works of Leonardo's that we only know of because they were copied by other artists. (By the way, in the US, anything that was 'authored' more than seventy five years ago is in the public domain.) Appropriation is definitely fair play.

 

* This isn't a masterpiece. I don't think there is any official definition or process, the distinction just seems to come from a lot of critical consensus over a longish period of time. I think that this is very unlikely. At the very best, this image is 'neat.'

 

* This image isn't groundbreaking. We've been seeing the use of famous works of art like this since long before personal computers. What's groundbreaking is the technology and especially the access to the technology that was used to make this.

 

* I'm not too impressed by this technically. Once you get around to playing with blending modes in photoshop, this kind of thing isn't that difficult. Not to downplay it, I know that it takes effort to get it right and polished, but these are techniques that are not on a very high shelf.

 

 

This feels very urgent.

This is really cool. I like the posture, and the cropping. It comes off a bit flashy though - too much light in the foreground. I have this problem too. I'm not sure how to fix it: bounce flash? slower shutter speed?

I had no idea that London had a Disneyland amusement park.