What's the point of this image?
Not trying to be dismissive, just asking.
Love it.
This is difficult to address without offending swathes of photographers, but as with all landscape, I'm left wondering where the hell the model went. Without her/him, there really is no overpowering reason for making an exposure unless for money.
Russ has pointed this out before, and he's right: interesting photographs are about people and their things. Remove either the human and/or signs of its creativity and we are looking at documentation, which may or may not be pretty - that is a matter of selection, opinion and luck. The best-lit tree on the brink of the Grand Canyon is still just a tree in a precarious spot on one of the biggest ditches in the world.
I think I'd better add one of these: :-)
Totally, Rajan.
Rings clear to me. Lovely image.
Rob can keep his scantily clad models. :)
What's the point of this image?
Not trying to be dismissive, just asking.
Images don't have points. Pencils and knives have points.+1.
What's the point of this image?Dismissive is OK, Oscar, especially since I asked for C&C. I would guess that this image would leave some folks cold as well as a full ranging gamut from thereon. I take the points made by Rob and previously by Russ (not this time though). By the way, Rob, the model is there if you look carefully, but she and her parts were moving so vigorously that she blurred right out due to the slow shutter speed! ;)
Not trying to be dismissive, just asking.
What's the point of this image?
Peter, I don't want them these days...Today's pin-up leaves me cold... I'd love to shoot fashion again.
"I will try to speak of the beauty of shapes... straight lines and curves and the shapes made of them... They are not beautiful for any particular reason or purpose, as other things are, but are eternally, and by their very nature, beautiful, and give a pleasure of their own quite free from the itch of desire: and in this way colors can give a similar pleasure."
Socrates
(& Slobodan)
Rob,
The hand of man is all over this one. The Canola didn't decide to grow in this field on its own, someone decided to plant here. Someone had to disturb the soil for the seeds to root. Someone had to spread the seeds. Someone had to pray for rain (and if you don't believe bless you anyway) to germinate the seeds. And the hand of man will have to harvest the crop.
My take on the subject,
Rich
"I will try to speak of the beauty of shapes... straight lines and curves and the shapes made of them... They are not beautiful for any particular reason or purpose, as other things are, but are eternally, and by their very nature, beautiful, and give a pleasure of their own quite free from the itch of desire: and in this way colors can give a similar pleasure."
Socrates
(& Slobodan)
...However, Socyboy aside, none of these replies answer Oscar's legitimate question beyond admitting that they, the responders, saw no point either, but dug the thing anyway or simply felt defensive...
For me it's an abstract inspired by Canola. The irony is that I started to "get" Rothko when his paintings started to suggest themselves as abstracts: that just seems to be what vibrated in my head one day. So this is pretty much exactly the sort of landscape that Rothko could have been abstracting (if he hung the result upside down).
Doesn't matter, the colours are pretty, the texture is interesting, that's enough for me. I'd take it any day over one of those melodramatic sunset pics of purples and oranges in a drug-fueled sky-orgy.
As for HOM, you can see subtle evidence in the grooved patterns in the field, rising left to right slightly. So I will add subtlety to simplicity, complementarity, and juxtaposition in one of my previous responses to the question, what is the point? But, Rob, I think there is a place for photographing the bountiful provisions of God just like there's a place for street photography where snaps may depend on pure chance. Why would we want one genre of image making? That may not be what you are saying, however. Fashion photography may be more like painting because of the creative effort that goes into achieving a satisfactory let alone beautiful result. I question your premise, if I understand it, that only the HOM is worthwhile and all else is mere cloning.
I remember a recent exchange with Russ and his quoting Ecclesiastes, "All is vanity," and your comment above about "making the same image" and how that is somehow condemning of our efforts. Not trying to put words in your mouth, but I think of my mother who made her living as an oil painter for more than thirty years. She would do seascapes with variation after variation until she moved on to landscapes :o or whatever and then back again. Each was unique, each a variation on a theme and this is common with painters, but is that a futile effort? I think not for it may be the progression of subtle differences "seen" by the artist that tells a more interesting story. Formula novels may be predictable, but I still read them.
I wrote a blog article (Why take a photograph? (https://davideckelsphotography.blogspot.com/2014/02/why-take-photograph.html)) about a posting by Russ, The Tracks. Nothing new under the sun, but it is still worthwhile sitting around the campfire listening to the same story even if told differently. I just finished "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out" by Richard Feynman and in one of the vignettes he discusses his observations that people think differently even with the seemingly simplest of things, for example, counting. Some compute a mental rhythm while others see a visual image (read the book). But the point is that we all see internally (mentally) differently and there's no guarantee we will "see" the same thing (image, poem, prose, etc) the exact same way the next time we "see" it. I think this may make revisiting old stories, in this case images, meaningful.
By the way, I knew when I took this image that it had probably already been done, but that realization did not diminish my joy at discovering it for myself.
I can understand you when you say that you find joy in discovering something new to you, whether or not it has been done before; I get the same buzz aping the New York school by shooting reflections in windows, but only when there is human presence in the shot does it really work for me.Emphasis mine. Rob, thanks for clarifying for me; I think I get what you are saying, which takes me to the quote above and discussions we've had in the past as to why take a photo: It is, in the end, for me as Peter concludes in his post just now. I also think my motivation or rather what I am learning to take out of my photography is that it's for me. I could post on 500px and lust after a thousand likes, or seek gallery representation, certainly not money (!), but ultimately satisfaction must come from within and I think that has been a consistent message from you and many others here in LuLa land. I very much appreciate that message and the more I assimilate it I think the stronger my photography becomes, or rather, I should say my satisfaction with it grows.
Emphasis mine. Rob, thanks for clarifying for me; I think I get what you are saying, which takes me to the quote above and discussions we've had in the past as to why take a photo: It is, in the end, for me as Peter concludes in his post just now. I also think my motivation or rather what I am learning to take out of my photography is that it's for me. I could post on 500px and lust after a thousand likes, or seek gallery representation, certainly not money (!), but ultimately satisfaction must come from within and I think that has been a consistent message from you and many others here in LuLa land. I very much appreciate that message and the more I assimilate it I think the stronger my photography becomes, or rather, I should say my satisfaction with it grows.
But we also have here something that is unique in my experience, to others a cliche perhaps ;) and that is the ability to post experimental images (for the poster at least) and learn from the reactions and discussions we have, such as the one we are engaged with now. Of course, this is probably off topic.
Amen, brother!
Yes, it really does boil down to the necessity of doing it for oneself... Yes, it is one of the strengths of LuLa that we are able to post pictures freely, and as great that we can do so and, should we wish, discuss without the same rancour that politics encourages. The Internet does have some positive aspects!
... I'd take it any day over one of those melodramatic sunset pics of purples and oranges in a drug-fueled sky-orgy....
I like it quite a lot, the colors are just right. Can I express why I like it? Maybe but I'm not trained for it and it will take me too much effort and risk not being understood anyway. So, I'll just keep enjoying it and maybe some day I'll have the words, if only to figure out how can I create something to replicate the same feeling.I do too, Armand, I think Slobodan won an award with this one.
I do too, Armand, I think Slobodanonewon an award with this one.
I think Armand is referring to your OP photograph :)
Slightly left of field, slightly colourful. The alternative name for canola is rapeseed or its shortened name rape.
So we could have the title – Rape in the fields. :)
Cheers,
I like it quite a lot, the colors are just right. Can I express why I like it? Maybe but I'm not trained for it and it will take me too much effort and risk not being understood anyway. So, I'll just keep enjoying it and maybe some day I'll have the words, if only to figure out how can I create something to replicate the same feeling.Thank you, Armand, sorry for my confusion.
The notion that every photograph needs a "point" is vastly overrated. If I feel an emotional connection with a photo, that's enough for me.
The notion that every photograph needs a "point" is vastly overrated. If I feel an emotional connection with a photo, that's enough for me.
The notion that every photograph needs a "point" is vastly overrated. If I feel an emotional connection with a photo, that's enough for me.
The canpla field is a fine, minimalist image, with echoes of both Rothko and BobDavid, IMHO.
And of course, that's its point. But, if one feels nothing...
I think this is how Rob feels about my photo! ;)
... Clearly, an image submitted for critique by necessity must have a purpose... submitting images with no purpose could well be considered offensive...
Color is much more than a bundle of hues, pigments and shades. It’s not only how we see the world, it’s how we feel about the world around us. Whether you know it or not, your mind associates different emotions and thoughts with every color you see. That means every day – every color you see – your mind is taking in all the feels, probably without you even being aware of it.
THE COLOR TRIFECTA
Color has a special impact on the brain, which leads to you landing somewhere on the extensive feeling spectrum. Whether you’re feeling anxious, happy, sad, calm or angry, color impacts our physiology in three main ways:
Psychologically – where we base color on personal experiences
Symbolically – where we associate colors with a specific object (the sky is blue)
Culturally – where society has defined how we are supposed to view colors (black at a funeral)
Nobody blinked at my canola photo (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=40005.msg592327#msg592327).
Well, this image, to me, is like hitting a C major chord on a Bosendorfer Concert Grand piano, with a jackhammer...
... and then asking us for critique.
The point of color theory is not to make you an artist, but to help explain how we perceive things thanks to colors. It helps explain why people would pay millions for a single color, or absence of it.
But I guess, Rob, that your “shortest ever” artist statement still remains - crap? ;)
At the risk of standing up in the middle of a crossfire and getting my head shot off, if artists can paint it, why can't a photographer snap it if they recognize it as a subject?
Ray, how did you know? ;D
JR, gracias.
I've been pondering your last reply, Rob, for a couple of days now. Are you saying that window reflections are not worth shooting? Or that they are cliches? Or something else entirely?
I suppose that's the reason for things like Ms Coke, too: just an idea to try and illustrate in yet another manner.And therein lies the fun! I enjoy seeing your explorations.
But hey, if it's purely for personal satisfaction,... at the bottom of it all lies this urge to keep creating something.Very well said, Rob, all of it. And this is why your "Without Prejudice" thread is so important. No critiques for the most part, but if they strike a chord with someone somewhere, there is opportunity for acknowledgement that an image has done so. I am starting to see that the desire for critiques implies that there is some right or wrong way to approach, capture, or render an image. I was not aware of that (my) assumption until now. Always good to learn something new. Thanks for teaching.
And therein lies the fun! I enjoy seeing your explorations.Very well said, Rob, all of it. And this is why your "Without Prejudice" thread is so important. No critiques for the most part, but if they strike a chord with someone somewhere, there is opportunity for acknowledgement that an image has done so. I am starting to see that the desire for critiques implies that there is some right or wrong way to approach, capture, or render an image. I was not aware of that (my) assumption until now. Always good to learn something new. Thanks for teaching.
It's difficult knowing when to leave a picture alone and declare it done!