Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: mcbroomf on May 09, 2018, 02:50:12 pm
-
Thank you Andrew ... very interesting article. I'm going to blur a load of my favorite (and poor) images now and see what I see.
Regards
-
... and I'm going to apply a gradient to some of them and see if it makes them look better!
-
This is exactly the type of deconstructive, navel-gazing nonsense that would have turned me right off becoming a photographer had I been exposed to it or, worse, forced to digest it.
Reading this now tells me as clearly as is possible that you either have an eye for a picture or you do not. If you require these kinds of spritual assists, then you should try golf instead. At least it's supposedly good exercise for the heart.
Which is all a terrible pity, because some of the accompanying photographs, left in peace to be what they are, are very good work indeed.
Rob
-
I am, of course, pleased to have been of some little use to a few people!
Rob, I don't think the pictures mind all that much if we think about them a little, or not. At any rate,
none of them have every complained to me.
-
I am, of course, pleased to have been of some little use to a few people!
Rob, I don't think the pictures mind all that much if we think about them a little, or not. At any rate,
none of them have every complained to me.
I'm glad to hear that; the pictures have certainly spoken to me, though, and I rather liked what they had to say.
:-)
-
I love this article, not because of the technical explanation and giving me a whole other realm of things to obsess over, but because after going through Columbia College's photography program back in the 90s when it was almost all darkroom, the Zone system snobs were everywhere and judgmental. A clear definition of another way to look at what makes a photo good, just adds to the over reaching idea that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
In my own work I often try to make great images that break traditional ideals like; shooting into the light and ignoring the rule of thirds. While social media likes seem to be spiking over sleek lines, minimum subject and vast negative space, I like to drop in occasionally what I call a "messy photo."
-
I love this article, not because of the technical explanation and giving me a whole other realm of things to obsess over, but because after going through Columbia College's photography program back in the 90s when it was almost all darkroom, the Zone system snobs were everywhere and judgmental. A clear definition of another way to look at what makes a photo good, just adds to the over reaching idea that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
In my own work I often try to make great images that break traditional ideals like; shooting into the light and ignoring the rule of thirds. While social media likes seem to be spiking over sleek lines, minimum subject and vast negative space, I like to drop in occasionally what I call a "messy photo."
The article illustrates another avenue to look at (or quantify) BW photographic art: I personally read through a lot of these articles and pull what I like out of it: in this case, (Breath) to remember to keep cognizant of the wide scope (or breath, if I may) of ways to create a fine art BW photograph. Nothing more or less. I agree with Vincent, and had similar thoughts when reading this piece: I do not follow rules all the time - I enjoy bending and breaking and in many cases end up with a startling piece. In any case, I feel the article was relevant in providing food for thought - and provoking conversation.
Lance
http://visualizingart.com (http://visualizingart.com)