Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: jenbenn on April 07, 2010, 04:20:20 am
-
Dear Art,
I am a great fan of your photography. With great interest I read the earlier "deconstruction" of your image of the chinese cormoran fisherman. This time I am slightly underwhelmed. Why did you choose such a boring image, that many tourists bring home form their visit to Ankor? On your website you display a lot of images that are much more intersting, with better light, better expression, stronger composition and more unusual subjects. As an example the three images that appear on your homepage, are really expectional and would make a much more interesting learning experience ( at least for me personally). I wish you would discuss some of these images here.
Thanks and looking forward to reading more from you
Jens
-
Does it matter if the image is boring? That is your opinion that others may agree with, or not? I found the explanation very good and it illustrated the process of making an image extremely well. Some advanced photographers may think it was preaching the obvious but others will find it useful. Dare I say it? I found it to be better than Michael's image and thoughts from a few weeks ago concerning the street scene and lamp post. Remembering all of this and putting it into practice is the problem?
-
Does it matter if the image is boring? That is your opinion that others may agree with, or not? I found the explanation very good and it illustrated the process of making an image extremely well. Some advanced photographers may think it was preaching the obvious but others will find it useful. Dare I say it? I found it to be better than Michael's image and thoughts from a few weeks ago concerning the street scene and lamp post. Remembering all of this and putting it into practice is the problem?
Of course its my opinion. What else? If I was the elected president of the photography world I would have made my statement in that capacity. This thread was purely meant as feedback for Art, telling him from which type of article I, as a photography "student", would enjoy the greatest learning experience . If you disagree thats very fine. This is what the thread is there for: to find out what people want to read and what is usefull for them. Constructive crisitsim and a poll. Nothing more and nothing less. I am not claiming that my views are shared by anybody else unless people post statements to this effect here.
-
I actually find the 'final' image to have two almost equal sides which clash horribly for attention. Hardly a showcase for composition. Flame suit on...
-
Dear Art,
I am a great fan of your photography. With great interest I read the earlier "deconstruction" of your image of the chinese cormoran fisherman. This time I am slightly underwhelmed. Why did you choose such a boring image, that many tourists bring home form their visit to Ankor? On your website you display a lot of images that are much more intersting, with better light, better expression, stronger composition and more unusual subjects. As an example the three images that appear on your homepage, are really expectional and would make a much more interesting learning experience ( at least for me personally). I wish you would discuss some of these images here.
Thanks and looking forward to reading more from you
Jens
Possibly one of the reasons that he chose the image is because it is one that can be easily captured by a tourist or anybody for that matter. It is one that a lot of people can relate to? If he had chosen one of his exceptional ones then most people would possibly thought I haven't a chance of taking that and would have failed to follow the thrust of the article? Attacking it as boring before addressing the merits of the article was - imo - poor judgement. Not a flaming war as the previous poster suggested but an opinion.
-
I actually find the 'final' image to have two almost equal sides which clash horribly for attention. Hardly a showcase for composition. Flame suit on...
I fully agree.
-
Possibly one of the reasons that he chose the image is because it is one that can be easily captured by a tourist or anybody for that matter. It is one that a lot of people can relate to? If he had chosen one of his exceptional ones then most people would possibly thought I haven't a chance of taking that and would have failed to follow the thrust of the article? Attacking it as boring before addressing the merits of the article was - imo - poor judgement. Not a flaming war as the previous poster suggested but an opinion.
This is were our views differ. I love a challenge. I want to have something to look up to. I want to say: "wow, this is an image I would want to take". I am not a tourist but a photographer. If I go travelleing I spend much time on photography. I dont submit to the given circumstances but put much effort in getting the best image I possibly can.
Therefore I am bored by step-by-step processes were you are supposed to learn a tiny aspect of composition from an image that executes only this tiny aspect well and falls short of being an overall convincing photograph. Again, my opinion, but maybe I am not part of the target audience for the article anyway. But this is for Art to decide. Giving him this type of feedback will enable him to see who actually IS his audience as opposed to who was supposed to be the audience. So its not poor judgment. Its an opinion. Posting an opinion is called freedom of speech. Please respect this as much as I repect your differing opinion.
-
Quote
I am not part of the target audience for the article anyway.
Unquote
Correct! You are obviously an advanced photographer who isn't in need of advice - I looked at your website - in regards to composition. The article was aimed at others that - including myself - who haven't progressed as far. This is what you failed to appreciate with your first post? Time to reflect?
-
Quote
I am not part of the target audience for the article anyway.
Unquote
Correct! You are obviously an advanced photographer who isn't in need of advice - I looked at your website - in regards to composition. The article was aimed at others that - including myself - who haven't progressed as far. This is what you failed to appreciate with your first post? Time to reflect?
I am merly telling ART that I as an "adavanced photographer", as you call me, would like to learn something from him, too. I am telling him that there are advanced photographers reading the LL. The idea is to see how many beginners vs. advanced photographers are visiting this website in order to give Micheal and ARt a guideline which articles are of interest to their readers and which are not. So please lets end the discussion right here. I have given my opinion you have given yours. It may well be that there are many people who like this type of articles and learn a lot from them. The question is: are they here on the LL? And if so, how many of them are visiting this site compared to the number of people who would like to read something else. Lets sit back and listen to comments. We'll soon find out.
( This is not meant to be saying that Michael has to publish certian types of articels. Its a free site, so as reader we cannot expect anything. But I detect that Micheal is quite ambitious with this site, therefore I believe feedback like this can help him in keeping the site interesting to his readers)
-
Which all goes to prove (to my satifaction) that all of these types of posts, articles, magazine features etc. are a gigantic waste of paper and space or whatever other medium is used.
If you want to improve your own work, you shouldn't read a damn thing at all because that will just be an attempt by some self-styled guru to mess with the purity of your own vision as you conceptualize it in your own words in your own head.
What will help you no end, and take you forward, is the looking at many many published pictures, either photos or paintings or drawings - whatever - where your sensibilities will be drawn to the features or moods that interest you personally, and based upon your own inner promptings. Then, you will be in a position to absorb the very nature of the beast that makes it work for you; you'll finally recognize what's your own thing. Use your eyes and keep your ears firmly stuffed with Walkman.
Photography is a visual game; you learn from looking and trying. If you want to be a writer, on the other hand, then read all you can.
Rob C
-
Which all goes to prove (to my satifaction) that all of these types of posts, articles, magazine features etc. are a gigantic waste of paper and space or whatever other medium is used.
If you want to improve your own work, you shouldn't read a damn thing at all because that will just be an attempt by some self-styled guru to mess with the purity of your own vision as you conceptualize it in your own words in your own head.
What will help you no end, and take you forward, is the looking at many many published pictures, either photos or paintings or drawings - whatever - where your sensibilities will be drawn to the features or moods that interest you personally, and based upon your own inner promptings. Then, you will be in a position to absorb the very nature of the beast that makes it work for you; you'll finally recognize what's your own thing. Use your eyes and keep your ears firmly stuffed with Walkman.
Photography is a visual game; you learn from looking and trying. If you want to be a writer, on the other hand, then read all you can.
Rob C
Hm, you are making a good point here. Maybe Michael could ask some photographers to publish a portfolio on the LL instead of writing lengthy articles? Or publish every week or so a link to a site with particularly good photographs? Many photographer webites are scattered around in the web, unnoticed by anybody. Bringing them to people's attention on the LL would be great.
-
For what it's worth, I do like the final image, and I did think the article worthwhile. I'd appreciate more articles similar to this one. YMMV!
Lisa
-
I found the article instructional, even though the image itself wasn't exactly what I would consider world-class. But that doesn't matter. What I believe Art was doing was just using the photographs to illustrate the process and only the process.
The same thing could have been done with a set of styrofoam blocks and studio lights.
I choose to look at these "compositional thinking articles" in the same way that we teach algebra. There are students who get all hung up over why they should learn how to figure out what "x" is in k*x=y. It's not at all about the image (or numbers), but the theory. Art was teaching operational theory--as such the actual set of photographs really doesn't matter.
Most importantly, which Art didn't mention, is the fact that a professional photographer must start out immediately by getting "something in the can". You start out getting something usable right away and then you can tweak and perfect the composition shooting each step of the way.
Ken
-
Art choose a very difficult location.
This place is simply a hell for composition.
Composition can be acheived by many ways,
- colors and lack of colors
- lights and lack of lights
- lines and points
- action and still
- full and empty
- patterns and tint area
- story told and untold
- information and lack of information
- inside - outside
etc...
The way all these are distributed in a measurable area (finite) determines a composition.
And composition is a choice.
A "choice" between what is in and what is not in.
This place is very difficult because there is a lot of informations (stimulations).
It is a mess in itself. The light is not great often. Colors are practically inexistents.
This is one of the most challenging environement for composition.
Fred.
-
Hm, you are making a good point here. Maybe Michael could ask some photographers to publish a portfolio on the LL instead of writing lengthy articles? Or publish every week or so a link to a site with particularly good photographs? Many photographer webites are scattered around in the web, unnoticed by anybody. Bringing them to people's attention on the LL would be great.
We started this some time ago:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/in...showtopic=13879 (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=13879)
There were a couple of other similar starts, but once you get into it there are links that take you places you might want to go. Only problem I find is that one can easily end up a totally passive photographer, browbeaten into submission by so much splendid work.
Rob C
-
Some of you totally missed the point of Art's article. It wasn't about the final image (or any of the others), it was about his PROCESS of thought. Get over yourselves, folks. Art didn't write his article hoping for critiques, he wrote it to help us become better photographers by opening our eyes to, perhaps, other possibilities we may not have considered.
-
.....
The same thing could have been done with a set of styrofoam blocks and studio lights.
.....
Some of you totally missed the point of Art's article. It wasn't about the final image (or any of the others), it was about his PROCESS of thought.
.....
+1
-
Some of you totally missed the point of Art's article. It wasn't about the final image (or any of the others), it was about his PROCESS of thought. Get over yourselves, folks. Art didn't write his article hoping for critiques, he wrote it to help us become better photographers by opening our eyes to, perhaps, other possibilities we may not have considered.
I do agree.
The articles are usefull, some may be aimed to beginners, others to more advanced etc... but the images that illustrate them are not
made for art critics or pro exhibitionism.
The writters have their own web-sites for that purpose.
Ok, it's always nice when pics are top, but the reason of these articles is IMHO, first pedagogic.
I think we should look at these that way.
I've been learning very usefull things here, and not specially when a picture was "Whao"!
If one day I can make whao pics, part of these acheivement will be thanks to many articles like this one,
so I tend to give them value, even when I'm not interested.
I think we forgot too often that all this are given things to us, and for free.
Fred.
-
Proofreaders Anonymous is sitting up sleepless tonight because of the usage problem in the lead-off sentence. Linotype tigers and bears, ohmy.
"Every successful image is comprised of several key elements that define its character"
would be
"Every successful image comprises several key elements that define its character"
The whole "comprises" the parts.
-
Proofreaders Anonymous ... blah, blah, blah, something not very important, blah, blah, blah...
On a photography forum, proofreaders should be anonymous.
It doesn't change the meaning or understanding of the article, so who cares (other than the not-so-anonymous proofreaders).
-
There is something to learn here. I tend to agree with Ben Rubinstein. The white vertical splits the image in two, and the reason principally is that the dividing vertical is so bright it distracts the attention. There's therefore a lack of communication between the left and right sides of the image.
I prefer the following rendition.
[attachment=21364:Art_Wolf...bodia7_1.jpg]
I've visited Angkor a few times in my life, the first time about 46 years ago. It's a marvellous place of photographic opportunities; well worth a visit.
On second thoughts, there is a psychological element here which perhaps transcends rules of composition. The distracting white vertical which splits the image in two in almost a dissociative way (or perhaps in a distinctly dissociative way) could have an intended moral meaning; ie. monks should not associate with dancing girls.
[attachment=21365:Art_Wolf...ambodia7.jpg]
-
I think that some of you don't get it? IMO he has chosen a less than "perfect" image in order to portray the thrust of what he means in regards to making a good composition. With regards to the white line down the middle then he did state it wasn't a good idea so posting an edited version wasn't necessary? A member decides if the article has some merit with regards to learning - including myself - or they think that they don't need to be educated about composition - such as Rob C - and see the article for what it was, an attempt to be educational.
-
Some of you totally missed the point of Art's article. It wasn't about the final image (or any of the others), it was about his PROCESS of thought. Get over yourselves, folks. Art didn't write his article hoping for critiques, he wrote it to help us become better photographers by opening our eyes to, perhaps, other possibilities we may not have considered.
If it was just for the process and not for the final result, I wonder why Art bothered to write this article. After all, he has descirbed the very same process two or three months back with the example of another image (the cormoran fisher). His approach was entirely the same last time. Actually, it was much more all-encompassing, because not only did he describe the process of arriving at the final composition, but he also talked about using light.
-
If it was just for the process and not for the final result, I wonder why Art bothered to write this article. After all, he has descirbed the very same process two or three months back with the example of another image (the cormoran fisher). His approach was entirely the same last time. Actually, it was much more all-encompassing, because not only did he describe the process of arriving at the final composition, but he also talked about using light.
Was the article posted here?
-
Was the article posted here?
Yep. Look here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/...fisherman.shtml (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/wolfe/night_fisherman.shtml)
-
There is something to learn here. I tend to agree with Ben Rubinstein. The white vertical splits the image in two, and the reason principally is that the dividing vertical is so bright it distracts the attention. There's therefore a lack of communication between the left and right sides of the image.
I prefer the following rendition.
[attachment=21364:Art_Wolf...bodia7_1.jpg]
I've visited Angkor a few times in my life, the first time about 46 years ago. It's a marvellous place of photographic opportunities; well worth a visit.
On second thoughts, there is a psychological element here which perhaps transcends rules of composition. The distracting white vertical which splits the image in two in almost a dissociative way (or perhaps in a distinctly dissociative way) could have an intended moral meaning; ie. monks should not associate with dancing girls.
[attachment=21365:Art_Wolf...ambodia7.jpg]
Did Art Wolfe give you permission to edit his work?
-
Yep. Look here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/...fisherman.shtml (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/wolfe/night_fisherman.shtml)
Did you find that boring, or was it more to your taste?
-
Gotta say, I just don't know how Art Wolfe made it so far without all of us to help him along. Now that we're giving him advice on photography and photographic education, I'm sure his career will flourish. He'll be here any minute to thank us all.
-
Did you find that boring, or was it more to your taste?
This was an excellent article and an excellent image. The new article was, in my view at least, the same thing but less comprehensive and with a very boring image. So I wondered why he wrote it. Art has shot so many great images that offer new aspects for discussion and teaching. Read my very first post, I made that very clear.
-
Gotta say, I just don't know how Art Wolfe made it so far without all of us to help him along. Now that we're giving him advice on photography and photographic education, I'm sure his career will flourish. He'll be here any minute to thank us all.
This thread is not about giving Art advice on Photography. He certainly doesnt need that. As for me, I am giving MY PEROSONAL feedback as a student. Werent you asked by your teacher in school how you found their way of teaching? Didnt they ask whether their way of explaining things to you, helped you understand? All i am saying here is that if Art had used a different image to make his point, I personally and not anybody else, would have profited from his efforts to a greater extend. This is meant as constructive feedback not as criticism. I dont get why some people think that it is inappropriate to tell somebody that their effort was not helpful to you. I am always looking for feedback, even when I am doing things for free.
-
This was an excellent article and an excellent image. The new article was, in my view at least, the same thing but less comprehensive and with a very boring image. So I wondered why he wrote it. Art has shot so many great images that offer new aspects for discussion and teaching. Read my very first post, I made that very clear.
Have you tried contacting him with your points?
-
Have you tried contacting him with your points?
Not yet, I wanted to see whether I was the only one with different expectations or not. Maybe this was a tactical mistake, since we have been mostly discussing why some of us feel the way they feel about Art`s article, which is rather pointless. Opinions are opinions and saying they are bad opinions will not change them. Anyway, right now I can only conclude that people bothering to post here are divided on the question while many others didnt bother to give an opinion at all.
-
Gotta say, I just don't know how Art Wolfe made it so far without all of us to help him along. Now that we're giving him advice on photography and photographic education, I'm sure his career will flourish. He'll be here any minute to thank us all.
+1!
I'm especially impressed by the detailed essays on how to compose an image that have been presented here by all of the critics. Their step-by-step illustrations with detailed explanations positively take my breath away. Perhaps we should have a poll to decide which of the comments provide the greatest help to someone struggling with composition.
Eric
-
I suppose that age doesn't come alone: it hefts a helluva lot of scepticism which sees what some think of as help as little more than personal image building, the creation of an ever greater (or at least more recognized) self.
Cool; let them all fight wars over you... you can't lose!
Rob C
-
+1!
I'm especially impressed by the detailed essays on how to compose an image that have been presented here by all of the critics. Their step-by-step illustrations with detailed explanations positively take my breath away. Perhaps we should have a poll to decide which of the comments provide the greatest help to someone struggling with composition.
Eric
IF your reasoning was correct, no criticism would ever be allowed. Would you agree that one must not criticise a politician unless one is an active politician? Likewise should one not be allowed to say that one didnt like a particluar article on photography unless one has written articles oneself? Criticism must of course be resonable, but if more people were of your opinion, we would live in a dictatorship because only the dictator may criticise the dictator. Anyway, this is my last post here. Internet forums are apprently not the place for sensible discussions.
-
IF your reasoning was correct, no criticism would ever be allowed. Would you agree that one must not criticise a politician unless one is an active politician? Likewise should one not be allowed to say that one didnt like a particluar article on photography unless one has written articles oneself? Criticism must of course be resonable, but if more people were of your opinion, we would live in a dictatorship because only the dictator may criticise the dictator. Anyway, this is my last post here. Internet forums are apprently not the place for sensible discussions.
Jens,
I'm sorry my facetious post upset you. Your response suggests to me that you totally misunderstood my post, and your response is completely irrelevant. In case you didn't realize it, my post was not particularly aimed at you.
Eric
-
On a photography forum, proofreaders should be anonymous.
It doesn't change the meaning or understanding of the article, so who cares (other than the not-so-anonymous proofreaders).
It wasn't a forum post, it was a published article. Obviously my post was lighthearted. You had to hit me for that? Anyway, this isn't a site for illiterates like certain others.
-
I'm probably coming into this late, but, I've been to locations that "called" to me only to find capturing that to be difficult or even impossible. I for one appreciate Art's article.
-
It's difficult to understand why anyone would find this image from Art Wolfe boring. Is it because such people have seen so many very fine images of the temples at Angkor that this particular one seems jaded by comparison? Or is it because some viewers have little knowledge of Angkor and therefore no associations that spring to mind?
For the benefit of those who don't already know, the Khmer civilisation with its centre at Angkor Wat in Cambodia was once the greatest empire in the region during the Middle Ages. It was the largest preindustrial city in the world with an elaborate system of infrastruction connecting an urban sprawl of 1,000 square kilometers.
These ancient people had no trouble subduing the Vietnamese, a task in which the Americans failed misearably a thousand years later.
The Khmers were eventually conquered by the Thais around 1431, so history tells us. But there's new evidence that the Thais had a lot of help from Climate Change.
Those of us who have been following the climate change debate will know that the 'alarmists' (those who think our CO2 emissions are responsible for the current change in climate) produced a graph a few years ago, known as the 'Hockey Stick', which implied that the Medieval Warming Period never existed, a position which is clearly in conflict with other evidence such as the inhabitation of Greenland by the ancient Vikings during this warm period and their eventual abandonment of that island as it became increasingly uninhabitable due to the effects of The Little Ice Age (from about 1250-1850).
It is now believed, through the study of tree rings, that this transition from the MWP to the LIA, also caused massive climate change in Cambodia, a country that relies upon the melting snows in the Himalayas and the regular appearance of the monsoon rains every year. This weather pattern which kept the reservoirs full and provided sufficient water for a very bountiful rice harvest was a strong component in the success of this empire.
After a few years of unusually cold weather in the Himalayas, causing a disruption to the annual melting of the snow which fed the great Mekong river, plus the frequent non-appearance of the annual monsoon during this transition period from the MWP to the LIA, would have caused havoc and would have severely weakened the Khmer empire, making it vulnerable to attack from the neighbouring Thais.
Now what has this history lesson got to do with Art Wolfe's image, you might ask?
Whenever I see an image of the ruins at Angkor, these are the thoughts that spring to my mind, particularly because this ancient civilization left no books, nor literature nor philosophy as the ancient Greeks and Romans did. Almost the entire creative output of these people was channeled into the construction of magnificent temples adorned with magnificent, bas-relief carvings of bare-breasted women, as well as other bas-reliefs depicting various battles, myths and their general culture and way of life.
If you'd been there a thousand years ago, you would not have seen the current, dull brown temple spires rising above the green foliage of the jungle, but brilliant white spires imitating the shape of lotus flowers. Yes! They painted their temples white, and the carvings of celestial dancing girls and other depictions of members of the royal family would have been painted with red ochre and black, and other parts covered with gold leaf.
The lifestyle was hedonistic and the Khmer women had such a reputation for their beauty and friendliness that many a Chinese sailor would jump ship, whenever a ship was berthed in the vicinity of Angkor, in order to spend the rest of his life amidst such alluring splendour.
Boring indeed!
(Sorry! Art. Not quite a thousand words ).
-
All of that was extremely interesting and well-written, Ray, and has made me want to find out more. Thanks for taking the time to put it together.
The problem is that a photograph has to stand on its own (visual) merits. Unless of course it was intended to be an illustration for an article about Angkor Wat.
John
-
Quote
The problem is that a photograph has to stand on its own (visual) merits. Unless of course it was intended to be an illustration for an article about Angkor Wat.
Unquote
It is a pity - or maybe not - that Art hasn't posted something in reply to what has been said. The last sentence stated above is - imo - the only way to view the image for what it was? If I was a well known highly rated photographer then I wouldn't send one of my best images to a public forum. Any reasonable one would do to illustrate the thrust of an article. It is a pity that this thread got started on such a negative footing which meant the merits of the article didn't get discussed properly?
-
Quote
The problem is that a photograph has to stand on its own (visual) merits. Unless of course it was intended to be an illustration for an article about Angkor Wat.
Unquote
It is a pity - or maybe not - that Art hasn't posted something in reply to what has been said. The last sentence stated above is - imo - the only way to view the image for what it was? If I was a well known highly rated photographer then I wouldn't send one of my best images to a public forum. Any reasonable one would do to illustrate the thrust of an article. It is a pity that this thread got started on such a negative footing which meant the merits of the article didn't get discussed properly?
Stamper,
Have you ever seen a terrific picture of this place? I've never seen one. This place is boring like hell.
Can someone post here a great pic of Angkor?
As I pointed before, it is one of the worst place for photography, and one of the most boring area if to be unique is your goal. (like the Eiffel tower for example).
All the pic I saw so far from here are just boring, but of course I do not pretend to have seen everything.
The Art article is EDUCATIVE, and the pics are there to show a process or illustrate idea, THERE ARE NOT THERE TO INFLATES ART'S EGO.
I thing Art is perfectly aware that these are not his very best pics, come one guys! It is obvious.
So I'm not surprised he has not reply so far because there is no reason to reply.
The article is here, if some of us find interest in it, it has acheive its goal.
Fred.
-
My thoughts are that the 'wow'-ness of the photo is irellevant. The point is that you don't teach composition based on an image that many would consider a composition fail. I'm all for breaking the rules when it works. This just doesn't (IMO) and assuming that people will disagree with me, why teach composition at a basic level based on something which not only breaks the rules but arguably unsucessfully?
-
My thoughts are that the 'wow'-ness of the photo is irellevant. The point is that you don't teach composition based on an image that many would consider a composition fail. I'm all for breaking the rules when it works. This just doesn't (IMO) and assuming that people will disagree with me, why teach composition at a basic level based on something which not only breaks the rules but arguably unsucessfully?
OK I am being untrue to myself, by skipping in again, although I wanted to leave for good.
Point is that there are many very good photography from Angkor Wat, with fascinating composition. For example: www.stevemccurry.com. There was also a National Geographic article about 2 years back from another photographer which featured a breathtaking image of a monk in the temples of angkor. Therefore it is simply untrue when somebody above said that one couldnt take great photographs at Angkor.
Anyways, in my humble opinion this photograph is failure compostion wise, as it falls in two equal sides, making the eye jump left and right without any clear focus point. Therefore I was not drawn into the image but bored by it. This made me conclude that it wasnt the right example for an article on composition, given that ARt does indeed take stunning photographs. This one just wasnt one of them.
I wonder if people thought the same if the image didnt have the sticker Art Wolfe attached to it....... Propably it is the same as in sports. If Michael Jordan delivered one of his very rare bad performances his fans still fiercly argued that he was the best player on court that particular night.
-
OK I am being untrue to myself, by skipping in again, although I wanted to leave for good.
Point is that there are many very good photography from Angkor Wat, with fascinating composition. For example: www.stevemccurry.com. There was also a National Geographic article about 2 years back from another photographer which featured a breathtaking image of a monk in the temples of angkor. Therefore it is simply untrue when somebody above said that one couldnt take great photographs at Angkor.
Anyways, in my humble opinion this photograph is failure compostion wise, as it falls in two equal sides, making the eye jump left and right without any clear focus point. Therefore I was not drawn into the image but bored by it. This made me conclude that it wasnt the right example for an article on composition, given that ARt does indeed take stunning photographs. This one just wasnt one of them.
I wonder if people thought the same if the image didnt have the sticker Art Wolfe attached to it....... Propably it is the same as in sports. If Michael Jordan delivered one of his very rare bad performances his fans still fiercly argued that he was the best player on court that particular night.
I'm the one who pointed that I have not seen so far outstanding pictures of Angkor, but I did not write that one could not take great pics of this place.
There is a BIG difference and as often, comments onces written, pass through the filter of interpretations and become distorted. So you won't get angry if I rectify here this little difference that I did not write.
My previous written:
Have you ever seen a terrific picture of this place? I've never seen one.
and concluded: All the pic I saw so far from here are just boring, but of course I do not pretend to have seen everything.
So, you see that it is not what you understood (or wanted to understood) of my post.
A part from that, I agree with what you say.
Cheers,
Fred.
-
I'm the one who pointed that I have not seen so far outstanding pictures of Angkor, but I did not write that one could not take great pics of this place.
There is a BIG difference and as often, comments onces written, pass through the filter of interpretations and become distorted. So you won't get angry if I rectify here this little difference that I did not write.
My previous written:
Have you ever seen a terrific picture of this place? I've never seen one.
and concluded: All the pic I saw so far from here are just boring, but of course I do not pretend to have seen everything.
So, you see that it is not what you understood (or wanted to understood) of my post.
A part from that, I agree with what you say.
Cheers,
Fred.
Fair enough. I indeed distorted your statement a bit. Sorry, wasnt intentional.
-
Jens, the problem is that you're so obsessed with the final image that you're totally missing the point of the article. It's about the journey, not the destination.
It matters not WHO, or WHAT, or WHERE. The article is about the WHY!
-
Jens, the problem is that you're so obsessed with the final image that you're totally missing the point of the article. It's about the journey, not the destination.
It matters not WHO, or WHAT, or WHERE. The article is about the WHY!
Very true. Obsessed is just a harsh word, but yes, I strongly believe photography is about the final result. I think the teacher should make his point on his best images, so that the student has something to live up to. I am just not motivated if someone shows me how to create a so-so photo. This is not what I am after.
-
Very true. Obsessed is just a harsh word, but yes, I strongly believe photography is about the final result. I think the teacher should make his point on his best images, so that the student has something to live up to. I am just not motivated if someone shows me how to create a so-so photo. This is not what I am after.
You're right. Photography IS about the final result. Photographic education and teaching, however, is about the process.
If you were taught otherwise, you were taught wrong.
-
You're right. Photography IS about the final result. Photographic education and teaching, however, is about the process.
If you were taught otherwise, you were taught wrong.
Fair enough, our opinions differ here. You say a so-so photos is sufficient for teaching; I say its not. Your statement that I was taught "wrong" seems to be ladden with prejudice however. I just prefer to study high quality images not low quality ones.
In the end, a teacher has to show his students why the student should take the effort to study. If he tells the student to study for the sake of learning the process, thats kind of demotivating. In my opinion, a teacher must show a student what he will be able to do with what he studied. Showing world class images is important in that regard. Compare it to you school days. Did you learn to analyze a novel or a poem on the example of something your teacher quickly scribbled on a piece of paper during the break or did your teacher made you read and analyzie fine writings by good authors?
-
Stamper,
Have you ever seen a terrific picture of this place? I've never seen one. This place is boring like hell.
Can someone post here a great pic of Angkor?
As I pointed before, it is one of the worst place for photography, and one of the most boring area if to be unique is your goal. (like the Eiffel tower for example).
All the pic I saw so far from here are just boring, but of course I do not pretend to have seen everything.
Fred.
Wow.. to paint with such a broad brush..
Yes, I've seen 'terrific' images taken inside the Angkor complex. I've also walked the side streets and observed some outstanding oils produced by local artists. In Siem Reap proper you'll find several art studios featuring wonderful photography and of course with prints for sale. One studio stands out in my mind. They sold exclusively infrared captures which lend themselves very well to the venue. Fantastic work. Of course it involved spending some time on a site, learning some of the culture, observing the weather, perhaps even finding a knowledgeable guide. The locals who live there can be a great help.
Boring? I suppose we all find different things exciting, other things boring. Angkor is what I classify as a target rich environment. There are many opportunities for unique and interesting images.. but perhaps not if you stand in the crowd and point your camera in the same direction as the tourists.
It's true that it's a major challenge. The natural light is often difficult to work with and finding color to add to the composition requires a bit of thought.
Personally.. I think this is a very easy place for a talented photographer to make great photographs, often more unique than you might expect. And it's easy for the talented photographer, for exactly the reasons you stated which would prove difficult to most.
I highly encourage anyone looking for a life experience to visit Angkor. I'd recommend they go at the right time of the year, find a good guide (inexpensive) based on recommendations, and not follow the herd. Spend enough time at each site to really see what's there.
-
All of that was extremely interesting and well-written, Ray, and has made me want to find out more. Thanks for taking the time to put it together.
The problem is that a photograph has to stand on its own (visual) merits. Unless of course it was intended to be an illustration for an article about Angkor Wat.
John
Well, thanks for thanking me.
I understand what you mean, but I wonder if any photograph (or painting) really does stand on its own visual merits. Surely it always needs an interpretation (by the viewer) to be fully appreciated, and such interpretation always requires some degree of cultural familiarity with the subject matter or content.
Returning to Art Wolfe's article, I see his final comment on the image is as follows: Ordinarily, the bright vertical strip of sun lit sandstone would bother me, but in this case it seems like a border between the past and present and accentuates the verticals of the temple's pillars.
Without any cultural interpretation, the vertical sunlit strip of sandstone seems a compositional flaw. I would prefer it to be toned down, but not necessarily as much as I indicated in a previous post. These sorts of things are always very subjective judgements.
For me, the reason that Art gives us, that it seems an appropriate border between the past and present, doesn't work for me because I understand that the present, on the right side of the image, is symbolically even further in the past than the bas-relief dancing ladies on the left. Buddhism is 2,500 years old, as symbolized by the red robe the monk is wearing, whereas the temple he's sitting in is only about 1,000 years old.
One major problem when trying to get good photographs of the temples at Angkor, is that there are so many tourists infuriatingly always in the way. The only people one really wants to see in one's photos are those who fit naturally into the environment, such as Buddhist monks or Apsara dancing ladies.
-
Wow.. to paint with such a broad brush..
Yes, I've seen 'terrific' images taken inside the Angkor complex. I've also walked the side streets and observed some outstanding oils produced by local artists. In Siem Reap proper you'll find several art studios featuring wonderful photography and of course with prints for sale. One studio stands out in my mind. They sold exclusively infrared captures which lend themselves very well to the venue. Fantastic work. Of course it involved spending some time on a site, learning some of the culture, observing the weather, perhaps even finding a knowledgeable guide. The locals who live there can be a great help.
Boring? I suppose we all find different things exciting, other things boring. Angkor is what I classify as a target rich environment. There are many opportunities for unique and interesting images.. but perhaps not if you stand in the crowd and point your camera in the same direction as the tourists.
It's true that it's a major challenge. The natural light is often difficult to work with and finding color to add to the composition requires a bit of thought.
Personally.. I think this is a very easy place for a talented photographer to make great photographs, often more unique than you might expect. And it's easy for the talented photographer, for exactly the reasons you stated which would prove difficult to most.
I highly encourage anyone looking for a life experience to visit Angkor. I'd recommend they go at the right time of the year, find a good guide (inexpensive) based on recommendations, and not follow the herd. Spend enough time at each site to really see what's there.
I certainly agree with what you say.
I volontary pointed one side of the coin, you made the other one.
But back to the article,
It has been said by many that the pics where not at the normal Art's level. Fair enough. But I also noticed that some people did liked the pics, and not specially beginners. So where is the truth?
And the question stands: for a (in)formative content, does "top class art" has to be involved and if not, then the content will be discreditated? I think that depends on how onces take the content.
Fred.
-
I certainly agree with what you say.
I volontary pointed one side of the coin, you made the other one.
But back to the article,
It has been said by many that the pics where not at the normal Art's level. Fair enough. But I also noticed that some people did liked the pics, and not specially beginners. So where is the truth?
And the question stands: for a (in)formative content, does "top class art" has to be involved and if not, then the content will be discreditated? I think that depends on how onces take the content.
Fred.
This has nothing to do with discrediting anybody nor anybody's work. It is giving an opinion that a differnt image might have illustarted ARt's point clearer to me and some other people. This is meant as feedback for the author so that he knows from which kind of image his audience would take the greatest profit. After all it doesnt cost Art anything to choose one image over the other. Here we are simply giving opinions, so that he may have a guideline what people like to read and see for his next article. Maybe he understands my position, maybe he likes yours better. I dont know. I just felt that a thread giving feedback is fairer to the author than leaving him in the dark about his audience's opinion.
-
oh my god! I just realised how many grammatical and spelling mistakes I'm making with my english in my posts...
Sorry for that mess.
I do not use corrector for the speed.
-
OK I am being untrue to myself, by skipping in again, although I wanted to leave for good.
Point is that there are many very good photography from Angkor Wat, with fascinating composition. For example: www.stevemccurry.com. There was also a National Geographic article about 2 years back from another photographer which featured a breathtaking image of a monk in the temples of angkor. Therefore it is simply untrue when somebody above said that one couldnt take great photographs at Angkor.
Anyways, in my humble opinion this photograph is failure compostion wise, as it falls in two equal sides, making the eye jump left and right without any clear focus point. Therefore I was not drawn into the image but bored by it. This made me conclude that it wasnt the right example for an article on composition, given that ARt does indeed take stunning photographs. This one just wasnt one of them.
I wonder if people thought the same if the image didnt have the sticker Art Wolfe attached to it....... Propably it is the same as in sports. If Michael Jordan delivered one of his very rare bad performances his fans still fiercly argued that he was the best player on court that particular night.
Mc Curry (great photographer) did brillantly the 1, 6, 17 and 19 # according to me. The last 2 ones are really singular and escapes the "one more pic of the stones" that are usually taken.
-
Mc Curry (great photographer) did brillantly the 1, 6, 17 and 19 # according to me. The last 2 ones are really singular and escapes the "one more pic of the stones" that are usually taken.
Great, hum? I really like McCurry a lot. Sadly he changed the look of his images when he switched to digital. His post 2004 photographs are a little bit brighter and a lot less contrasty with lower black point, which makes them less athmospheric than the old ones.
Does anybody know whether it is possible to duplicate that old Kodachrome look with digital? Any good Lightroom presets /color profiles? So far I have found only bad ones, that dont even get close to the original look.
-
One major problem when trying to get good photographs of the temples at Angkor, is that there are so many tourists infuriatingly always in the way. The only people one really wants to see in one's photos are those who fit naturally into the environment, such as Buddhist monks or Apsara dancing ladies.
Perspective..
The first time I photographed Angkor I spent over 3 weeks patiently waiting for groups of tourists to pass by and capturing the scenes without people. The only exceptions was the day I started the rent-a-monk program and made a few captures using their services.
In the months of post processing that followed I kept getting the feeling something significant was missing from the images.. turns out it was people.
I've since been back more than a few times and stopped worrying about 'most' of the people. The huge tour buses of Koreans and Chinese still bother me.. they're loud and very disrespectful of what the locals consider a very sacred site.. so I suppose I still have my limits..
-
Does anybody know whether it is possible to duplicate that old Kodachrome look with digital? Any good Lightroom presets /color profiles? So far I have found only bad ones, that dont even get close to the original look.
have you tried this:
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=40779 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=40779)
It's not a total solution, but a pretty good starting point.
-
It is a pity - or maybe not - that Art hasn't posted something in reply to what has been said.
You ARE kidding...right?
Art should not come on to this chicken coop and waste his time talking to you bunch of "clucking hens"...seriously, Art has nothing better to do that get into the mud with you guys? Surely you jest...there is ZERO upside and massive downside for Art to post ANYTHING to ANYBODY in this thread...
Read the article...if the article helps you, cool...if the article doesn't help, move along and find something else to do...
Jeeeshe, talking about looking into the horse's mouth and complaining about cavities...if _YOU_ can do something _BETTER_, then do so and shut the F$%CK UP...ya know?
-
Jeeeshe, talking about looking into the horse's mouth and complaining about cavities...if _YOU_ can do something _BETTER_, then do so and shut the F$%CK UP...ya know?
A little louder, please? There's a guy next door practicing the drums.
if _YOU_ can do something _BETTER_, then do so and shut the F$%CK UP...ya know?
Thanks.
-
How does the "Rent a Monk" in Angkor Wat differ from "Rent a Wolfe" at a game farm?
-
You ARE kidding...right?
Art should not come on to this chicken coop and waste his time talking to you bunch of "clucking hens"...seriously, Art has nothing better to do that get into the mud with you guys? Surely you jest...there is ZERO upside and massive downside for Art to post ANYTHING to ANYBODY in this thread...
Read the article...if the article helps you, cool...if the article doesn't help, move along and find something else to do...
Jeeeshe, talking about looking into the horse's mouth and complaining about cavities...if _YOU_ can do something _BETTER_, then do so and shut the F$%CK UP...ya know?
When he posted his article he started talking to us so a follow up is/was possible. If there was a contest for the biggest ignoramus on the internet then you would be in the running for the top spot. Suggestion ..... if you don't have anything constructive to post then keep yours shut?
-
When he posted his article he started talking to us so a follow up is/was possible. If there was a contest for the biggest ignoramus on the internet then you would be in the running for the top spot. Suggestion ..... if you don't have anything constructive to post then keep yours shut?
Stamper, stamper!
This isn't Scotland: you aren't supposed to tell it like it is, you know; that sort of thing can lead to Independent Thoughts!
I wonder how the election will turn out this time - suicide or just assisted suicide or even, heaven forbid, bloody murder and rape! Marooned here on a chunk of rock in the Med, with huge penalties if I should dream of taking the old wheels onto the ferry to anywhere, my concerns are the pound/euro exchange rate, the fact that some old people that come to live here are allowed the UK heating allowance whilst others, who have been here longer than the legislation allowing such payments, are NOT allowed them at all under the new legislation. That's part of labour's FAIRER society: some pensioners are far more equal than others. Inglorious Basterds! And some who don't friggin' well know better, say: oh - heating in Spain? How absurd! Permanent summer there, don't you know! Cost me €400 a ton for wood this year, and on a bad season I can be forced into buying three of them; electricity is so expensive that most of the place stays closed off to concentrate what heat I can get. Oh, the state pension is worth approx. €420 a month. The Spanish pensioners can't believe that that's what Great Britain thinks of its old folks.
Roll out the tumbrils!
Rob C
-
You ARE kidding...right?
Art should not come on to this chicken coop and waste his time talking to you bunch of "clucking hens"...seriously, Art has nothing better to do that get into the mud with you guys? Surely you jest...there is ZERO upside and massive downside for Art to post ANYTHING to ANYBODY in this thread...
Read the article...if the article helps you, cool...if the article doesn't help, move along and find something else to do...
Jeeeshe, talking about looking into the horse's mouth and complaining about cavities...if _YOU_ can do something _BETTER_, then do so and shut the F$%CK UP...ya know?
Well, as for me, who started this thread, I dont expect ARt to reply here. Maybe he reads this and maybe he finds our feedback useful. If he doenst, well than be it. There is no reason Art should discuss with us, after all most of us are just giving audience feedback and not asking for Art to justify himself. Even if stamper asked for that, there is no reason to jump at him like that.
Of course I often too feel like telling people to beg of (not stamper, though), but before I post a statement to this effect, I usually ask myself what words I would choose if the person was standing in front of me. Can we try to be as polite as when talking face to face to somebody, please?
-
How does the "Rent a Monk" in Angkor Wat differ from "Rent a Wolfe" at a game farm?
There is no travel photography contest I know of which prohibits the use of "unfree" human models . Even if there was, there would be no way of determing whther or not the model was paid by the photographer. Probably only press photography contests prohibt arranged scenes. Travel photography is usually not about a true reportage but often about capturing the atmosphere of a place.
-
have you tried this:
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=40779 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=40779)
It's not a total solution, but a pretty good starting point.
Thanks alot, that link was very helpful!
-
... Maybe he reads this and maybe he finds our feedback useful...
Perhaps Jen, what took this thread immediately off topic is that all it really affirms is the old saying 'you can't please all people all of the time, etc."
When you talk about "our feedback", what you really mean is "your feedback". Not a collective at all, but a singlular and which you hoped would be supported by similar voices.
However, if the intent is that Art then writes articles specifically to address your concerns, someone else will likely start a similar post because his next article doesn't address their needs/desires/personal preferences.
In the end, the only thing Art can do is write what he wants to write and readers can take from it what they will. If one article suits you, then great. Learn from it and apply it. If another article doesn't suit you, then great. Also learn from it (eg. what doesn't suit you) and don't apply it.
Either way, don't knock a guy in a negative way for putting something down and offering it for free.
Regards,
Peter
-
Perspective..
The first time I photographed Angkor I spent over 3 weeks patiently waiting for groups of tourists to pass by and capturing the scenes without people. The only exceptions was the day I started the rent-a-monk program and made a few captures using their services.
In the months of post processing that followed I kept getting the feeling something significant was missing from the images.. turns out it was people.
I've since been back more than a few times and stopped worrying about 'most' of the people. The huge tour buses of Koreans and Chinese still bother me.. they're loud and very disrespectful of what the locals consider a very sacred site.. so I suppose I still have my limits..
Steve,
Sometimes the tourists are groups of Buddhist monks in their saffron robes. I don't mind them. They suit the environment, although I've always found the mixture of monks and voluptuous ladies a little incongruous because, as we all know, monks strive to have no thoughts about sex. I suppose the situation is explained by the fact that the early temples were purely Hindu. There was a gradual transition towards Buddhism over the centuries, rather than a complete take-over with the usual destruction of the former idols.
What I find annoying are the hordes of tourists just aimlessy wandering around. Even before one lot has departed, there's another that immediately takes its place, each member of the group requiring his or her photo to be taken in front of whatever feature is considered to be the main attraction of the site.
However, sometimes the tourists can become the main feature of a composition. Some of these temples have very big and very steep steps leading to a shrine at the top. Climbing such steep steps seems to appeal to those with a montaineering spirit. I think I captured a few amusing shots of the tourists. Sometimes the wife is the leader and gets to the top first whilst hubby still struggles below.
[attachment=21423:Steep_steps_3.jpg] [attachment=21424:Made_it.jpg] Phew! Made it! What a view!
One also has to be careful on the descent. One young tourist from Eastern Europe boasted to his friends that he could run down these steps without stopping. To prove his point, he tried it, stumbled about halfway down, and tragically landed at the bottom, dead. This is not recommended. Be careful!
[attachment=21425:Steep_steps_2.jpg] [attachment=21426:Steep_st..._cropped.jpg]
-
Perhaps Jen, what took this thread immediately off topic is that all it really affirms is the old saying 'you can't please all people all of the time, etc."
When you talk about "our feedback", what you really mean is "your feedback". Not a collective at all, but a singlular and which you hoped would be supported by similar voices.
However, if the intent is that Art then writes articles specifically to address your concerns, someone else will likely start a similar post because his next article doesn't address their needs/desires/personal preferences.
In the end, the only thing Art can do is write what he wants to write and readers can take from it what they will. If one article suits you, then great. Learn from it and apply it. If another article doesn't suit you, then great. Also learn from it (eg. what doesn't suit you) and don't apply it.
Either way, don't knock a guy in a negative way for putting something down and offering it for free.
Regards,
Peter
What I really meant was our feedback as in our feedback. Meaning the opinions of people agreeing AND disagreeing with me. Excluded from the term "feedback", as used by me, are dicussions WHY people have a certain opinion and discussion if people by whatever morals standards are entiteld to have the opinion they have. Therefore lableing constructive cristicim as "negative way" is just like comending people for a certain opinion NOT wanted on this thread. Feedback means saying "i like the article" for some reason or "I didnt like it" for some other reason. Really nothing more. If you feel that constructive criticism is a personal offence because it "knocks somebody in a negative way", I resepctfully disagree.
-
What I really meant was our feedback as in our feedback.
Perhaps though, the original wording of the thread leads to different interpretations on what you perhaps meant. It's full of "I", but not a since "us", "our", etc. It's your opinion directed specifically at Art.
In terms of the invitation for others to provide feedback. I wasn't underwhelmed by the article. The article is about the thought process in getting from the initial snap (Cambodia-1) to the final version (Cambodia-7). The progression has produced a stronger image in my view; and whether or not that particular image is a World beater or not, doesn't really matter. It's the process of constructing the image that was important in the context of the article. Whether or not the final capture is something special, at the very least the chances of producing top class images are improved by trying v. just accepting the initial version.
-
Perhaps though, the original wording of the thread leads to different interpretations on what you perhaps meant. It's full of "I", but not a since "us", "our", etc. It's your opinion directed specifically at Art.
Because I started the thread with my opinion. Note that I never attacked anybody for disagreeing with me in the course of the discussion. People telling me that I shouldnt have or tell my opinion make me jump, however.
-
There is no travel photography contest I know of which prohibits the use of "unfree" human models . Even if there was, there would be no way of determing whther or not the model was paid by the photographer. Probably only press photography contests prohibt arranged scenes. Travel photography is usually not about a true reportage but often about capturing the atmosphere of a place.
There was an uproar last year when a photographer won a prestigious competition with an image of a wolf jumping over a gate. He was accused of setting up a tame wolf to do the jumping. I believe it was a topic of interest on here?
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/A...200912415506480 (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Award-Winning-Spanish-Artist-Jose-Luis-Rodriguez-Accused-Of-Faking-Wildlife-Photo-Of-Jumping-Wolf/Article/200912415506480)
-
Isn't it amazing, the power of a couple of so-so photographs to generate anger! Perhaps that was the real game being played out, the bets collected...
A better and more rewarding challenge might be to do the Trevi Fountain instead, and attempt to catch the atmosphere of a Dolce Vita sequence with only two figures and a cat to populate it. You might, of course, feel an obligation to shoot as per toursit-dominated daylight reality and then PS the others out. Or me, for that matter. But you don't hold the original file on me! Shoot!
Rob C
-
Isn't it amazing, the power of a couple of so-so photographs to generate anger! Perhaps that was the real game being played out, the bets collected...
Rob C
I certainly have learned that now.