Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: RSL on January 11, 2013, 09:58:36 am

Title: Path II
Post by: RSL on January 11, 2013, 09:58:36 am

Next week I'll contact Christie's and see if they're interested. I can make the print wall-sized if they think that'll help to sell it. Should sell for more than Rhine II since it has a more interesting background.

Title: Re: Path II
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 11, 2013, 10:06:44 am

Sorry, Russ, even with your D800, a.k.a. The Detail Enhancer, I can not discern what's that in the background: dinosaur droppings, perhaps?

Title: Re: Path II
Post by: amolitor on January 11, 2013, 10:21:25 am

Those are hay bales, modern style!

So far this ain't doing much for me..

Title: Re: Path II
Post by: RobbieV on January 11, 2013, 11:24:58 am

For a minimalist inspired piece, I find the oranges distracting. It's probably because I don't understand the conventions though.

I'll start the bidding at $300,000.

Title: Re: Path II
Post by: Bruce Cox on January 11, 2013, 12:15:30 pm

The shadows of the central trees bother me. I fancy they would do better more nearly parallel with the fence or, failing that, completely parallel with the path.  Don't pick the oranges though; I like-um.

Bruce

Title: Re: Path II
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on January 11, 2013, 12:41:10 pm

Sorrry, Russ. There's too much going on on the other bank side of the path.
Simplify, simplify, simplify. And then make it huge.

Title: Re: Path II
Post by: RSL on January 11, 2013, 01:42:19 pm

You're right Eric. Here's the final product -- cropped.

Title: Re: Path II
Post by: amolitor on January 11, 2013, 02:20:12 pm

Now THAT is some excellent commentary there. It's much more clearly a direct reference to Rhine II, and a refutation of it.

That sounds all art-world bulls*tty, but I think it's actually a pretty reasonable way to look at it. Just because it's not in words doesn't mean it can't be pretty direct about peeing in someone else's corn flakes.

Title: Re: Path II
Post by: Rob C on January 11, 2013, 02:42:07 pm

Better peeing in those cereals that snap, crackle and pop; cornflakes have no drama. Even with semi-skimmed milk. I know: I test them every morning!

Rob C

Title: Re: Path II
Post by: Dave (Isle of Skye) on January 19, 2013, 02:50:43 pm

Quote from: amolitor on January 11, 2013, 02:20:12 pm

Now THAT is some excellent commentary there. It's much more clearly a direct reference to Rhine II, and a refutation of it.

That sounds all art-world bulls*tty, but I think it's actually a pretty reasonable way to look at it. Just because it's not in words doesn't mean it can't be pretty direct about peeing in someone else's corn flakes.

I thought the actual terminological usage of this type of phraseology was when trying to disuade someone from doing somthing stupid - I don't wish to p*ss on your chips (that's French fries for our American friends), or fart on your cornflakes, but...!

Had to remove the following, as it was putting me off my cornflakes..  Thanks Rob  :-[

I must say I was shocked   ::)

Title: Re: Path II
Post by: Rob C on January 19, 2013, 04:14:48 pm

Quote from: Dave (Isle of Skye) on January 19, 2013, 02:50:43 pm

I thought the actual terminological usage of this type of phraseology was when trying to disuade someone from doing somthing stupid - I don't wish to p*ss on your chips (that's French fries for our American friends), or fart on your cornflakes, but...!

Another even less salubrious quote I once heard said to a young lady shop assistant who was not being very helpful to a gentleman customer of some advancing years, as he turned to walk out of the shop in digust - I wouldn't deal with her young'un, she wouldn't even p*ss in your mouth if your teeth were on fire...

I must say I was shocked   ::)

There are photographers who sell books etc. shooting exactly that, if without the fire.

Sick world indeed.

Rob C