Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye  (Read 3473 times)

Chris Calohan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2744
  • Editing Allowed
Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« on: October 03, 2016, 04:09:26 PM »

If anyone else has a better title, I'm all ears.
Logged
What! Me Worry?

Chris Calohan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2744
  • Editing Allowed
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2016, 10:54:09 AM »

Since there are no replies, what is it you don't like about the image? Non responses are worse than negative ones. At least from a negative comment one can strive to do better the next time around.
Logged
What! Me Worry?

Otto Phocus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 634
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2016, 11:51:34 AM »

Perhaps you can help us out.  What do you find interesting about this photograph?  What was your intent?
Logged
I shoot with a Camera Obscura with an optical device attached that refracts and transmits light.

Chris Calohan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2744
  • Editing Allowed
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2016, 01:48:45 PM »

To me, it's a double image. The shadow of mother and child reflects a kind of guidance as in the shadows her hand appears on his shoulder. As it stands without the other implied possibility, there is still a sense of freedom though not too much. And, i think the processing helps to show both images.
Logged
What! Me Worry?

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16036
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #4 on: October 04, 2016, 04:17:19 PM »

I guess that there's just a feeling of no-no about shooting kids nowadays.

That doesn't imply anything, just a measure of current societal thought.

David Eckels

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1496
  • Paris sidewalk cafe
    • DavidEckelsPhotography.com
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #5 on: October 04, 2016, 06:07:42 PM »

I think the title fits, Chris. Personally, I don't see it as exploitive, but then I am usually politically incorrect ;)

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12720
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #6 on: October 05, 2016, 12:57:27 AM »

I think the title fits, Chris. Personally, I don't see it as exploitive, but then I am usually politically incorrect ;)
+1.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes    (A sampler of my new book is on my website.)
http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10628
    • Echophoto
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2016, 01:06:08 AM »

+1

I would add that I like it, the shadows sort of improve the image.

Best regards
Erik

I think the title fits, Chris. Personally, I don't see it as exploitive, but then I am usually politically incorrect ;)

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1383
    • 500px
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #8 on: October 05, 2016, 05:50:39 AM »

I think the shadows are essential!

And in case I came over as some sort of guardian of PC elsewhere, I have no problem with this at all. It's true though that some people get ultra protective of their kids now.
Logged

Otto Phocus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 634
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #9 on: October 05, 2016, 06:24:58 AM »

Since the shadows seemed to be an important part of your intent,

1.  You have cut off the woman's head in the shadow.  If the shadows are an important part of the composition, I feel they should be treated as if the shadow was the person -- don't cut off limbs.
2.  In PP would it be possible to darken the shadows of the two people?  This would make the shadows more prevalent in the composition.  The eye is drawn to the extremes of tones in a photograph.  First to what is brightest and then to what is darkest.   Because you had to work with the light you had, the shadows are rendered rather light.  Perhaps darkening the shadows might help?  Especially since the shadows are in "competition" with the tonal differences of the sand patterns.
3.  Just the opposite with the shadow on the left. Would it be possible to lighten up that shadow?  In my opinion, this left shadow is not dark enough to serve as a frame, but is dark enough to distract my eye.  Since this shadow does not lead my eye to anything you want it to be directed, do you think lighting or even cropping that left shadow would help in your composition.

It would be interesting to see this shot in colour.
Logged
I shoot with a Camera Obscura with an optical device attached that refracts and transmits light.

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1383
    • 500px
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #10 on: October 05, 2016, 09:23:27 AM »

Logged

David Eckels

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1496
  • Paris sidewalk cafe
    • DavidEckelsPhotography.com
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #11 on: October 05, 2016, 10:55:31 AM »

...in case I came over as some sort of guardian of PC...
You did not

Otto Phocus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 634
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #12 on: October 05, 2016, 12:08:06 PM »

Rules suck.

The original sculpture did not cut off the arms, they were later destroyed.
Logged
I shoot with a Camera Obscura with an optical device attached that refracts and transmits light.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16036
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #13 on: October 05, 2016, 02:58:55 PM »

You did not


No, he didn't. Personally, I detest PC and all the sadness for which it provides compensation. However, ragarding kids: I would love to snap those street kids that were open day for all those guys in Paris as well as for some in London and even Glasgow. BUT, the problem lies with this damned thing about paedophiles and their horrible abuses. So, the most innocent photography of brats leaves people open to challenge, and it's easier to 'prove' guilt than innocence. And then there's the public notion about smoke without fire, and in these cases, even the smoke is often imaginary. But the harm gets done anyway. My reaction: avoid at all costs.

David Eckels

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1496
  • Paris sidewalk cafe
    • DavidEckelsPhotography.com
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #14 on: October 05, 2016, 04:50:02 PM »

avoid at all costs.
Rob, I fully understand, both sides of that viewpoint. But the other part of me, the artist, responds, "At what cost?"
Pedophillic photographers lurking around a playground seems one thing, obviously sinister, but once the shot is taken, can it not be appreciated innocently? Not necessarily by the same photographer ;) This is the sin of PC. Perhaps the PC Police (not anybody in this thread) should visit all the great museums of the world and be sure to cut out all the cherubim! The assumption every photographer or painter of nudes is a pervert or that images of children derive from pedophiles would lead to our being deprived of some of the greatest art the world has ever seen. And let's not forget the perversions of madonna and child! To me, Chris' image has such a quality, one of tenderness, peacefulness, and watchfulness; it's a beautiful thing.
Sorry for the rant, which was brought on by frustration with our f'd up PC culture and certainly not by any of the views posted herein. Where did my meds go? ;) ;)

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9073
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #15 on: October 07, 2016, 10:08:51 AM »

So, the most innocent photography of brats leaves people open to challenge, and it's easier to 'prove' guilt than innocence.

Nobody has to prove guilt, Rob. If you're suspected, you're guilty. You now have to prove innocence.

Here's one from sixteen years ago, when things weren't quite so screwed up. Just a kid coming down the sidewalk with a balloon, shot with a Casio QV-3000EX. Nowadays, if you made this shot and somebody saw you making it, you'd be strung up on the nearest tree.

Otto Phocus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 634
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #16 on: October 10, 2016, 07:20:44 AM »

A bunch of years ago, my wife was visiting her family back in Germany.  It was the year of the terrible heatwave.  People were literally dying from the heat.  While hanging out in a garden/park, there some toddlers playing in a sprinkler/fountain.  And they were Neked!!!  O the horrors!  Evidently, in Germany this is not an issue (nor should it be an issue).  These are toddlers playing in a sprinkler.  In the process of her trip, my wife took a lot of pictures, including some of the park.

When she got back in the US, she was legitimately concerned with what should she do with the films?  If she sent it to a lab, and they saw photographs of  "neked kids", would they call the cops on my wife?  Should she even take the chance?   I think she still has the undeveloped rolls somewhere.  Sad state of being.

As a US society, we are still rather puritanical about some things.  It is part of our culture.
Logged
I shoot with a Camera Obscura with an optical device attached that refracts and transmits light.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16036
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #17 on: October 10, 2016, 09:09:32 AM »

A bunch of years ago, my wife was visiting her family back in Germany.  It was the year of the terrible heatwave.  People were literally dying from the heat.  While hanging out in a garden/park, there some toddlers playing in a sprinkler/fountain.  And they were Neked!!!  O the horrors!  Evidently, in Germany this is not an issue (nor should it be an issue).  These are toddlers playing in a sprinkler.  In the process of her trip, my wife took a lot of pictures, including some of the park.

When she got back in the US, she was legitimately concerned with what should she do with the films?  If she sent it to a lab, and they saw photographs of  "neked kids", would they call the cops on my wife?  Should she even take the chance?   I think she still has the undeveloped rolls somewhere.  Sad state of being.

As a US society, we are still rather puritanical about some things.  It is part of our culture.


It's got nothing to do with being puritanical, it's got absolutely everything to do with exploitation of children, real or imaginary. I am absolutely not implying anything untoward about your wife's motivation, so don't go down that one! What I do say is this: were those kids mine, I would be less than thrilled at a stranger photographing them, "neked" or fully-clad. They are mine, not yours; reserve your photography of kids to your own!

And here's why: was a time when nobody had heard of child-molesters; as with homosexuality, it was something that never crossed one's path, and held to be a bit of an urban myth. Suddenly, at least in my neck of the woods, the 60s came along and something that could once have had you arrested became not just accepted, but a case of protected and, possibly, special rights!

Personally, as long as they do not impinge on my life or that of any minor, I have zero interest in the sexual inclinations of others; my fear, when we consider the kids, is that some day even that will become accepted as a form of norm. It has been before, and in some societies always has been - so take care the freedoms one screams in the streets to bring about.

As I said earler, nothing to do with your wife's snaps, so don't take it that way.

I have also remarked more than once that I regret the changes in public mores that brough this about; lots of my favourite photographers (I have many!) made beautiful pictures of street kids running around and playing, totally involved in their little worlds of the imagination. They are natural actors during that age of innocence, and offer expressions and drama that they will never be able to offer as genuinely again in their lives - great stuff for photographers to catch if they can. But, the audience has changed, fresh exploitative markets have boomed and a whole network of monsters awaits out there, plotting horrors for which they should be hanged, drawn and quartered. In essence, we have allowed so many other things to become accepted behaviour (drunken Friday nights on streets, dealers doing their trade...) that as a result, even innocent actions have had to be curtailed in order to prevent the acts of the few taking hold of the popular imagination and exploding.

Some balancing act, freedom and the negative exploitation of it. It can't be done: hence, the constant state of flux of our own societal mores. Maybe it will never achieve a divine equilibrium, just drift from extreme to extreme for as long as our species survives.

Rob

David Eckels

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1496
  • Paris sidewalk cafe
    • DavidEckelsPhotography.com
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #18 on: October 10, 2016, 09:50:26 AM »

Some balancing act, freedom and the negative exploitation of it. It can't be done: hence, the constant state of flux of our own societal mores. Maybe it will never achieve a divine equilibrium, just drift from extreme to extreme for as long as our species survives.
Wisdom

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9073
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Under a Mother's Watchful Eye
« Reply #19 on: October 10, 2016, 10:42:38 AM »

Right, David. And right, Rob. I don't think the plan is for humans to have a nice comfortable ride.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up