Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Dancers  (Read 6744 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Dancers
« on: December 05, 2007, 11:30:08 am »

Dancers - Madagascar.

This must be one of the most beautiful images that Michael has ever put up on this site. It has everything that still photography can offer, including motion.

Love it.

Rob C

Don Libby

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 824
  • Iron Creek Photography
    • Iron Creek Photography
Dancers
« Reply #1 on: December 05, 2007, 07:01:19 pm »

I always thought good images should tell a story – this one speaks volumes!

don

Tim Gray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2002
    • http://www.timgrayphotography.com
Dancers
« Reply #2 on: December 05, 2007, 08:42:21 pm »

Yes, the abstract colours and motion make this particularly outstanding.  One of the best in recent memory.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Dancers
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2007, 08:02:29 am »

Quote
Yes, the abstract colours and motion make this particularly outstanding.  One of the best in recent memory.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158545\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I obviously have no idea if Michael does much in this genre, but I have always felt that what he shows from the ´street´ ethic is much more interesting than any of his landscape work. This is very probably a totally personal take on MY photographic tastes rather than his, but it still strikes me that he does these other things so much better.

Luminous-Street.com Michael?

Rob C

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Dancers
« Reply #4 on: December 06, 2007, 08:31:54 am »

Quote
I obviously have no idea if Michael does much in this genre, but I have always felt that what he shows from the ´street´ ethic is much more interesting than any of his landscape work. This is very probably a totally personal take on MY photographic tastes rather than his, but it still strikes me that he does these other things so much better.

Luminous-Street.com Michael?

Rob C
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158640\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's a bit unfair, Rob. I think Michael does both types of photography remarkably well. I actually came across the LL site as a result of an enquiry I made to Epson in Australia as to why I couldn't get good prints from my Epson 1200. The Epson salesman gave me a spiel about how difficult the whole topic of color management was and recommended a few sites on the internet that were very helpful on such matters, one of which was LL.

When I first visited the LL, I was particularly struck by the quality of Michael's landscapes and this feature seemed to distinguish this site from other sites which also provided similar technical advice and tutorials, but few outstanding photos from the owners of the sites.

In those days, Michael even provided tutorials and comments on the compositional interest of photos submitted by readers.

As regards the current front page image, it's very appealing because it has that fluidity of the dance in spades.

It seems this shot was taken with the Canon 50/1.4 at f1.4. I'm glad there was no attempt to get it sharp because the Canon 50/1.4 is incapable of sharpness at full aperture. We would have had a blur of a less appealing kind  .
Logged

Tim Gray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2002
    • http://www.timgrayphotography.com
Dancers
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2007, 08:36:38 am »

Quote
I obviously have no idea if Michael does much in this genre, but I have always felt that what he shows from the ´street´ ethic is much more interesting than any of his landscape work. This is very probably a totally personal take on MY photographic tastes rather than his, but it still strikes me that he does these other things so much better.

Luminous-Street.com Michael?

Rob C
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158640\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

One observation that I'll make is that some images are "OK" at 300x400 - and this is one where the sense of the image doesn't get overly stressed by the web presentation.  I've seen a number of his landscapes displayed as intended in a gallery setting, printed at a nice size and it's impossible to draw any kind of conclusion from the web (other than the web sucks big time in conveying the sense of a large format landscape).
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Dancers
« Reply #6 on: December 06, 2007, 10:07:18 am »

I think this image displays what it is meant to display - an excellent composition of motion, colour, form and exuberance. Of course it won't look exactly the same on print versus a web page, but the essence and the purpose are well retained and well presented. Superb photograph.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

sojournerphoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 473
Dancers
« Reply #7 on: December 06, 2007, 10:30:15 am »

Quote
It seems this shot was taken with the Canon 50/1.4 at f1.4. I'm glad there was no attempt to get it sharp because the Canon 50/1.4 is incapable of sharpness at full aperture. We would have had a blur of a less appealing kind  .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158647\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I've got a 50 1.4 and whilst it is not sharp at full aperture at least you geet appealing bokeh everywhere:)


I like the picture very much. Although I've not seen any of Michael's work as intended I wonder if the web suits 'street' work better than landscape. After all, we're used to a fairly gritty look for street photography, which isn't compromised by the low resolution of web presentation?

Mike
Logged

Tim Gray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2002
    • http://www.timgrayphotography.com
Dancers
« Reply #8 on: December 06, 2007, 10:54:59 am »

Quote
I've got a 50 1.4 and whilst it is not sharp at full aperture at least you geet appealing bokeh everywhere:)
I like the picture very much. Although I've not seen any of Michael's work as intended I wonder if the web suits 'street' work better than landscape. After all, we're used to a fairly gritty look for street photography, which isn't compromised by the low resolution of web presentation?

Mike
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158677\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'd argue that the web is basically best suited to the kind of abstract image posted here.  When you talk about "gritty", what makes the grit interesting is the detail, and even micro detail - all of which is lost in translation to the web.  The web (based on "normal" screen sizes and resolution) is only capable of displaying gross shape and texture.  It the shot relies on any kind of detail (eg the bricks in a building) you're out of luck.  If you're shooting with lots of OOF and motion blur (I'm not being critical) then the broad content will survive the translation.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Dancers
« Reply #9 on: December 06, 2007, 01:06:26 pm »

Ray - I don´t think I was being unfair to Michael at all - there was no criticism of his landscape work intended in the sentence;  I was trying to indicate, and still am, that I find his non-landscape pics more interesting. I did say it was perhaps more to do with MY personal inclinations than his. To try and be even more clear: there are very few landscape pictures from anywhere that hold me for more than a passing moment, though Michael has certainly produced some that have led me into posted congratualations mode.

Luminous-Street would be a pleasant alternative, but oh the hassle for him!

Rob C
« Last Edit: December 06, 2007, 01:06:58 pm by Rob C »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up