Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: 23/03/2013  (Read 1566 times)

Riaan van Wyk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 812
23/03/2013
« on: November 23, 2013, 07:19:40 am »

Thoughts please?

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: 23/03/2013
« Reply #1 on: November 23, 2013, 07:26:08 am »

I like it, though I'd reduce the sky somehow by cropping or reducing it otherwise by working on tones or colors, since its conflicting with the interesting water.
I think you had an image with a similar conflict recently, hadn't you?

ned.ward

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 43
  • Ned Ward - Eternal Apprentice, I'm keen to learn.
Re: 23/03/2013
« Reply #2 on: November 23, 2013, 08:09:05 am »

Nice, I'd try nudging the contrast, on my screen it seems a tad flat. The dark fore may become too dark though?
Ned

Logged
"Hapless nobody, married with a mortgage and no job, loves photography and zany humour, seeks philanthropist with amnesia."

brandtb

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 972
    • http://www.brandtbolding.com
Re: 23/03/2013
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2013, 08:24:32 am »

Static/non-blurred clouds "moving" horizontally across the picture plane...water blurred "moving" vertically on picture plane - are these very separate elements working against each other? Most likely
Logged
Brandt Bolding
www.brandtbolding.com

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1077
    • flickr
Re: 23/03/2013
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2013, 10:31:21 am »

I tried painting on the sky to some effect, but I like this desaturation better.
Logged

Riaan van Wyk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 812
Re: 23/03/2013
« Reply #5 on: November 25, 2013, 12:13:47 am »

Thank you all for looking, it's appreciated.

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: 23/03/2013
« Reply #6 on: November 25, 2013, 04:24:23 am »

Missing an obvious focal point such as a Somali raider attacking a large ship or a small island with a coconut tree on the horizon? Personally imo this type of image needs a focal point to be really worthwhile. :-\

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: 23/03/2013
« Reply #7 on: November 25, 2013, 04:48:13 am »

Missing an obvious focal point such as a Somali raider attacking a large ship or a small island with a coconut tree on the horizon? Personally imo this type of image needs a focal point to be really worthwhile. :-\


What you really had in mind was a mermaid, but there are no mermaids in those oceans anymore - you have to import your own fakes. The real ones all ended up as tuna salad.

Rob C

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2705
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: 23/03/2013
« Reply #8 on: November 25, 2013, 09:00:21 am »


There are no mermaids in those oceans anymore.

Rob C

I find this to be a sad fact in much of life.

Peter

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: 23/03/2013
« Reply #9 on: November 25, 2013, 09:32:03 am »

I find this to be a sad fact in much of life.

Peter


Loss of innocence, Peter? I think it starts with precocious children being encouraged.

I seem to remember being quite well aware of women (not really much of girls), when I was about eleven or twelve. Something lost - or something gained? Hard call, but that's how it can be. Oh! Mrs Robinson - where are you now that I need you?

Rob C

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: 23/03/2013
« Reply #10 on: November 25, 2013, 09:51:58 am »

I find this to be a sad fact in much of life.

Peter


I had something to say about mermaids a year or two ago, when I was involved in a show. I had this on a little card, and some images were projected from a computer. Yes, it was a local 'art community' effort and I never got to see any of it: like Sandro, I was laid low by flu, quite possibly a great wave of fortune. The Spanish translation was kindly written by my Selmer-wielding friend, Santiago Bo.

FWIW:



The Birth of Venus


Always a pale child, Sandro Botticelli would spend hours of the day in solitary walks by the fabled shore, chatting quietly with the mermaids who, taking pity upon the poor kid, would allow themselves to be seen. Nonetheless, sirens to a fish, they would temper their discourse with anecdotes about heroes and other mythical creatures until poor little Sandro, head throbbing, could take no more, and would scurry back to the relative silence of his broken home.

This continued until his fourth birthday when, heavy with a cold, he was confined to quarters. Bored, he wandered around the house until he came upon the wooden ladder to the flat roof, an area forbidden him because of the difficulties a small child might face attempting to challenge the perils of such a thing.

Anyway, since nobody was around and his mother was entertaining some soldiers in the garden, he took the opportunity of going where he had never gone before: up and ever higher, at least to the open trapdoor to the roof. Now, you must understand that for a four-year-old, wooden ladders do indeed represent a formidable obstacle. With great care, he climbed until his head just reached the level of the floor outside.

At that point he almost fell right back down. There, on a bed of swan feathers, her feet framing his ears, lay Aunt Leda, snoring and sunbathing naked as a frog, in perfect simulation of the Vitruvian Man in his more athletic mode. At four, such things are inclined to leave an indelible mark upon one’s mind.

And so it was with Botticelli. From then onwards, he saw everything in terms of shells, a condition that stayed with him until the end and gave rise to his most renowned oeuvre: the Birth of Venus. The mermaids saw little of him after that.



© Rob Campbell, 2011


P.S.- Perhaps this is off-topìc.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2013, 09:55:00 am by Rob C »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up