Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => Discussing Photographic Styles => Topic started by: William Walker on August 18, 2019, 06:12:03 am
-
This happens to be about 30 meters from my front door...
My guess is that the sap from the leaves interacted with the some substance in the tar to create this image.
The bottom line here - in my opinion - is that the credit for the image goes to the street!
William
-
That's my kind of Street photography, William!
-
That's my kind of Street photography, William!
Correction: Sorry, I should not have capitalized "Street."
I'm usually more careful than that. I generally use the term "Street photography" to refer to the classical Street genre thet Russ describes so well in his essay. The classical Street photography is about people and not about streets.
I have made hundreds of exposures of streets (with no people), so that is "my" form of "street" photography. I have also attempted a few "Street" photographs, but they are much more difficult to find.
Here is one of my "street" photographs and one of my "Street" photographs:
-
Correction: Sorry, I should not have capitalized "Street."
I'm usually more careful than that. I generally use the term "Street photography" to refer to the classical Street genre thet Russ describes so well in his essay. The classical Street photography is about people and not about streets.
I have made hundreds of exposures of streets (with no people), so that is "my" form of "street" photography. I have also attempted a few "Street" photographs, but they are much more difficult to find.
Here is one of my "street" photographs and one of my "Street" photographs:
I like your "street" photo better than the other one; that red makes it an Eggleston, which is something else.
-
Now, William, don't argue. Just keep shooting pictures of streets.
-
I like your "street" photo better than the other one; that red makes it an Eggleston, which is something else.
Hm, I sense a growing interest for Eggleston in your latest posts, Rob. 8) (btw, maybe you would like to check Harry Gruyaert, he is the real ‘red’ colorist of that era. ;)
-
Hm, I sense a growing interest for Eggleston in your latest posts, Rob. 8) (btw, maybe you would like to check Harry Gruyaert, he is the real ‘red’ colorist of that era. ;)
I do not enjoy Mr Eggleston's pictures most of the time; some look okay to me but the majority are too random and without purpose - in my opinion, of course. It's like he has been proclaimed God, and so whatever he does has to be miraculous. I don't follow that faith, even if he might.
;-)
-
William, both OP images are quite nice, fine-art gallery worthy.
-
William, both OP images are quite nice, fine-art gallery worthy.
+1.
-
William, both OP images are quite nice, fine-art gallery worthy.
And make that another thumbs up.
-
Thanks for all the smartass ;D replies!
I was really hoping that someone would offer an opinion or theory as to how the image appeared there in the first place!
I thought everyone's thought would immediately go to a cave in France and museums would make me fantastic offers to dig up my street...
Oh well... :)
-
I was really hoping that someone would offer an opinion or theory as to how the image appeared there in the first place!
I'm curious too. Is the image of the leaf a photogram? Or simply a chemical stain?
In the autumn, the pavements of London are covered with these leaf impressions. They can look very photo-realistic. I always fancied they were some sort of natural cyanotype. But perhaps light plays no role in their formation?