|
Author
|
|
vincent
Friend
Registered: December 2008
Location: Co. Kildare Ireland
Posts: 876
|
|
Fri, 2, January, 2015 1:29pm
|
|
|
Peter I'm not convinced that you are fair to us by scanning proofs and then expecting us to judge the photos on their aesthetic value. With the exception of the above photo all the others are lacking in contrast and are difficult to appreciate. Surely a range of tones and contrast add to the final value of photos.
I fail to see any beauty in your first shot and I've no idea why you might have taken the shot. Perhaps you might explain what is in the picture that attracted you to take it.
Your second shot again lacking in contrast looks very like a typical shot taken by a tourist to the ville.Maybe a good finished print might add a lot to its impact.
Your third shot I find quite interesting and would be interested in seeing how you would approach your final version.
Your final shot has a nice sense of composition to it and has a range of tones and contrast lacking in your other shots. Although not perfect and with a major fault in the sky area, this shot to my mind offers you the best chance of producing a first class print.
I hope you don't find my comments too harsh and of course are but one person's opinion
------------------------------
Cheers
Vincent - Not afraid of the dark
|
|
|
|
skellum
Friend
Registered: December 2011
Location: Isle of Lewis
Posts: 1,330
|
|
Fri, 2, January, 2015 4:46pm
|
|
|
Hi Peter.
Good to see someone stick their head over the parapet and invite critique.
I'll disagree a little with Vincent about the first image. I can see exactly how that snaking road would catch your attention. I wonder if moving a little to the right and forward would have 'opened up' the shape? The dark clump of trees act as a destination for the eye to travel to through the print.
I also think that there's a stronger crop, losing a little of the foreground and part of the sky. I've taken the liberty of doing the crop as an illustration- if Peter doesn't like it I will immediately remove it.
The third image, looking across the water at the chateau, is very interesting. In this scan the contrast is obviously flat, but likely the negative has more to offer.
The last image, of the wet roadway, is the only one I wouldn't know what to do with. It seems to lack a clear point of focus. It is very much a 'mood' piece, but lacks something for the eye to settle on.
Having said that, the 'white house behind gate' image is also a mood piece. The mood being distinctly unsettling. Creepy even. The two windows are like eyes, peeking over the hedge.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike O'Pray
Friend
Registered: October 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,984
|
|
Fri, 2, January, 2015 6:13pm
|
|
|
This is the best of the three for me. The dark areas especially the group of trees does add something and I like the contrast in the road's tone and its curve. It is interesting that Skellum sees "things" in "the white house behind gate" that I fail to. As I said in my comment on it the darkness here adds nothing for me
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
MartyNL
Friend
Registered: September 2010
Location: based in The Netherlands
Posts: 3,349
|
|
Fri, 2, January, 2015 8:16pm
|
|
|
I agree with Skellum about the lack of compositional balance in this photo and a crop would improve the visual harmony of the scene.
------------------------------
MartyNL
“Reaching a creative state of mind thru positive action
is considered preferable to waiting for inspiration.” - Minor White, 1950
|
|
|
|
peterlg
Friend
Registered: December 2010
Location: living in Luxembourg
Posts: 507
|
|
Sat, 3, January, 2015 6:06pm
|
|
|
Vincent, Mike, Skellum and Marty, thank you for your comments and for taking the time to react, I very much appreciate your frankness and am glad to have some different views on my photos to chew on.
First: I do apologise for the dust and dirt on all four photos.
Second: They are all cropped to my liking. The rainy road is lightly dodged. The snake road photo is gently burnt in along the upper edge, and the woods behind the castle are also burnt in.
Obviously, I cannot judge the photos myself. Anyway, what is a good and a bad photo? The one I like the most is the white gable with the black fence, as you will probably agree it does not represent anything material, I'm not interested in the house nor the fence nor the garden, is it rather an expression or state of mind? I'm pretty sure the screen does not do a favour to the photo, it's dark but there are plenty of details in the shadows - except for the black fence!
And then, our contacts here somehow tell me that we see images differently, we maybe expect something different from an image. Is it ever possible that we could all agree on one photo as a masterpiece?
Worth a try!
And finally, many good wishes to you all for the new year,
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
skellum
Friend
Registered: December 2011
Location: Isle of Lewis
Posts: 1,330
|
|
Sun, 4, January, 2015 12:32pm
|
|
|
Hi Peter.
As I recently experienced with the FADU book, viewing prints here is completely different to viewing them in reality.
The image of 'white gable black fence' is interesting. I understand what you mean when you say it is less about the house itself than how the print makes one feel.
As photographers we tend (understandably, I think) to be very literal. Metaphor is a rarer language for us.
There is a current thread debating whether we are too focussed on the technical side of photography, and we neglect motivation and the 'philosophy' of photography. I suspect it prompted you to post these??
I sometimes suspect that as a group of mostly amateur photographers we don't take or print enough photographs to develop the level of expertise where we stop worrying about 'process' and focus instead on 'content'. So, good luck making more photographs which are more mysterious and poetic.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike O'Pray
Friend
Registered: October 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,984
|
|
Tue, 6, January, 2015 11:53pm
|
|
|
I hope this doesn't sound antagonistic, Peter as it is not intended to but I think you are saying that you have heard our views for which you thanks us and that on balance you think you have produced prints that meet your objectives. They work for you
This is fine and absolutely valid but it sums up why I wonder if the kind of discussion about motivation and philosophy of photography gets us anywhere.
Maybe I am just a "snap taker" but I want to see prints that I could never otherwise see, be that scenes I will never see myself, quirky shots or even the dog heading a balloon when it is trying to catch it which might make me smile.
I sometimes wonder whether I should even be here in terms of discussions on the philosophy of photography or the motivation of Gary Winogrand etc .
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
peterlg
Friend
Registered: December 2010
Location: living in Luxembourg
Posts: 507
|
|
Wed, 7, January, 2015 8:27pm
|
|
|
no, Mike, I don't think the prints meet my objectives.
Long time ago I wrote in the introduction to a show of some of my photos : " ...it is not art. But if just a few of those here receive a genuine visual pleasure by contemplating one or the other of my photos, then I've achieved my goal". And I think I cannot change anything in that statement to set out better what my motivation/objectives are today.
Our discussion here is for me very constructive and positive because we have left the path of impersonal, technical comment. It takes a bit of courage to walk out the path of philosophy and personal feelings related to our photographic activities. I saw a tv program with Michael Kenna: he put into words how and why he makes photos - unforgettable! (he and Bernard Plossu are my favourites now)
that's it for tonight
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
peterlg
Friend
Registered: December 2010
Location: living in Luxembourg
Posts: 507
|
|
|
|
|
skellum
Friend
Registered: December 2011
Location: Isle of Lewis
Posts: 1,330
|
|
Wed, 7, January, 2015 10:09pm
|
|
|
Peter, thanks for the link. I've enjoyed Kenna's work for a long time. He seems to be a man dedicated to finding the extraordinary moments which normally pass unseen, and committing them beautifully to film. He is a particularly interesting choice here- his work is technically superb, but he seems to have moved looking for 'magic bullets'.
I don't know what he's up to now, but at one point he'd settled on 120 tri-x printed on Ilford multigrade.
Mike-
"I sometimes wonder whether I should even be here in terms of discussions on the philosophy of photography or the motivation of Gary Winogrand etc"
Wow- sorry Mike. FADU is about the only forum I've visited where we are pretty much all mates (Including you Gals). I really hope you will go on wondering about Winograd et al and posting questions about motivation and meaning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Film and Darkroom User
Photo Details
