| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/30/2002 08:09:10 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by floyd:
Regarding your spot edited version - It nicely removed that bright spot on the left of the submitted version. But it's made that diagonal crease/scratch in the wall much more prominent. I find myself looking at that almost as much as at you. That didn't happen in the submitted version.
Thanks so much for the feedback, Floyd. Which crease are you referring to...the one on the far left? I bet I could clone that out a bit.
Also regarding the composition and use of negative space - Personally I love it. When used well negative space makes a picture tell a story or set a tone - you achieved that here. But since the light is coming from the left and the shy subject is peering out from her shadow - shouldn't she be looking towards the light?
Why?
|
|
|
|
07/30/2002 08:32:04 AM · #27 |
I don't believe that there is a right or wrong way to do that photograph... the composition most likely makes whatever statement the photographer intended...
|
|
|
|
07/30/2002 09:15:46 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I don''t believe that there is a right or wrong way to do that photograph... the composition most likely makes whatever statement the photographer intended...
John, if a redneck from North Carolina like yourself and a hillbilly from the Blue Ridge Mountains like me can agree on an artsy fartsy idea like the one above then I hope others will grasp that idea as well :-)
* This message has been edited by the author on 7/30/2002 9:16:08 AM. |
|
|
|
07/30/2002 09:19:12 AM · #29 |
Kimbly is an artsy fartsy kinda girl for sure :) but u know what, i could still share a beer with her :)
|
|
|
|
07/30/2002 02:16:12 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Kimbly:
Thanks so much for the feedback, Floyd. Which crease are you referring to...the one on the far left? I bet I could clone that out a bit.
That's the one yes. The one near the left edge - about halfway down. Sloping up to the right. Hopefully pretty easy to remove.
Why?
Just because the light is symbolic of where 'the action' is. Within the metaphor of the photograph the action is off-stage to the left and the shy girl is hiding in a corner on the right. It was actually your comment about her 'peeking out' that made me think she should be peeking towards where the action is. As if she felt she was missing it but was too shy to go and join in.
Hope that made some sense.
John
|
|
|
|
07/30/2002 02:20:00 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Kimbly is an artsy fartsy kinda girl for sure :) but u know what, i could still share a beer with her :)
Get in line, Setzler. ;-)
-Terry |
|
|
|
07/30/2002 02:27:16 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by floyd:
Just because the light is symbolic of where ''the action'' is. Within the metaphor of the photograph the action is off-stage to the left and the shy girl is hiding in a corner on the right. It was actually your comment about her ''peeking out'' that made me think she should be peeking towards where the action is. As if she felt she was missing it but was too shy to go and join in.
Well, without getting into it too much...I didn''t really want to portray "timid" - which I feel like is what you''re describing - more than my definition of "shy" which is closer to "introverted". And that''s a significant distinction to me at least. So I feel like it expresses not fear or longing to join in, but a little bit more satisfaction or contentment at being on the fringe. I''m thinking now that perhaps "introvered" would have been a better title.
* This message has been edited by the author on 7/30/2002 2:27:23 PM. |
|
|
|
07/30/2002 02:50:52 PM · #33 |
Kimbly..it is what it is.
Sometimes things are better left unsaid.
What I mean is this. I am not referring to the discussion here being left unsaid.
What I am referring to is in the photo.
A flower shot or a technical shot ..lets use my "Aloha" to play it safe. That is a tech shot. Sure it has some art thinking blah de blah in it but really its nothing more than an attempt to give as much life to a pineapple shot as I could muster. End of story.
My shot this week is a whole 'nother matter. It is very complicated. So much so some folks may never "get" the whole thing or all the little nuances well enough to piece it together.
It's like a movie like "Pulp Fiction" or "The Usual Suspects". Little things. Some bit of mystery or puzzle solving..fun stuff.
For some folks when they see a photo if they don't get it in 15 seconds they hate it. For some folks it's important to see things and if a photo is too "snapshot like" they hate it.
I guess my point is there will be some photos there is nothing more than some pretty colors or neat light. Sometimes there is soemthing going on at a level that even the photographer can't talk about but only felt.
Both are excellent. I just hope people who vote here don't think every photo needs to be "fixed". Some are just what they are.
|
|
|
|
07/30/2002 03:22:00 PM · #34 |
Here''s a little test for how much negative space you like...
Take two pieces of paper and bring up Kimbly''s "shy"... Use the paper to crop close to Kimbly (hope your not claustraphobic Kimbly :)... Move the pieces out to give more and more negative space. Does the shot improve to your eye? It certainly did for mine. The more I''ve looked at this shot the more I like it. I wish I gave it a 9 instead of an 8...
To be honest I never even knew the term ''negative space'' before this discussion started (I found the Duke Ellington shot by web search for "negative space"). Thank you for starting the thread... My scores will likely go down while I experiment with it, but I''m guessing I''ll be happier with my shots.
* This message has been edited by the author on 7/30/2002 3:23:02 PM. |
|
|
|
07/30/2002 03:22:27 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Kimbly:
Well, without getting into it too much...I didn''t really want to portray "timid" - which I feel like is what you''re describing - more than my definition of "shy" which is closer to "introverted". And that''s a significant distinction to me at least. So I feel like it expresses not fear or longing to join in, but a little bit more satisfaction or contentment at being on the fringe. I''m thinking now that perhaps "introvered" would have been a better title.
Ok yeah that works for me. A subtle but significant distinction.
John
|
|
|
|
07/30/2002 03:28:42 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by myqyl:
To be honest I never even knew the term 'negative space' before this discussion started (I found the Duke Ellington shot by web search for "negative space"). Thank you for starting the thread... My scores will likely go down will I experiment with it, but I'm guessing I'll be happier with my shots.
Experimentation is the funnest part of this whole gig.
I often submit stuff that is 50% of where I want it to be. This week I didn't have the time to set up my background idea..just couldn't get to the location. In the future I will try to reshoot my idea.
But I still submitted it, because I like playing in the game instead of watching :-)
My "Asphalt Mirage" image was the shot BEFORE the final Photoshop stuff I wanted to do but are illegal here. I submitted anyway. It's all I had time to work on that week.
I really like people submitting works in progress or new explorations or technique...it's very cool to see and discuss :-)
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 02:16:27 AM EDT.
