Adjusted levels, contrast, converted to bw, clarify several times.
crop (yes, the centeredness is on purpose)
resize
submit
[Feb. 5th, 2009 10:13:27 AM]
Thursday -- 10am
bringing in a whopping 3.7079. Clearly in contention for the brown. THAT I really don't have a problem with -- even though I discovered quite by accident that the negative inversion looks way cooler and was more what i had in mind and couldn't get. I have NO comments. Not even one "I don't get it" or "DNMC"
I can't help but wondering if all the complaints about trolls and "stupid comments" is keeping people from commenting.
Statistics
Place: 111 out of 117 Avg (all users): 3.9258 Avg (commenters): 3.0000 Avg (participants): 3.5682 Avg (non-participants): 4.0108 Views since voting: 840 Views during voting: 358 Votes: 229 Comments: 7 Favorites: 0
Where the idea originally came from is in Genesis where it talks about in the beginning the world was without form and void. (Now the earth was formless and empty,)
If you don't adhere to/believe in/accept the Genesis/creation account, it reminds me of a small beginning with no details in the beginning.
OR, it is a small, round seed like thing, with few discernible details so as give little indications as to what it will become. It is the beginning. That is all.
And like I mentioned in the details, I wish I had gone one more step in editing. I normally do not like negative inversions, but in this one, it really gave me more what i was going for with the whole genesis thing. .
Ahh, I see. Now. I am very philosophical and like to see the deeper meaning in things, but I didn't see it in this! However, now you have pointed it out to me, I appreciate the shot a lot more.
I think the meaning was a bit too deep for the masses (myself included).
As far as I'm concerned, kudos to you for trying something "out there".
I wish I could revise my rating for you, based upon the extra info you've just given. That said, although I love the negative space, I think the ball itself is a little noisy.
Where the idea originally came from is in Genesis where it talks about in the beginning the world was without form and void. (Now the earth was formless and empty,)
If you don't adhere to/believe in/accept the Genesis/creation account, it reminds me of a small beginning with no details in the beginning.
OR, it is a small, round seed like thing, with few discernible details so as give little indications as to what it will become. It is the beginning. That is all.
And like I mentioned in the details, I wish I had gone one more step in editing. I normally do not like negative inversions, but in this one, it really gave me more what i was going for with the whole genesis thing. .
I really think this is one to move into the forum. Personally, I see, along with the title, the start of life, the universe, and everything. This photo is simple, with only a few shades of gray and to me, represents the proverbial start of the big bang. The negative space around the most basic universal shape (sphere) really implies the sense of nothingness. The symbolism of the sphere is quite distinct.
If this was a free study, I'd get the score, but for the challenge title and the title of this photo, I think there is a good fit. Abstract, sure. But what great photo isn't?
When I saw this I did not see how it fit the challenge at all, even in a creative fashion. It's a nice photo, in terms of its simplicity, but how it connects with "begin" I just cannot work out.
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.
