If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
(July, 30th) Structure
Hello,
I would like to show you a new picture http://www.monochromatique.com/photosemaine/ Regards, -- Daniel Rocha | Photographie http://www.monochromatique.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
(July, 30th) Structure
Daniel Rocha wrote:
Hello, I would like to show you a new picture http://www.monochromatique.com/photosemaine/ Neat shot. I want to see it bigger! -- Paul Furman Photography http://edgehill.net Bay Natives Nursery http://www.baynatives.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
(July, 30th) Structure
On Jul 30, 1:13 am, "Daniel Rocha" wrote:
Hello, I would like to show you a new picture http://www.monochromatique.com/photosemaine/ Is "Godawful" one word or two words? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
(July, 30th) Structure
Annika1980 wrote:
On Jul 30, 1:13 am, "Daniel Rocha" wrote: Hello, I would like to show you a new picture http://www.monochromatique.com/photosemaine/ Is "Godawful" one word or two words? In this instance one accurate one. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
(July, 30th) Structure
On Jul 30, 1:13 am, "Daniel Rocha" wrote:
Hello, I would like to show you a new picture http://www.monochromatique.com/photosemaine/ Regards, -- Daniel Rocha | Photographie http://www.monochromatique.com No real point of focus. Reflection in upper part of image distracting. Even for an abstract/graphic image it doesn't hold attention of the viewer. I reconize it but, I wonder if anyone else does? Contrast and sharpness are fair compared to your other images. We all know you can do better the next time around. Keep at it Daniel. You have done better and you will. Draco Getting even isn't good enough. Doing better does. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
(July, 30th) Structure
Draco wrote:
I would like to show you a new picture http://www.monochromatique.com/photosemaine/ ... No real point of focus. Not supposed to be present on an image like that. Moreover, a distinctive point of focus there would be a big mistake. Reflection in upper part of image distracting. On the contrary, the gradual "introduction" of the reflection along the diagonal is exactly what gives the image that "foggy" mood and makes it interesting. Even for an abstract/graphic image it doesn't hold attention of the viewer. I reconize it but, I wonder if anyone else does? An image like that is supposed to be printed larger and viewed form a different distance. Yes, it will hold attention. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
(July, 30th) Structure
On Jul 30, 2:21 pm, Andrey Tarasevich
wrote: Draco wrote: I would like to show you a new picture http://www.monochromatique.com/photosemaine/ ... No real point of focus. Not supposed to be present on an image like that. Moreover, a distinctive point of focus there would be a big mistake. Okay I'll buy that one. But even most have a visual point of focas. The human brain likes to go to a point. Weither it is there or not. Reflection in upper part of image distracting. On the contrary, the gradual "introduction" of the reflection along the diagonal is exactly what gives the image that "foggy" mood and makes it interesting. Sorry, but there wasn't anything gradual about it. The "foggy" reflection is distracting and could have been better handled. Having it less "foggy" would have brought more of the structure design to the viewer, and allowed a better graphic image. Even for an abstract/graphic image it doesn't hold attention of the viewer. I reconize it but, I wonder if anyone else does? An image like that is supposed to be printed larger and viewed form a different distance. Yes, it will hold attention. I'm sorry but it doesn't. Anything printed large will hold the attention of the viewers. More in the way of, "What was this person thinking. Printing this so big?" An image will hold the person attention no matter what size as long as the image can grab and hold that person. For me, this one doesn't. I keep looking at it and it doesn't sing to me like several of Daniel's other works do. It is a mess of lines and light. The eye keeps being drawn to the lower right. The large black lines keep drawing you away from the light area. Yet the thinner lines drag your eye every where. Such confusion brings not a wonderment of "What is it?", just a headache and a desire to move away to something else. Daniel these are just my feelings and opinion on this image. You have already proved you are a excelent photographer and will continue to be. My words not withstanding. Keep at it. Andrey Tarasevich , keep challenging the status of opinions. It keeps us on our toes and makes for better photographers. Keep being polite and firm in your visions and you will do well. Draco |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
(July, 30th) Structure
On Jul 30, 9:33 am, Annika1980 wrote:
On Jul 30, 1:13 am, "Daniel Rocha" wrote: Hello, I would like to show you a new picture http://www.monochromatique.com/photosemaine/ Is "Godawful" one word or two words? lower case, no caps |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
(July, 30th) Structure
Draco wrote:
Andrey Tarasevich wrote: Draco wrote: Daniel Wrote: http://www.monochromatique.com/photosemaine/ No real point of focus. Not supposed to be present on an image like that. Moreover, a distinctive point of focus there would be a big mistake. Okay I'll buy that one. But even most have a visual point of focas. The human brain likes to go to a point. Weither it is there or not. The upper right window mullions are sharp, where the foggy glare is. I still like it, I like to have my eyes teased, I like them darting back & forth, hunting for a place to settle. :-) Reflection in upper part of image distracting. On the contrary, the gradual "introduction" of the reflection along the diagonal is exactly what gives the image that "foggy" mood and makes it interesting. Sorry, but there wasn't anything gradual about it. The "foggy" reflection is distracting and could have been better handled. Having it less "foggy" would have brought more of the structure design to the viewer, and allowed a better graphic image. Even for an abstract/graphic image it doesn't hold attention of the viewer. I reconize it but, I wonder if anyone else does? Pyramid at the Louvre? An image like that is supposed to be printed larger and viewed form a different distance. Yes, it will hold attention. I'm sorry but it doesn't. Anything printed large will hold the attention of the viewers. More in the way of, "What was this person thinking. Printing this so big?" An image will hold the person attention no matter what size as long as the image can grab and hold that person. For me, this one doesn't. I keep looking at it and it doesn't sing to me like several of Daniel's other works do. It is a mess of lines and light. The eye keeps being drawn to the lower right. I get drawn to the upper middle left then down to the lower middle right for relief & hunt my way back up to the mullions again :-) The large black lines keep drawing you away from the light area. Yet the thinner lines drag your eye every where. Such confusion brings not a wonderment of "What is it?", just a headache and a desire to move away to something else. Daniel these are just my feelings and opinion on this image. You have already proved you are a excelent photographer and will continue to be. My words not withstanding. Keep at it. Andrey Tarasevich , keep challenging the status of opinions. It keeps us on our toes and makes for better photographers. Keep being polite and firm in your visions and you will do well. -- Paul Furman Photography http://edgehill.net Bay Natives Nursery http://www.baynatives.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
(July, 30th) Structure
"Draco" wrote in message oups.com... Okay I'll buy that one. But even most have a visual point of focas. The human brain likes to go to a point. Weither it is there or not. An image like that is supposed to be printed larger and viewed form a different distance. Yes, it will hold attention. I'm sorry but it doesn't. Anything printed large will hold the attention of the viewers. More in the way of, "What was this person thinking. Printing this so big?" An image will hold the person attention no matter what size as long as the image can grab and hold that person. For me, this one doesn't. I keep looking at it and it doesn't sing to me like several of Daniel's other works do. It is a mess of lines and light. The eye keeps being drawn to the lower right. The large black lines keep drawing you away from the light area. Yet the thinner lines drag your eye every where. Such confusion brings not a wonderment of "What is it?", just a headache and a desire to move away to something else. Daniel these are just my feelings and opinion on this image. You have already proved you are a excelent photographer and will continue to be. My words not withstanding. Keep at it. Andrey Tarasevich , keep challenging the status of opinions. It keeps us on our toes and makes for better photographers. Keep being polite and firm in your visions and you will do well. Draco Western Culture Humans scan a document on presentation from the upper left to the lower right. Only then does any point of interest (call it point of focus) receive closer attention. This is why magazine layout artists us "pullouts" on the mid to lower portion of the right had side of a page when they attempt to capture a reader's attention. Photographs created with the same concept in mind, do not need a point of focus and may in fact, have several obscure points. What is important and missing from Daniel's picture is a "return" point to which you are drawn after scanning the picture from left to right, top to bottom and it lacks small detail to keep you intrigued as you go over the picture again. I am of the opinion Daniel has not grasped the significance of these matters in any of his photos and produces the odd good picture not by design but by accident. What I'm saying is most ably demonstrated in a landscape image you find attractive but are unsure exactly why. Invert the image and it simply doesn't "look right". Go back then, and you can see the parts of the composition that made you think it was attractive. Look at this picture of Matt Clara's. http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/26091584 It is composed to perfectly lead you to the item of importance. So much so, that you miss seeing the people in the jeep on the other side of the river. Invert the picture and the effect is entirely lost, making the people in the jeep much more prominent. Doug |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Photo for 30th May (Today in paradise) | Ryadiia | 35mm Photo Equipment | 5 | May 30th 07 06:42 PM |
(April, 30th) New picture | Daniel Rocha | 35mm Photo Equipment | 5 | May 1st 07 08:10 PM |
(October, 30th) Picture of the Week | Daniel Rocha | Photographing Nature | 0 | November 3rd 06 12:03 PM |
(October, 30th) Picture of the Week | Daniel Rocha | 35mm Photo Equipment | 16 | November 2nd 06 04:00 PM |
(October, 30th) Picture of the Week | Daniel Rocha | Other Photographic Equipment | 0 | November 2nd 06 01:34 PM |