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
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] ugly comments
- disclaimers:
I like gritty urban subjects; there's something appealing to me in the devolved rawness of manmade structures, especially when it's unintentional as a result of neglect, time, or just plain ignorance. it's not the same beauty as nature, but it's somehow ticklish to my brain. - Colin Donoghue: the guy's vest matches the fence-ish netting and the traffic cone. at least there are some trees. by themselves there are a lot of visually appealing elements but the mish-mash assembly is what makes this scene ugly. - Jim Kramer: when I was young I used to stare at these on streets and parking lots while on my way to/from school. this doesn't seem ugly at all and tickles my love of urban grit. I wonder how well a slide of similar subjects would come out... - R. Schenck: hard for me to tell what they're saying by just looking at the picture. what did you use to capture this? I'm impressed that you got both the background and the foreground to come out, although the color range seems a bit flat... which is odd seeing as the background is very high contrast. - Tom Hudson: the depth-of-field is perfect. what other little bits of kipple are lying in those pools? what remnants of "modern" civilization are slowly decaying in small piles behind that TV? - Rich Pos: amusing... looks staged? the figures converging to the stop sign is a nice (intended?) touch to an otherwise stark composition. - Ken Tough: the glinting metal against the soft green background is a nice contrast. this image conjures the ugliest thoughts to me of them all. - Owamanga!: a delorean? an ugly hack job, to be sure. I'd be curious to see what the original image looked like. - Alan Browne: american-style ugliness... in canada! (PFK would work too.) I'd argue the brick isn't ugly enough, but that's me. - Bowser: sprawl. grey, ugly, compressed. the composition seems too easy, though. - Aaron Grier: the easter connection was completely unintentional. - Ken Nadvornick: how bleh. good composition. it looks a little under-printed, though, like there should either be more contrast, or it should be just a tad darker. the color tint does throw me off a little and add to the mood; I converted to B&W and it doesn't seem nearly so sinister. - Walt Hanks: maybe those three ball doohickeys on the background powerlines count as ugliness in an otherwise pleasant shot? - Bob Hickey: damn that's some nice grit. what is this a detail from? how far off do the values represented vary from reality? -- Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | The United States is the one true country. The US is just. The US is fair. The US respects its citizens. The US loves you. We have always been at war against terrorism. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Aaron J. Grier wrote:
- Alan Browne: american-style ugliness... in canada! (PFK would work too.) I'd argue the brick isn't ugly enough, but that's me. It's actually one of the oldest McD's in Canada. It has had its share of makeovers, of course. The ugliness is not neccesarilly in the visuals. I tried to find a good boulevard perspective (somewhat like Bowsers) with a lineup of fastfood shops. There were a few, but the image would have been cluttered to the point of losing the message. Cheers, Alan -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
- Bob Hickey: damn that's some nice grit. what is this a detail from? how far off do the values represented vary from reality? That's a doorway on Mercer St. It started out as a sickly creme a very long time ago,. and looked bad enough as is, but that shade of red was unusually revolting, so that's what I sent. I used a Rollei, which are particularly good at that type of thing. I shot HP-5 for a shot that called for PanF, but I ran out. Outside of that putrid color, there's no manipulation . Thanx much for your comments. Bob Hickey |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
- Bob Hickey: damn that's some nice grit. what is this a detail from? how far off do the values represented vary from reality? That's a doorway on Mercer St. It started out as a sickly creme a very long time ago,. and looked bad enough as is, but that shade of red was unusually revolting, so that's what I sent. I used a Rollei, which are particularly good at that type of thing. I shot HP-5 for a shot that called for PanF, but I ran out. Outside of that putrid color, there's no manipulation . Thanx much for your comments. Bob Hickey |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Hickey wrote: damn that's some nice grit. what is this a detail from? how far off do the values represented vary from reality? That's a doorway on Mercer St. It started out as a sickly creme a very long time ago,. and looked bad enough as is, but that shade of red was unusually revolting, so that's what I sent. I used a Rollei, which are particularly good at that type of thing. I shot HP-5 for a shot that called for PanF, but I ran out. Outside of that putrid color, there's no manipulation . It's a wonderful shot. I think the dereliction is beautiful, very appealing. -- Ken Tough |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Aaron J. Grier" wrote:
- Ken Nadvornick: how bleh. good composition. it looks a little under-printed, though, like there should either be more contrast, or it should be just a tad darker. the color tint does throw me off a little and add to the mood; I converted to B&W and it doesn't seem nearly so sinister. Hi Aaron, Thanks for all of the reviews, mine included. Interesting, your comments regarding contrast/darkness. This print was made using a variable-contrast paper exposed through a contrast grade #5 filter. It highlights an optical illusion problem I frequently experience in the SI and which has no reasonable solution for me. Black and white photos (including these digitized SI likenesses) often utilize their background display mount (or screen color) tones to help key their shades of gray. B&W photos are normally mounted on white, or off-white, museum boards. Alternatively, the SI "photos" are by default displayed on a black background color. Against a white background the tones in a photograph will appear to be darker and/or richer than they really are as the pupils of the viewer's eyes are reduced to accommodate the glare of the white boards. Against a black background the opposite becomes true. If you flip back and forth between the following two versions of my submission, I think you will see the dramatic effect these two opposite backgrounds have on the final appearance of the image. In both cases the picture is the same one as was originally submitted: http://mysite.verizon.net/kjnadvor/C...n/UglyDark.htm http://mysite.verizon.net/kjnadvor/C.../UglyLight.htm Since I manually print my original photos in a traditional wet darkroom they are printed to look pleasing to me when displayed against a white mount board background. I do not alter them to look good against the black background of the SI where, I agree with you, they do look weaker. Ken |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Lionel" wrote:
It might help to put a big white border around them in Photoshop before submitting them. Hey Lionel, If such a white border did not come at the expense of those precious 800 long dimension pixels I would do so. But anything greater than the 800 limit get resized down to that limit for display. And the reproduced image can suffer mightily in that process, especially if it's true scanned size is only slightly over the limit. I once inadvertently scanned to something like 804 pixels on an early SI submission and the resulting downsized display image made the original photo appear to have been enlarged through a snot-covered negative. Yuk... (I kinda' suspect I'm the only SI participant anal enough for all of this to make any sort of difference.) Ken |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[SI] Symmetry - My Comments | Alan Browne | 35mm Photo Equipment | 35 | March 8th 05 01:24 PM |
[SI] Symmetry - My Comments | Alan Browne | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | March 2nd 05 12:23 AM |
[SI] Vivid - comments | Alan Browne- | 35mm Photo Equipment | 20 | January 9th 05 03:01 AM |
[SI] Reflections - my comments | Alan Browne | 35mm Photo Equipment | 17 | December 4th 04 04:07 PM |
[SI] Brian's Comments | Brian C. Baird | 35mm Photo Equipment | 10 | July 22nd 04 04:20 PM |