cracked
PhotoCamel: Your friendly photo community, with free discussion forums, digital photography reviews, photo sharing, galleries, downloads, blogs, photography contests, and prizes.
 


Go Back   PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum > Photography by Genre: Critique and Discussion > Abstract & Artistic Expression

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-29-2015   #1
Guanaco
 
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 333
CamelKarma: 450862
Editing OK?: No
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default cracked



cracked
view larger.

Happy to hear your thoughts & critique on this still. I hope it's abstract enough for your taste and this category.

__________________
Members don't see ads in threads. Register for your free account today and become a member of PhotoCamel to open up the site's many benefits and features.
__________________
All the best, Silv. Contributor to our fine-art photography blog, mixed with some documentation shots. @Kamerahelden on Twitter. Always happy about insightful critique of my photos here on the camel and elsewhere.

Berliner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015   #2
Camel Breath
 
scoundrel1728's Avatar
 
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
Posts: 10,117
CamelKarma: 1469207
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: cracked

This image doesn't do much for me; the effects merely get in the way of the image's clarity rather than enhancing the mood or message.
scoundrel1728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2015   #3
Guanaco
 
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 333
CamelKarma: 450862
Editing OK?: No
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: cracked

Quote:
Originally Posted by scoundrel1728 View Post
This image doesn't do much for me; the effects merely get in the way of the image's clarity rather than enhancing the mood or message.
Thanks for your answer. Could you clarify which effects you are talking about?

What is the mood or message you mean?
__________________
All the best, Silv. Contributor to our fine-art photography blog, mixed with some documentation shots. @Kamerahelden on Twitter. Always happy about insightful critique of my photos here on the camel and elsewhere.

Berliner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2015   #4
Camel Breath
 
scoundrel1728's Avatar
 
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
Posts: 10,117
CamelKarma: 1469207
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: cracked

Quote:
Originally Posted by Berliner View Post
Could you clarify which effects you are talking about?
There are several, one of which is an overlay that resembles one of those panes of diffusing glass such as they glaze bathroom windows and shower stalls with. I also see a series of arcs that puts me in mind of a bicycle frame. The array of white horizontal lines and vertical hash marks serve only as a distraction. There is also what look to me like widespread but blurred reflections that serve only to obscure and degrade the image further, reducing its effective dynamic range. I also see one or more overlays that look like holes in glass produced by bullets or small rocks, but these ring false because I would expect the reflections, diffusion, and other effects to be absent in the holes where the projectile went through, but that is not the case in this image.

Behind all that looks like a waist-up environmental street portrait of a man in a pink dress shirt and dark slacks, which I take to be the "real" picture, but all the extra effects merely distract and detract from the clarity of this image, for no apparent (to me) reason.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Berliner View Post
What is the mood or message you mean?
Photography, indeed any art form, is a form of communication. It is therefore presumed that the photographer has some kind of message to convey. Its content is up to you as the photographer. Perhaps you have heard that a good photograph "tells a story," with the story being the message - perhaps nonverbal or even an emotional impression not easily put into words. All I am getting from this image is blur and visual noise and technical degradation, not much different from a very snowy television picture. (Oops! Modern digital broadcast image pixelate instead when the signal is weak. Got to update that example! ) The effect is an image of such poor overall technical quality that the "story" is largely lost.

Sorry to be a bearer of such bad news about your image; I really would have preferred to have given it a kinder and more favorable review.
scoundrel1728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2015   #5
Guanaco
 
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 333
CamelKarma: 450862
Editing OK?: No
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: cracked

Thank you so much for your detailled clarification.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scoundrel1728 View Post
There are several, one of which is an overlay that resembles one of those panes of diffusing glass such as they glaze bathroom windows and shower stalls with. I also see a series of arcs that puts me in mind of a bicycle frame. The array of white horizontal lines and vertical hash marks serve only as a distraction. There is also what look to me like widespread but blurred reflections that serve only to obscure and degrade the image further, reducing its effective dynamic range. I also see one or more overlays that look like holes in glass produced by bullets or small rocks, but these ring false because I would expect the reflections, diffusion, and other effects to be absent in the holes where the projectile went through, but that is not the case in this image.
For me, the element that most disturbs the image (I wanted to take), is the black vertical bar, which you don't mention, and I assume you don't mind. I agree that the white scratches are also a distraction, but I loved including them in the frame, as they add to the gritty feel. Btw. there is nothing "false" (digitally added) in this picture, unless you count contrast.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scoundrel1728 View Post
Behind all that looks like a waist-up environmental street portrait of a man in a pink dress shirt and dark slacks, which I take to be the "real" picture, but all the extra effects merely distract and detract from the clarity of this image, for no apparent (to me) reason.
I'm quite astonished that you could see that and applaud you for your eye. The pink shirt you think you are seeing are probably the arms, as the dress shirt was mainly white with thin colored stripes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scoundrel1728 View Post
Photography, indeed any art form, is a form of communication. It is therefore presumed that the photographer has some kind of message to convey. Its content is up to you as the photographer. Perhaps you have heard that a good photograph "tells a story," with the story being the message - perhaps nonverbal or even an emotional impression not easily put into words. All I am getting from this image is blur and visual noise and technical degradation, not much different from a very snowy television picture. (Oops! Modern digital broadcast image pixelate instead when the signal is weak. Got to update that example! ) The effect is an image of such poor overall technical quality that the "story" is largely lost.

Sorry to be a bearer of such bad news about your image; I really would have preferred to have given it a kinder and more favorable review.
I'm actually very happy with your review and remarks and think you very kind for giving your opinion. Of course you cannot see the image that is not there, but that might be. For me, an undisturbed reflection of the man you describe would not have been an image worth taking and sharing with the world. Certainly not under the abstract heading.

That you understand blur, noise and photographic impurity AND still see a human form is more than I could wish for.

What makes me wonder is why you chalk the visuals up to poor technical quality. The image is technically quite clean, if you look at noise, sharpness, values etc. I guess you mean in visual comparison to the image that you described further up, but that is not actually in this picture?
__________________
All the best, Silv. Contributor to our fine-art photography blog, mixed with some documentation shots. @Kamerahelden on Twitter. Always happy about insightful critique of my photos here on the camel and elsewhere.

Berliner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2015   #6
Camel Breath
 
scoundrel1728's Avatar
 
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
Posts: 10,117
CamelKarma: 1469207
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: cracked

As a general rule, abstract images are often (usually?) primarily about artistic or emotional abstractions such as shape, form, balance, color, or, in this case, texture. Clearly, I am getting a very different idea from this image from what you have intended to convey. Unless you intend this image a sort of photographic equivalent of a Rorschach test in which you want each viewer to come away with something different and dependent on the personalities and attitudes that the individuals bring to the image, the image has probably failed as a means of communication, at least as far as I am concerned. Whether the failure is yours, mine, or some combination is something I would not expect to resolve to the full satisfaction of both of us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Berliner View Post
For me, the element that most disturbs the image (I wanted to take), is the black vertical bar, which you don't mention, and I assume you don't mind. I agree that the white scratches are also a distraction, but I loved including them in the frame, as they add to the gritty feel. Btw. there is nothing "false" (digitally added) in this picture, unless you count contrast.
I read this with great interest because this exemplifies how different our interpretations of this image are. I find this part of the image where the visual interference (as I see the texturing) to be least and the dynamic range least degraded.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Berliner View Post
I'm quite astonished that you could see that and applaud you for your eye. The pink shirt you think you are seeing are probably the arms, as the dress shirt was mainly white with thin colored stripes.

I'm actually very happy with your review and remarks and think you very kind for giving your opinion. Of course you cannot see the image that is not there, but that might be. For me, an undisturbed reflection of the man you describe would not have been an image worth taking and sharing with the world. Certainly not under the abstract heading.

That you understand blur, noise and photographic impurity AND still see a human form is more than I could wish for.

What makes me wonder is why you chalk the visuals up to poor technical quality. The image is technically quite clean, if you look at noise, sharpness, values etc. I guess you mean in visual comparison to the image that you described further up, but that is not actually in this picture?
An honest question deserves an honest answer. I appreciate your favorable description of my photographic viewing and interpreting capabilities, though I am not entirely sure that I can actually live up to them. It was only after scrutinizing this image for a while in full forensic analytical mode that I was able to pick out the human form within. I also had little doubt that the image was more or less as you intended it, otherwise, you would have posted it with a caption like, "This image isn't quite what I wanted. How do I improve it?" I am also sure but not certain that the texturing was deliberate and was not actually pixel noise. After having overdosed on the vacuous "Nice image!" variety of comments, I have occasionally in my darker and more cynical moments briefly considered posting the worst image artistically that I could make to see what reaction, if any, it would provoke. Although I have never come close to actually doing such a thing, I consider it possible but not probable that someone else might be driven over the edge, hence the lack of absolute certainty. The comparison to a snowy television picture was more a description of the effect the texturing had on me, not that the image contained actual pixel noise; nevertheless, what you intended as grittiness had much the same emotional effect on me that noise, scratches, and other technical faults would have had. I also agree that if you dropped all of the special effects, the image would no longer qualify as an abstract, which would be a bad thing only if you insisted that the final produced image be an abstract - the best apple in the world would make a very poor cabbage. I will also take your word for it that the unadulterated human image would not be worth posting because I cannot see it at all well and you know a lot more about what went into this image than I do.

I would like to know whom you believe your target viewers to be and what effect you intended to produce on them with your image. I would also like to hear from third parties might have to say, but I don't expect any such responses, considering that this thread has had 123 views at last count and no one else has posted yet.
scoundrel1728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2015   #7
Guanaco
 
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 333
CamelKarma: 450862
Editing OK?: No
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: cracked

Again thanks for talking about your emotions regarding the image and your pointers. You are certainly right that this is a much more provocative and unusual image than many. However, I didn't post it on our blog and here merely to show off "the worst" just to provoke a reaction nor do I consider it objectively one of my worst, technically or from its possible meanings.

I have actually taken a much "cleaner" version of this photo by changing the focus away from the surface(s) to the reflection, but found it not terribly interesting and I'm not vain enough to force boring depictions of myself on others.

Concerning a target audience, I mainly take a photo to be happy with it and, if it is crafted well enough, for it to start a thought process in others. Many of my photos are actually a form of Rorschach test, I call them apophenic images though and I did not formerly see this one as fitting very well into that category, but I can see how one could start to interpret the different marks, like you did.

I find it interesting that you say the image failed for you, yet it has managed to communicate so much to you, maybe more than most abstracts I can think of have communicated to me.
__________________
All the best, Silv. Contributor to our fine-art photography blog, mixed with some documentation shots. @Kamerahelden on Twitter. Always happy about insightful critique of my photos here on the camel and elsewhere.

Berliner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2015   #8
F1 Camel
 
Golem's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,791
CamelKarma: 683702
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: cracked

I am greatly entertained by the apparently very sincere levels
of 'restraint and diplomacy' in the language used here for the
hashing out of greatly disparate views on this image .... hey,
that language thing is contagious, aint it ?

Anywho, I'm not leaning toward either view from the opposing
parties ... and while I'm intrigued by the image upon my initial
encounter with it, I get no follow thru result from a longer look
at it. I suspect this is one of those images meant to be seen at
a rather large size [poster size, didn't mean mural ... ] and also
seen as a [2D] "Art Object", not simply a recorded view of what
met some individual's eye at some moment in some light.

By "Art Object" I don't mean to be negative, neither snotty nor
snooty. I just mean that it's possibly appreciated properly as an
"object-before-the-viewer" rather than a glimpse into someone's
experience of the material/visual world.
Golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015   #9
Camel Breath
 
scoundrel1728's Avatar
 
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
Posts: 10,117
CamelKarma: 1469207
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: cracked

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golem View Post
I am greatly entertained by the apparently very sincere levels
of 'restraint and diplomacy' in the language used here for the
hashing out of greatly disparate views on this image .... hey,
that language thing is contagious, aint it ?
It sure beats a flamefest! Glad someone besides the two of us decided to weigh in here.

@Berliner: Your mention of apophenia, or rather its adjectival form, goes a long way toward explaining the disagreement we've been having here.
scoundrel1728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2015   #10
F1 Camel
 
Golem's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,791
CamelKarma: 683702
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: cracked

I have a suspicion, that this image might, maybe might,
be some kinda playground or funhouse for the mind's eye
but that it cannot serve that function as viewed within
the file size, resolution restriction, screen size, etc etc
of experiencing it withing the forum environment ... or
[I suspect] more accurately put as "not experiencing it,
but just glimpsing it." Kinda like trying to experience a
large scale sculpture via the printed page.

OTOH, my suspicions might prove false, and it's nothing
more than another pretentious, post-deconstructivist,
severely anti modernist excersize in mindless dribble ! !

Like who knows ? # !


`


__________________
Members don't see ads in threads. Register for your free account today and become a member of PhotoCamel to open up the site's many benefits and features.
Golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

« PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum > Photography by Genre: Critique and Discussion > Abstract & Artistic Expression »


Share this topic:

Thread Tools
Display Modes