New 2/17

Please CRITIQUE these.

not quite, but kinda

This is not exactly what I have been working on, but as I was getting ready to mess around with my cameras and I snapped these while waiting. I'm not sure if I would really want to move forward with anything similar to these, just thought that they were kind of interesting. I have been working on my lighting and color with this contraption so I will have to post those next week! As for now, here are some randoms. I usually work with people; these just happened to grab my attention.

Again, these are not as crisp as what I'm working on. They are just random shots that came out before a shoot. I like the first one a lot better. Just the combination of the vintage look + emptiness really gets me thinking for some reason.

Laura Letinksy and Peter Fraser

In response to the question I asked in my last post, I do think that photographs can be strong without people. I feel as if the majority of the population wouldn't think so.. (so screw them right?) I really enjoy the still life photographs that Laura Letinsky shoots. They hint at human presence but none are present. I think it's fascinating to see how much we leave behind. I am doing a project in sculpture centered around that thought.




One of my other favorites is Peter Fraser's Everday Icons.




I am attracted to simplicity, but still interested in the pattern, texture, line and composition. I would really like to explore this, but there's a part of me that doesn't think I should. The answer to my question before could be that it's personal preference whether or not one can connect with this type of imagery. It seems to simple. How do you feel about Letinksy and Fraser's works?

Franz Marc

This may seem elementary. But Franz Marc is worthy of our attention. I have been thinking of his paintings lately and they continue to amaze me. I think it is an important lesson that we realize we don't have to know what exactly is going on within the frame. I guess that's not the right way to word it.....rather, we DON'T have to explain the whole photo to the viewer. I think that a strong photo makes people ask questions. The more questions asked, the more the viewer dwells, the more they interpret. Even though I know what is contained in Franz Marc's work, I'm intrigued by his use of color and line; it seems undefined. This is an important lesson for myself in particular because I WANT, so badly, to tell my viewer what I'm about. But this is not important. Just as I could not follow my work to a gallery in New York (hopefully one day!) and tell everyone the reason for it, I cannot do so here, either. For myself, the most important thing to do is to let go. Let go, in the sense of let different intrerpretations happen. I often enter a critique thinking I know what my photos are about/should be about. But at the end of all the feedback it becomes something new and different. I think that we should really listen to one another. I often don't let those new interpretations lead my direction, but why shouldn't I? I respect Franz Marc's work in an abstract way. I know what each may represent but my eyes stay with his work for a while because it is somewhat unknown.

Monica, after reading your post and looking at your new photos, I thought they related to Franz Marc as well. I think that it is particularly present in the last one. Use of color and line are engaging. I don't think people need to be present for a strong photo to happen. But I will comment on that later.

My main question is: Do we limit the interpretations of our photographs by telling too much within the frame? Even if you consider Franz Marc's work a bit kiddish, look at how he uses color and line to keep the viewer engaged. He is not telling a story, or maybe he is, but I feel that it is open to interpretation.

yikes

This is a little preview of what tomorrow looks like for me... after reading Chris's post on Holm's I have a new approach I am itching to try. I bet everyone was expecting me to do what I said I was going to (as it should have been) but I got side tracked. I was enamored with the reflection that Jacki had in her images at crit and decided to search for different ways to achieve that. I am not sure where to go. I made my images small because I posted a lot, if you click on them they will open larger (all of the ones we post will open to their original size if clicked on).






My mind is burning, please answer this question for me: If people are not present in the image is it less strong than those that do?

...

This is what I have created...Shane and I have talked about how I need to have a camera around my neck at all times, and capture all those moments that are emotionally meaningful to me. Again, I really don't know what I am shooting. I just am going to start shooting everything, literally. I can imagine that is the only thing that is going to spark imagination in me. I am fascinated by hands and what they do, and the creation they allow. There is such a loving tender things about hands, but also something super destructive. These are two opposite things, yet brought about by the same thing. Something odd to think about it.

I stop myself from pursuing what could be something great, because I become fixated by ideas, and what I want to create. What I see in my head...Not allowing myself to open my eyes to EVERYTHING around me that could allow me to be great. I believe that people are restricted by wanting something specific, and not allowing to see all of the things that surround us. We could all be artists if we could see what surrounds us everyday. I wasn't looking for anything last semester, and I got something that I am so proud of. This semester it hasn't come yet...and I think thats what frusterates me. I know it shouldn't, but it does... I need to open up my eyes and just see what is presented to me. Allow myself to listen...Allow myself to just be.... We are all type A personality, because we think we know what we want...We don't...Most of the time what we want doesn't work, and from that we find what does... Why do still try to control, even though our control proves us wrong mostly everytime. I am trying everything...and this is a start. I also have an underwater disposable camera that I am going to try. Everything...something will come...I just need to be open, and shoot. I know this...It will only come if I have the motivation and face my fear of making mistakes. That is the start to whatever will come, and I am going to do my best to listen...to my classmates, to my teacher, and to my camera.

Corey Holms

From the first moment I was able to get my hands on a camera until the day I entered intro to photo I had a habit of shooting detail shots. I cannot say that it has completely left me (I use it with video often), but shooting a "beautiful" shot is not as important to me. Now I am not saying that I would be alright with shooting a sloppy photo; I just do not get the same feelings looking at a close up of an object/subject if there is not real purpose other than advertising or something like that. That being said - Corey Holms rules.
There has been a recent trend in photography that involves photographers dropping food coloring into a glass and shooting it as it spreads... pretty... but also pretty boring. Some people are exceptionally good at it while others are not so good, but that does not really matter because doing that stuff sucks if you are actually doing it for portfolio work IMO. Corey Holms took this a step further and experimented a little more than the other photo-duplicators. There are two things that grab my attention about this guy:
1. He makes detail shots interesting (instead of just taking detail shots of everyday things)
2. His experimentation with a common shot led him to something unique

(doesn't the picture above remind you of something out of Dexter?)

If you are good at doing detail shots, find a way to make them interesting/unique. Do not go take detail shots of things that we see every day. Save that for ad campaigns or gifts unless there is true concept or meaning behind it. I started intro to photography taking detail shots. I think my first couple ones were cliche - like of a golf ball waiting to be teed off and a dead dandelion... boring. When I finally found my way in intermediate photography I did not let detail shots leave my mind. I more or less waited for a situation where I thought that it would be necessary for me to use them, similar to what Corey Holms has done here. These almost seem scientific.
His process, that probably started with him doing the stupid shots of food coloring through the glass, led him to experiment with different substances. He mixed foot coloring with different oils and other liquids with various consistencies to create pattern and textures within an otherwise typical shot. This is an appropriate use of detail shots.

Have you often found that your ideas stem from something that begins as a recreation, but turns into something that becomes your own do to your process bringing you in different directions along the way?