On Dec 31, 2012, at 6:21 PM, Doug Brewer wrote: > On 12/31/12 2:53 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >> >> On Dec 31, 2012, at 7:22 AM, Doug Brewer wrote: >> >>> On 12/29/12 1:22 AM, Larry Colen wrote: >>>> >>>> On Dec 28, 2012, at 8:00 AM, Doug Brewer wrote: >>>> >>>>> year-end survey of representative work: >>>>> >>>>> https://plus.google.com/u/0/115347824062413314605/posts/dL2uXjoYvRj >>>> >>>> Very nice. Some of them look downright film like, though it might just be >>>> what I can only describe as "retro composition". >>>> >>> >>> Thanks, Larry. I'm curious which one you thank are film-like. Also: can you >>> explain "retro composition"? >> >> Going back and looking, I'd say 3 and 6 are the most film like, 4 also has >> some of it. I suspect that it is a case of exposure issues looking more >> like the weaknesses of film than the weaknesses of digital. >> > > um, thank you?
That wasn't meant as any sort of quality judgement. When you push film or digital beyond their comfort zone, they "go nonlinear" in different ways. It is these ways that give the images their character, rather than just being a matter of fact documentation of the scene. Most of the art of the technical side of photography, in my not at all humble opinion, comes from overcoming, or working with these issues. > > >> As to retro composition, some of the photos have the feel of photos taken >> when I was much younger. Looking through, 3,6,&7. I can't say what makes >> them look like they might have been taken forty years ago. I suspect that >> there are two factors at play. One is that any activity where you make >> aesthetic choices will have styles and fashions. People do what they >> see/hear their social circle doing, because that is what seems right. A >> corollary to this would be, if you want to take better pictures, look at >> better pictures. I think that another factor is that the care and thought >> that goes into a photograph is generally in proportion to the cost, in money >> and in effort, of taking that photograph. Also, when each frame cost a >> perceptible amount of pocket change (click, that cost as much as a cup of >> coffee), the people being photographed took a bit more care either because >> they didn't want to screw up the photo and cost the photographer extra >> money, or because they knew that t > hey would > n't get a second chance and if they looked dorky, that's how they'd be > memorialized. >> > > wow, you could have just said you didn't like them. But thanks for typing it > out. Again, that has nothing to do with these photos. I'm just trying to explain why I think that people presented themselves differently for photos forty years ago than they do now. It used to be that getting a photo taken was almost a special occasion, in the same way that people would dress up to fly someplace on an airliner. It's all a lot more casual now. > >> I'm not saying that people consciously thought of these things, or that >> everyone did, but over time, photos have become far less formal. People >> don't get dressed up every time someone is going to take a photo of them. >> > > I suspect you don't have a free-spirited five-year-old girl around the house. > Rather than me saying to her to get dressed up so I can take some photos, > it's that I notice she is being a princess so I get my camera. Yes, and so many of the less formal photos from when I was a kid were when parents were doing just that. That may also have contributed to the nostalgic feel of your photos. They reminded me more of the photos I saw when I was a kid, rather than the photos, casual or portrait, than I so often see now. I *liked* the nostalgic feel to your photos. It wasn't anything I consciously thought about when I first saw them, I just had the gut feeling that they reminded me more of photos from my childhood than the vast majority of photos that I see now. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
