Fighter-fight

[Mr. Lou Garou]

Just finished this one:

I'm fairly happy about how it came out, although I feel I left some aspects unresolved.

 

[ScottS]

Yea its got some holes that are not blurred. HAHA

 

[ScottS]

Do you know rob91 by any chance?

 

[Mr. Lou Garou]

I just discovered rob91 at this site. It's exciting to see work of his caliber.

 

[The Phototron]

I just discovered rob91 at this site. It's exciting to see work of his caliber.

I personally think you are quite near in imitating his work. Ironically you are also one for praising his originality.

 

[Amnesic]

:er:... these are jokes right. :greenpbl:

 

[Mr. Lou Garou]

Imitating rob91's work? I never even saw his work until yesterday, when I joined this forum. Besides, rob91 uses a uniform blur, or "fuzzy" as he calls it, while my photographs, or rather, this series of photographs, relieves the field by juxtaposing one or more areas in sharp relief. More importantly, those are merely technical aspects. A photograph is far more, infinitely more, than the manipulations of the darkroom, whether digital or actual.

 

[Mr. Lou Garou]

And to clarify further, rob91 actually ~achieves~ what I merely strive for in my photography.

 

[rob91]

It's an interesting shot. I'm guessing you achieved the selective focus in Photoshop or some other program?

 

[Mr. Lou Garou]

Yes. I was first attracted to indistinction in portrait photography of the early 1980's, where the use of panty hose as a filter softened the features of aging actresses, and petroleum jelly was sometimes smeared on the verges of the lens to allow selective blurring. Coating nearly the entire lens, except for a few judiciously placed lapses, achieved the results I was looking for, but was messy and imprecise. I'm much happier with the results by using software.

By the way, rob91, I like very much what you do with indistinction. I haven't been able, successfully, to use darkness to the extent you have. Kudos!

 

[rob91]

Panty Hose and jelly, sounds like some good times lol.

Are you familiar with Frantisek Drtikol? I have a book of his photos from the early 1900's. Very grainy stuff and an interesting use of dark and shadows, some abstract as well. Though I wonder how much of it is just the technology of the era.

Thanks for the compliments, you are way too kind.

 

[Mr. Lou Garou]

Love Drtikoliv. Have you seen his "Composition"?

I love the angles, the tension between light and dark. His work reminds me of a photograph of a dancer I found once in a thrift-shop book. The name of the photographer was lost, but I scanned the photograph for later study:

I think the early twentieth century was when chiaroscuro came to the fore. What I like in your photographs, rob91, is not chiaroscuro, but rather, the minimal illumination--- i.e., chiaroscuro without the light. I've not yet been able to achieve this. My images become simply dull, rather than dark. I'll keep at it, though!

 

[Mr. Lou Garou]

Here's a piece I did where I attempted to minimize the light. I don't feel it is successful, though.

 

[Mr. Lou Garou]

See what I mean? Dullsville, Daddy-O!