Barn door

[The wife!]

Hey, how did you unlock this thread

I traded them some of Ben's camera equipment.

 

[The wife!]

Photography is not always about focus, subject, aperture, and lighting. For me photography is art. It won't be liked or speak to everyone the same way but it does not mean its wrong or bad work.
This particular photo has come to mean/speak a lot to me and many people I work with.
When people are in a dark place and the darkness is creeping in around you it is hard to see the light. The light is always there you just need to look up for it. When you feel like there is no way out there is a door or a window you just need to look for it. When you can't escape your thoughts or the past there is always a fresh clean start like a freshly fallen snow. There is a clean new begining. You just need to look for it.

As a massage therapist I work with a lot of people dealing with strees, depression and anxiety. So I have it hanging in my therapy room. I have had discussions with cliens sharing this photo. I may make it a postcard with what I just wrote above and make it avalabe for people who need it.

Photography is so much more than tecnical things, it is art. I hope everyone can have a photo that speeks so deeply to them. Perfection is something I don't see as achevable, its somthing you can strive for but like a building Jeep there is always somthing to improve on.

 

[benhasajeep]

Hey, how did you unlock this thread

I traded them some of Ben's camera equipment.

 

[dxqcanada]

Hmm, this thread is going to get locked again ... for real this time

 

[SquarePeg]

The printed and framed version won 2nd place for special edditing in a local fair.

Thank you for answering MY QUESTION. If others were not so conceited as to only read their own posts, they would have seen you were answering MY QUESTION.

Let's not start that whole mess up again please! The OP requested the thread be continued in order to discuss the photo, not to rehash or restart the previous argument.

 

[Dean_Gretsch]

Yes, Ma'am. My apologies to the OP.

 

[terri]

Hey, how did you unlock this thread

She wanted a chance to express what this image means to her, and she has spoken about it very eloquently. For her and others who have viewed it, it touches certain emotions in a personal, meaningful way.

Can any of us ask more from any art that we've produced? Wayyyy too much attention is given to simple technical aspects these days, when art has always been meant as a tool for communication.

In this regard, the photo is a great success.

 

[timor]

Hey, how did you unlock this thread

She wanted a chance to express what this image means to her, and she has spoken about it very eloquently. For her and others who have viewed it, it touches certain emotions in a personal, meaningful way.

Can any of us ask more from any art that we've produced? Wayyyy too much attention is given to simple technical aspects these days, when art has always been meant as a tool for communication.

In this regard, the photo is a great success.

Yes and no Terri.
Yes, comments on emotional value of this picture for the photographer surely bring some understanding. A thing I was suspecting all the way as me to, I have many very imperfect technically, but very emotional (at least at the time) photographs. And I am still taking them.
Nevertheless presenting to wide public a picture which is missing the "communicational" standards of a photograph will always create question marks. Art is not only in emotional values, art is also in perfection of execution which bring own emotional values, more universal values, values speaking to many people. Values, which may lead everyone towards intended by the photographer goal.
It is not easy to talk nowadays about feelings. Like people are afraid to uncover themselves. Understandable. But this is why we talk about technicalities and aesthetics. This are tools to express feelings.

 

[terri]

Appreciate the comments. But when you mention "perfection of execution" we often move towards the subjective rather than the objective. Many of the comments here found the image pleasing as it was presented, no technical issues with focus or exposure. It is the additional processing, her personal touch, that some here found fault with. She hadn't articulated her reasons for this, so the questions were left unanswered at that time.

Whether or not you agree that her processing of the photo supports her vision is subjective. Apparently the photo has touched many of her clients, as well as some of the members here. But not everyone. I would argue that even had she employed those "universal values" you mention, it's still unlikely that everyone would have the same reaction to it. Art doesn't work that way.

I tend to think we're saying the same thing, actually, whether we're in agreement about this photo or not.

 

[sleist]

Hello there ...

My apologies for any perceived nastiness on my part.

Regarding the photo and my issues with the processing. I find the processing, specifically the areas of light and dark, to be distracting, as they appear unnatural to my eye. The scene itself is pleasing, as I stated in my original post, but the light and dark make no sense to my eye.

If the OP had trudged into the woods with a pinhole camera and created a photo, the vignette on that image may have been equally distracting, but it would not have been a choice made in post, but rather a limitation imposed by the chosen tools. Perhaps the reaction may not be justifiable, but I am more accepting of that as a creative "choice" than what I see here. As a counterpoint to that, had the OP trudged into the woods with her cell phone and applied a pinhole filter in post, I would not feel quite as accepting of that.

I often state that an image should be judged on its own merits and the means of producing it not be taken into account, so this seems to challenge that belief - at least with respect to my pinhole/cell phone analogy. I suppose I will need to ponder that a bit...

Anyhoo, I don't like the processing. That said, congrats on the prize - seriously.

Now I know folks don't want to revisit the other piece of this thread, but since I kind of caused it all maybe I get a pass for hopefully putting it to bed? I will use an analogy again so as not to unintentionally start another brouhaha. (I actually looked up the spelling of that).

I have given, in the past, negative critique on an image in a forum. I have been told that I must be wrong (clueless I think was the term) because the image had been purchased by several people. Now, I may have been wrong (or clueless), but it was not because some unknown person had money and a different perspective. A paying customer is not a valid justification for anything except making a living.

I can't read minds, but I do wonder if the "drunk" portion of my description of the judges might have been taken more seriously/differently than it was intended. I was only trying to present an over-the-top example of why people I don't know should not have any impact on my point of view simply because they disagree. I think that maybe someone thought I meant that you would have to be drunk to like this image, and that was not what I was trying to say.

That's all. Time for dinner and a beer.