Broken valentine rose, C & C please

[MTVision]

Yeah Twilight came after my teen years. When I was a teen, I was into the whole hot topic, emo, band shirt, fairies fad

Your 22 right?

The whole twilight hysteria started a couple years ago but you were probably 15 (or 16)when Twilight was originally published in 2005.

 

[cgipson1]

Yeah Twilight came after my teen years. When I was a teen, I was into the whole hot topic, emo, band shirt, fairies fad

Your 22 right?

The whole twilight hysteria started a couple years ago but you were probably 15 (or 16)when Twilight was originally published in 2005.

She is just a BABY! <evil Grin>!

 

[blackrose89]

Yeah Twilight came after my teen years. When I was a teen, I was into the whole hot topic, emo, band shirt, fairies fad

Your 22 right? The whole twilight hysteria started a couple years ago but you were probably 15 (or 16)when Twilight was originally published in 2005.

I have no clue when the books came out. I meant the hysteria.

 

[blackrose89]

Yeah Twilight came after my teen years. When I was a teen, I was into the whole hot topic, emo, band shirt, fairies fad

Your 22 right? The whole twilight hysteria started a couple years ago but you were probably 15 (or 16)when Twilight was originally published in 2005.

She is just a BABY! !

Should I find this creepy? Lol

 

[cgipson1]

Your 22 right? The whole twilight hysteria started a couple years ago but you were probably 15 (or 16)when Twilight was originally published in 2005.

She is just a BABY! !

Should I find this creepy? Lol

Only if you like it! Bwahhahhaahahahaaaa!

 

[LightSpeed]

So much for trying to have a discussion

Hey Compaq, Gipson's ignoring me.

Watch this. Hey Gipson , are you ignoring me?

No... I was driving home from work, you fool! Although if you keep doing the "GRUMPY" Lightspeed with silly posts about NL... I might! lol!

I Officially closed that thread Gipson , you're late to the party son..............and contrary to Vtec the image was NOT improperly exposed.
I think he got mad at me.

 

[ph0enix]

Should I find this creepy? Lol

Please do!!!

 

[cgipson1]

Hey Compaq, Gipson's ignoring me.

Watch this. Hey Gipson , are you ignoring me?

No... I was driving home from work, you fool! Although if you keep doing the "GRUMPY" Lightspeed with silly posts about NL... I might! lol!

I Officially closed that thread Gipson , you're late to the party son..............and contrary to Vtec the image was NOT improperly exposed.
I think he got mad at me.

You were being a Lightspeed! What did you expect? lol!

 

[luvmyfamily]

Well, I'm just saying that for a photograph to be successful, it needs to be more than a shot of a flower. I'm sure Derrel or Bitter or anyone more experienced than myself could write in lengths about this, and formulate that in a good, understandable way. I'm trying to say that if you press the shutter, something must have made you do that. Being artistic for the sake of "being artistic" isn't really something I like. I saw a video on youtube once, I think it was that Gavin guy, about shooting a flower on a plank, with a weird WB and heavy vignette from photoshop. I'm guessing several people went out into their back yard to shoot flowers on planks with weird WBs and with heavy vignette, but those photos do not mean anything. They did it because they saw a video on it, they initiate the shot by themselves due some something they felt.

I don't know why you really took that photo, other than "for practice", and I'm not sure what you practiced. If you had a "reason" for taking it, whether it was because you liked the contrast between flower on road, or because you wanted to convey an emotion of something, or something that might provoke some feelings in the viewer, then I'd understand it. I don't know how much time you put into the photo, either. For all I know, you may have put a flower on the road and snapped away just for the sake of "getting a cool pic of flower on road".

I'm not sure if I'm reaching through, here.

/opinion

First of all, I really do appreciate you taking the time to help, and also edit my photo. I DO understand where you are coming from, totally understand, comprehend what you are trying to explain. I agree that an image of a flower is boring, I NEVER photograph flowers, just yesterday, it was Valentines Day, so I thought it would be cool to do something with the flower I broke by accident. I mainly photograph people, like this one,

however, photographing people can be boring as well. I have a historic graveyard fascination, the one's that date back to the 17 and 1800's such as this one,

so perhaps a better photo would have been the broken rose on the old grave stone and a faded B&W as you did with my photo?? This historic grave yard is in my neighborhood and I'd like to get some better photo's of it. I did some research on this historic graveyard trying to find out who was buried there and found out they were slaves during the civil war era. I also have a facsination with OLD barns, the ones where roofs are caving in and old one-room school houses. I agree with you to some extent, but IMO, I do not believe a photo always needs to tell a long story. I don't think there is anything wrong with simplicity.

 

[luvmyfamily]

I want to find my style./QUOTE]

Who doesn't? Finding one's style, and be confident in it, that's the hard part, I think.

I think it's a bit harder with photography. When painting or sketching you are not limited to what's in front of you. You can create any world you want. It's not say it's not possible and I don't want tot spark the whole "you just have to learn what to see" argument, but I think it's harder to train your eyes to see rather then to create from your mind. For me anyway.

I like the goth idea and the photo in the link you provided. Wish we lived closer, we could hang out in the historic graveyard in my neighborhood and do some photo brainstorming.

 

[luvmyfamily]

Oh, and I'll bring my Ouija board.... Seriously, when the rose dies, I will walk over to the historic graveyard....Compaq has my brain going

 

[Compaq]

Simple photos are much like short stories: the less you tell, the more the viewer must figure out. This forcing the viewer to think is what makes so many street shots good story-telling pictures, I think. Telling a story and simplicity go hand in hand.

Water drop shots can be cool, but those do not tell much of a story other than "we're able to do it". Those can be great shots, but not in an emotional way. I think there's a difference there, a major one.

 

[gsgary]

I want to find my style./QUOTE]

Who doesn't? Finding one's style, and be confident in it, that's the hard part, I think.

I think it's a bit harder with photography. When painting or sketching you are not limited to what's in front of you. You can create any world you want. It's not say it's not possible and I don't want tot spark the whole "you just have to learn what to see" argument, but I think it's harder to train your eyes to see rather then to create from your mind. For me anyway.

You can in the studio

 

[gsgary]

Well, I'm just saying that for a photograph to be successful, it needs to be more than a shot of a flower. I'm sure Derrel or Bitter or anyone more experienced than myself could write in lengths about this, and formulate that in a good, understandable way. I'm trying to say that if you press the shutter, something must have made you do that. Being artistic for the sake of "being artistic" isn't really something I like. I saw a video on youtube once, I think it was that Gavin guy, about shooting a flower on a plank, with a weird WB and heavy vignette from photoshop. I'm guessing several people went out into their back yard to shoot flowers on planks with weird WBs and with heavy vignette, but those photos do not mean anything. They did it because they saw a video on it, they initiate the shot by themselves due some something they felt.

I don't know why you really took that photo, other than "for practice", and I'm not sure what you practiced. If you had a "reason" for taking it, whether it was because you liked the contrast between flower on road, or because you wanted to convey an emotion of something, or something that might provoke some feelings in the viewer, then I'd understand it. I don't know how much time you put into the photo, either. For all I know, you may have put a flower on the road and snapped away just for the sake of "getting a cool pic of flower on road".

I'm not sure if I'm reaching through, here.

/opinion

First of all, I really do appreciate you taking the time to help, and also edit my photo. I DO understand where you are coming from, totally understand, comprehend what you are trying to explain. I agree that an image of a flower is boring, I NEVER photograph flowers, just yesterday, it was Valentines Day, so I thought it would be cool to do something with the flower I broke by accident. I mainly photograph people, like this one,

however, photographing people can be boring as well. I have a historic graveyard fascination, the one's that date back to the 17 and 1800's such as this one,

so perhaps a better photo would have been the broken rose on the old grave stone and a faded B&W as you did with my photo?? This historic grave yard is in my neighborhood and I'd like to get some better photo's of it. I did some research on this historic graveyard trying to find out who was buried there and found out they were slaves during the civil war era. I also have a facsination with OLD barns, the ones where roofs are caving in and old one-room school houses. I agree with you to some extent, but IMO, I do not believe a photo always needs to tell a long story. I don't think there is anything wrong with simplicity.

I have been shooting flowers lately and they seem to do very well in club competitions, do you find these boring ?

shot with 120 film 27 years out of date

Another 120 film shot on FP4