True Self - series of long exposure self portraits

[Dejan]

Comments are welcome and appreciated.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

My pages are at:
Web: Dejan Rackovi? Photography
Tumblr: Dejan Rackovi? Photography
FB: http://www.facebook.com/foto.rackovic
MM: ModelMayhem.com - Dejan Rackovic - Photographer - Podgorica, Podgorica, Montenegro

 

[The_Traveler]

For my taste, they are too similar, thus making any meaning difficult to put together.
It would be easier to concentrate if you presented one as the most on target and then I could try to dissemble the symbolism.

 

[Designer]

#1 is the best IMO. Composition, balance, pose, all working.
#2 Not enough of the subject
#3 Subject very good, but composition is not
#s 4, 5, & 6 just too busy - don't like them

 

[Derrel]

I think 4,5,and 6 are the absolute best frames. A lot of people will not be able to appreciate this type of multiple representations because they don't "get" Cubism. Some people want everything spoon-fed to them. If they cannot "get" an image within 0.5 seconds, they will tell you it needs to be re-done, or that you missed the mark. The reactions these have garnered here so far are similar to those that much Cubist painting received for the first thirty years of its existence. My personal favorite is #4.

 

[The_Traveler]

A lot of people will not be able to appreciate this type of multiple representations because they don't "get" Cubism. Some people want everything spoon-fed to them. If they cannot "get" an image within 0.5 seconds, they will tell you it needs to be re-done, or that you missed the mark. The reactions these have garnered here so far are similar to those that much Cubist painting received for the first thirty years of its existence.

Why is it necessary to bolster your own opinion by denigrating others?

 

[Dejan]

Thanks everyone for comments, there are no right or wrong comments and photos are there for different interpretations. Some people like minimalism, some like diversity, some like abstraction.
Derrel, interesting comparison with cubism and #4 is also my favorite.

 

[runnah]

Cubism? Surrealism if anything. A small Breton influence.

 

[Derrel]

A lot of people will not be able to appreciate this type of multiple representations because they don't "get" Cubism. Some people want everything spoon-fed to them. If they cannot "get" an image within 0.5 seconds, they will tell you it needs to be re-done, or that you missed the mark. The reactions these have garnered here so far are similar to those that much Cubist painting received for the first thirty years of its existence.

Why is it necessary to bolster your own opinion by denigrating others?

Sorry if you were offended, but honestly Lew, you have denigrated MANY other people on this forum with your "pro-street, anti-portraiture, anti-still-life" diatribes on MANY occasions. On MANY occasions you have repeatedly stressed the nobility and value of your "street photography" sensibilities, and you have pointedly denigrated the types of photography other people like to do. You were in fact guilty of it last week, and one TPF member called you on it then, but I let it slide, since taking you to task would be tedious if I did it every time you made a snide comment about how "worthless" portraiture is. So, please Lew, don't play the butt-hurt card with me, not on this issue. You have ZERO room for leeway, buddy.

My opinion is my own opinion, and it's basically this: many people can not and do not appreciate the artistic sensibility displayed in any Cubist art. "My opinion" as you call it, that Cubism and multi-point-of-view image methods are valid and worthwhile. Picasso introduced Cubist ideas to art around a century ago. Maybe you've heard about it?

I'm sorry, but your opinion is one I do not mind disagreeing with, and I stated my opinion that the OP's 4th,5th,and 6th images are his strongest images, and I even provided a historical example of how such images were rejected and dismissed by the majority when the technique was first seen by the public. SAME thing is happening today among those who are not familiar with the idea of multi-point viewpoint work. I am sorry if you are unfamiliar with the history and controversy surrounding Cubism. Perhaps if you were more educated in the style, your opinion and mine would be in accord.

 

[Designer]

Thanks everyone for comments, there are no right or wrong comments and photos are there for different interpretations. Some people like minimalism, some like diversity, some like abstraction.

As for me, I like many styles if they are well done. For instance; if a cubist image is what you intended, I would like to have seen it done better.

 

[vintagesnaps]

I think #4 is the most interesting image (made Herbert Bayer come to mind). I'd continue to explore the idea. I'd keep trying different compositions to see what works best, and I'd try to frame it so the edge of the windows in the background isn't showing (that seems to bring reality into it instead of keeping it more abstract). Or if you want that more warm golden color and shapes of the windows in the picture maybe think about how it works in the composition.

 

[Dejan]

Thanks vintagesnaps, I'll certainly keep playing with the idea, it's an interesting process.
Designer, I didn't go for any particular "ism" I find it interesting that Derrel mentioned it but it's more about the feeling, it may be more subjective to me and meaning unreachable to others but I don't feel like I should explain them, if it doesn't meen anything to some viewers that's OK.

 

[JerryVenz]

I am a true traditional portrait photographer and I really like these!

My favorites are #1 and #4. The first one has a strong center of interest and hits the rule of thirds "crash point" so it appeals to me artistically and technically.
The #4 image is really "out there"---I get a John Carpenter "The Thing" VIBE from it!! ( I have a FILM background )
Nice work--explore your niche!!