Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Cmon Rob. You can do better than that.
Calling me names, as misplaced as they are, doesn’t add to the discussion.
Straw man fallacy requires you put up an argument in the first place. Name dropping of old Greeks doesn’t constitute a degree of clarity in ant argument.Irrespective of your personal thoughts and beliefs, I know what I base my arguments on. They are substantiated by my peers, all of which are rigorously scrutinized by the process of investigation, logic and legitimacy.
Contrary to those that express themselves as teachers on the Internet, I don’t have that advantage. I must continuously upgrade my knowledge, check my facts, stay in tune with current thoughts, hypothesese and theories and be at the risk of losing my credentials if I mislead people.
In addition, not that it means much, I get paid a lot of fucking cash for the effort and gain a considerable amount of respect from my peers and students.
Remember where you learnt your photography from?
The Internet, for fuck sake.Now behave or I’ll keep you back after class.
Xx
Phidias might or might not have considered the so called golden ratio. It’s been attributed to lots of people. In any case it’s only ever going to be an approximation since phi is n irrational number and can only ever be approximated.
In addition, the idea that a number could define beauty is in the same league as God creating the universe, earth first.
Humans like simple answers. They make them up.
There are much more interesting numbers. Avogadro’s number is cool. So is absolute zero, or just plain old zero, which, by the way wasn’t around in Phideas’s time so he would not have understood the full implications of phi. Also, if he’d had means to measure accurately he’d have noted that those things he believed to be of the golden ratio were in fact not so. They just looked that way.
If your going to apply a mathematical relationship to a loosely defined phenomenon such as aesthetics you’d better be prepared to be laughter at.
I not suggesting that such a rule is damaging to the integrity of any image. What I find ludicrous is the suggestion that it can be rigorously applied as demonstrated by Kent and his colleagues as if it is the holy grail of photography when all it is, is photography by numbers as we might teach 6 year old how to paint. Then on top of all that, quote a Greek from 400 BC as a reference for its veracity.
Give me a break!
Falxy old mate I don’t give a fuck who you play with. Your a big boy now.
Imagine your in the street and there are just 2 houses to visit.
On is owned by a drug infested, alcoholic, perverted old fool who never mows the lawn, eats nothing but pizza and kebabs, never washes and swears like a frustrated storm trooper. The other is run by a clean cut, anal retentive self flagellating wanker who sleeps with his mother and wears socks with sandals.One of them knows fuck all about photography and the other knows even less but thinks he knows it all.
You pick.
Or go home.
????
Yes, actually, although I’m not proposing a belief system. I’m presenting a concept based on studies in anthropology, art, history, culture and brain studies. I’m reflecting the attitudes of those who have done these studies and who realize that aesthetics isn’t a precise concept as suggested by this thread but a complex, flexible system of understanding how we perceive.
Lol!
You might like to consider 2 possibilities for framing the composition.
Inclusive framing is just that: include everything you think is going to tell the moron out there what’s going on.
Here’s a simple example:
It’s all there. Your imagination needs no prompting. You don’t even need a title unless the viewer is a complete imbecile.
Exclusive framing leaves out bits that the viewer can extrapolate.
Here’s an example:
It doesn’t require too much imagination that there is a body attached to the leg or a shop attached to the window. Nor does it take a genius to figure out there might be a connection between the 2.
Framing is fun.
Framing is experimental.
Framing is freedom to choose what you want.
There are no rules. There aren’t even any guidelines.
More later. It’s lunch time
Every composition is a result of your decision to edit the scene before you.
The question you can ask yourself is not what rule do I follow to satisfy the pleasures of others but what interests me.
The frame is your boundary, your thoughts are your guide, your decision is final. Whatever you capture is as a result of all the thought you have put into stopping and pointing the camera.
We have the advantage today of putting aside the technical issues. Do so at every opportunity, in the same way you would put aside the technicalities of a car while driving to the shops.
I’m not talking to the wankers of the world who talk numbers and size at every opportunity. We all know who they are. Leave them to themselves. Get it all on auto and concentrate on what you are thinking about when you stand there before your place or object of interest.
Think: is what I see funny, colourful, light, bright and cheerful, dark, scary and gloomy, memorable, exciting, historic, new, old, dead, rude, disgusting ………
Don’t think about someone else. Just think about what you are experiencing.
Move the frame around until it includes what you think is necessary to capture what you are experiencing.
You might not be able to include everything. That’s OK. Bits will do. If some bloke could feed a crowd with a few fish and a loaf of bread, you should be able to get something in there to remind you of what is was about.
Viewers are often stupid. They need stuff pointed out to them. You can do that when you have them cornered at the Friday night ‘slide show’. Get them drunk and they’ll enjoy anything you throw at them.
Did someone audit my reply?
Maybe I dosed off and dropped the ipad into the loo.
Here’s a second edition.
Dunc and I are old mates, Darren, back when LS was a freshly hatched grub searching for food.
I was talking about a pub in Wooloomooloo. Bath is what I do every now and again. I do enjoy them.
As for the tonal values, its not necessary to have the full quid. That’s a misunderstanding of the Zone System. Adams never meant it that way.
Have a look at Freeman’s book on Exposure. He has a nice explanation of tones using histogram as a guide to getting what you want.
Dunc is a reasonable photographer so he doesn’t need telling. He’s just here for the attention. He’s got a good eye for the interesting stuff. Perhaps this shot was taken while he was lying in the gutter; a typical pose for such a bloke
cheers
tomWe’re old mate, Darren.
Dunc can’t afford to loose friends. Us madmen have to stay together.who else would drag us from our own vomit to save our worthless lives?As for tonal range, it’s OK not to have the full range represented. That’s a bit of a fallacy. Adams never meant it that way.
Freeman does a nice expose on using the histogram (which is the modern tool for tone control) in his book on Exposure. Lots of possibilities other than what you suggested depending on what the photographer wants to express.
Falx is a reasonable photographer in spite of his other failings. He’s captured a bit of architecture that has caught his eye from an unusual perspective which, in tern, has caught yours and mine. He won’t become famous for it. His other activities will enable that.
Let it be, I say. Why interfere with a mans underware just because you don’t like the tone of his voice.
Your new best friend
Tom
The prayer we construct is wasted. The Construct is all there is. Pray to that. If you wish.
The value we place on what we see and perceive is nothing more than pennies in our pocket.
The joy is in the search, not in the domain of other thoughts.
The result is as the spoken word; once heard, never unheard.
The image is as the word.
No rule pervades the scene or the frame.
Just what falls before us.
Ignore nothing, count nothing as you want it
Be lonely amoung the ignorant.
Be lonely in your own image.
Be in your own image.You’ve sold your soul, you pathetic man.
I’m retired and living of the earnings of a woman. Good life. You should try it.
I’m on a mission. Destroying myths. No Santa, no god, no Easter bunny, not fucking internet experts.
I thought I might fire bomb a few photo forums for starters. Not literally, of course. I’m not a Muslim radical, just a simple Aussie radical who would prefer a brawl in a pub.
You know, we worry about terrorists creeping up on us and yet the so called greatest country on the planet (legend in their own lunc box more likely) elects a moron to run the place. And it’s not the first time. Last count they’ve had a senile actor, an illiterate cowboy, a lying cunt and now a circus clown. What next? You?
I’m going to slam my fingers in the kitchen drawer. I might feel better.
Love you bro
Tom
Good thing you’re a passable photographer, Dunc. Your taste in other things is shit.
Rose, Crown and Thistle, Bath, vodka plus E.S.T
Meet you at the top.
Good for a laugh, maybe.
Rule of thirds is about as helpful as a fly screen on a submarine hatch and as factual as Santa’ elves.
This is a classic example of a meme, created from misconceptions, mathematical assumptions and errors, spiritualism, then perpetuated by those with little imagination or creativity in composition of any ‘art’ form. Then, the first sign of criticism of the ‘rule’ the reaction is to make square pegs fit round holes by pounding the adversaries of such rubbish with examples in nature, art and architecture that ‘prove’ the ‘rule’
Then, if that’s not enough it is then explained as a ‘guide’ not a rule, as if that makes a difference here, since the explanation has used mathematical relationships and precise measurements to ‘guide’ us through an image that was never meant to be constructed like a Lego toy.
Then, to beat it all into a wasteland of pulp fiction, the infatuated student will be told in the future that the best photos will be produced when the rule is Brocken.
Let me make it quite clear.
There is no factual evidence for connecting numbers to aesthetics.
Close enough doesn’t make it a rule.
Aesthetics is related to culture, interpretation, understanding of content and context, appreciation of skill, knowledge of subject matter, personal experiences and circumstances under which an object will acknowledged. These things will generate what we call ‘personal preferences’. Some call it ‘taste’. Neither of these relate to the object in question but only to the judgement placed by the observer.
To place a mathematical relationship as the cause of such a complex issue is rediculous to say the least. To suggest such a thing is misleading and ignorant.
If it’s what you want to do, feel free to go ahead, but don’t talk on the matter as if is the only way, the right way or the proven way.
What this thread is doing is pushing a myth by one person who had declared that he knows best, based on a myth that he continues to generate.
Cheers
Tom Dinning
Crossing the alps isn’t what it used to be.
Of course, there is always the intrepid traveller who wants to do it hard.
Some harder than others.
On reaching Como one is struck by the beauty of the lakes, the presence of George Clooney and a secondary influence of Italian wine, women and food.
Love is also in the air, be it lost, found or dwindling.
Jazz fills the evening streets.
And the religious seek eternal forgiveness
Personally, I prefer the jazz.
Thanks for dropping by, Paul.
The shake or blur is in-camera. I have a habit of shooting at low shutter speeds. My thinking is if I’m moving or the subject is moving then I’d like to show that in the image.
I’m of the age where passing scenes and the passage of time is a blur. The older I get the more distant and foggy the images of the past and present reveal themselves.
I’m probably applying some artistic licence to the end product. So! For the viewer, I’m leaving the aesthetic and intellectual interpretation up to them. My capacity as a photographer has already been well proven; good, bad or indifferent.
This next shot illustrates a little more of what I mean.
Perhaps you might like to comment on its intellectual qualities.
Christine is always one step ahead of me.
She is the phantom who leads me to my fate, the muse that guides me through darkened streets, the Lorelie who sings from dark waters.
Is she ‘sadly’ or are you, Dunc, old man?
This is how every lost love should be photographed. Remember them how they fall, I say.
Every time you go into this supermarket you’ll get a lump in your throat that can only be dissolved by a stiff shot of whisky. (middle shelf behind her)
What’s wrong with you, anyway? Fuck the composition, go for the woman.
Zurich has a few great galleries but it’s had to tell the difference between the decor and the displays.
I did sit on a chair at one point and was promptly told to move on. I think I might have disturbed the ambience. Here’s a selection from Klaushaus. Don’t ask me anything about art. I fail to understand any of it.
Tomorrow I will start the trek over the Swiss Alps to Italy, in the comfort of a well warmed train.
There is also a sparsity in their decor. It’s possible they don’t have a lot of visitors.
The first thing I noticed was the connectivity of the Swiss.
As long as yu can plug it in you are one of them. Mind you, I did notice the absence of an earth pin. I suspect they don’t have the conductivity of us Australians.
Pam
How nice to see you again.
Camera problems, eh.I had a few of those, mostly I had too much.
I bought a couple of Fuji X ‘s and a Nikon J5 and Im like a pig in mud.Its all about greed. Blokes like me like ‘bigger is better’ but I feel quite comfortable about my new small size. After all, its what you can do with it that counts.
Have fun with whatever.
