mikelc Posted November 5, 2008 Author Share #61 Posted November 5, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hey Bill...thanks for weighing in on this..I always value your comments on this site so thanks for your kind words... mike Mike Cetta | Fine Art Photographer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Hi mikelc, Take a look here A Grand Prize for me and my M8. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
JL2006 Posted November 5, 2008 Share #62 Posted November 5, 2008 Me & my colleagues love this picture !! Thanks for sharing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted November 5, 2008 Share #63 Posted November 5, 2008 Great picture, amazing work, magical moment. Worth every bit of that prize and then some more. Great composition and great postproduction as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted November 5, 2008 Share #64 Posted November 5, 2008 Where's Wally? Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted November 5, 2008 Share #65 Posted November 5, 2008 Which avenue is it? Im busting my head ... 5th? no Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent10D Posted November 5, 2008 Share #66 Posted November 5, 2008 Where's Wally? Pete. Whoo! Now there's a blast from the past! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted November 5, 2008 Share #67 Posted November 5, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Whoo! Now there's a blast from the past! Have you found him yet? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tollie Posted November 5, 2008 Share #68 Posted November 5, 2008 Which avenue is it? Im busting my head ... 5th? no Park... Looking north. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isabelle Lenatio Posted November 5, 2008 Share #69 Posted November 5, 2008 I can see why it won the prize .... it's special. Reminds me of "Merkley" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcoombs Posted November 5, 2008 Share #70 Posted November 5, 2008 Which avenue is it? Im busting my head ... 5th? no He's on Park Ave looking north, just below 52nd St. There is a street sign if you look closely. Citibank is the highrise on the right and the Lever Bros. building is on the left (green glass one), a classic design building. Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted November 5, 2008 Share #71 Posted November 5, 2008 Composition and the time of the moment of taking the pic is amazing. It is enough amazing without PP effects BTW. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
citrus Posted November 5, 2008 Share #72 Posted November 5, 2008 I love the lady looking down her long, long legs - and all this in front of many young children - that is an expressionate style and voyerism rarely found in US - great to see it still exists in the country of conservatism and prudence. Well captured moment of reality-! A big heads-in from me and contratulations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyexist Posted November 5, 2008 Share #73 Posted November 5, 2008 Great image Mike. And thanks for generously sharing technique. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchs Posted November 5, 2008 Share #74 Posted November 5, 2008 Mike, a little late, but congrats from Argentina both for the prize and for the outstanding image. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGW Posted November 5, 2008 Share #75 Posted November 5, 2008 Well first of all, what a fantastic image! I think I'm going to say what most will instantly disagree with, and I can understand, but I would much rather see the image as it comes out of the camera so that it stands on its own merits. This is now really a post-processing art-form which (to some people, though not your judges, obviously) can also detract from the capture by making it look more like an intricately painted water colour, than a photograph. It's slightly disconcerting and has unusual aspects to its appearance, and I feel that this is what people find attractive, rather that a strong photograph. There's nothing completely wrong with this, and it will in fact attract more admirers than just the well processed natural image would do. You don't even have to have an interest in photography to like an image like this, so immediately you have a larger audience. But as much as I like your 'digital Norman Rockwell like results', I can't help but think that it's losing something while gaining something else because of your 'redirecting' with your post-processing interests. It's a strong image as it is, and I would really like to see it before you did this post-processing work. It looks a bit too unreal, and therefore more like a painting where the artist has had all the time in the world to create it; as indeed a post-processor does. The fact that it's an instantaneous capture from a photographer is submerged slightly because of your post-processing work. But I do know that instant gratification is really the first impression that most people (and judges) respond to; but in doing so, something else equally as important can, I feel, be devalued, when it really shouldn't be. It's a great photograph, and a great captured moment, and I'd rather just see it printed. I'm certainly not saying there's anything wrong in working photographs in this way, that would be stupid, and the results can be very interesting. But I do think it's wrong to have such post-processing art judged in the same category as 'straight' photography. The two are quite different interests. I'm just a person in a minority here, I know. I'm just adding another point of view, but congratulations and well done. Jeffrey. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted November 6, 2008 Share #76 Posted November 6, 2008 Awesome. Just like a Thomas Kinkade painting! That's a compliment? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted November 6, 2008 Share #77 Posted November 6, 2008 Jeffery yea, the image is a bit formula based, but so be it .... .....................then I am happy to prostitute myself to anti-art/art/non art stuff so I will not pass judgment on your statement ............... it all began with a feral cat skin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted November 6, 2008 Share #78 Posted November 6, 2008 I am also against post processing, but not when its done like is done in this pic: with style. He caught a wonderful picture and added his own artistic style to present an even better one. It is a balanced result and I dont want to see the original photo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michali Posted November 6, 2008 Share #79 Posted November 6, 2008 Well first of all, what a fantastic image! I think I'm going to say what most will instantly disagree with, and I can understand, but I would much rather see the image as it comes out of the camera so that it stands on its own merits. This is now really a post-processing art-form which (to some people, though not your judges, obviously) can also detract from the capture by making it look more like an intricately painted water colour, than a photograph. It's slightly disconcerting and has unusual aspects to its appearance, and I feel that this is what people find attractive, rather that a strong photograph. There's nothing completely wrong with this, and it will in fact attract more admirers than just the well processed natural image would do. You don't even have to have an interest in photography to like an image like this, so immediately you have a larger audience. But as much as I like your 'digital Norman Rockwell like results', I can't help but think that it's losing something while gaining something else because of your 'redirecting' with your post-processing interests. It's a strong image as it is, and I would really like to see it before you did this post-processing work. It looks a bit too unreal, and therefore more like a painting where the artist has had all the time in the world to create it; as indeed a post-processor does. The fact that it's an instantaneous capture from a photographer is submerged slightly because of your post-processing work. But I do know that instant gratification is really the first impression that most people (and judges) respond to; but in doing so, something else equally as important can, I feel, be devalued, when it really shouldn't be. It's a great photograph, and a great captured moment, and I'd rather just see it printed. I'm certainly not saying there's anything wrong in working photographs in this way, that would be stupid, and the results can be very interesting. But I do think it's wrong to have such post-processing art judged in the same category as 'straight' photography. The two are quite different interests. I'm just a person in a minority here, I know. I'm just adding another point of view, but congratulations and well done. Jeffrey. Well done great work! However I must say that I share the same minority view as Jeffrey. MIKE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted November 6, 2008 Share #80 Posted November 6, 2008 ... it's wrong to have such post-processing art judged in the same category as 'straight' photography. The two are quite different interests... I don't do post processing myself, usually trying to get the best of of a straight print. Nevertheless, I disagree with the above generalization. An artistic image stands alone (if it can stand). I guess I would notice that Mike's image has been changed or enhanced in some way that makes it different than a straight-up conversion of the in-camera image, but Mike's image is both surreal and magical. So, I wouldn't categorize it as a non-photo, or whatever category might say that the image is " not a photograph." To me, it's clearly a photograph. Another example that comes to mind is a "painting" by Caryl Withay posted elsewhere during the past week (I'll look for it). Her image is an intentional manipulation of the photographic image and looks more like a painting than a photograph. Here's the link: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-post-processing-forum/67568-mexican-dancers-painting.html Mike's looks more like a photograph to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.