pmun Posted June 11, 2009 Share #1 Posted June 11, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The recent threads by dent 'Classic shots with an M8' prompted me to start a thread about my project. I am currently in transition from a Ricoh GRD2 to the M8 and have started off by pre-focusing and manually exposing at 1/60th to get some sense of motion. These comments on that thread also caught my eye: At least you mostly shoot from the front rather than showing us photos of peoples backs! by earleygallery and 'The walking with the flow is the most difficult has there is no set parameter' by yanidel. Well here are some backs with a set parameter: http://www.urbanpaths.net (only those in the M8 section were taken with the M8) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 11, 2009 Posted June 11, 2009 Hi pmun, Take a look here Non-classic shots with an M8 . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
manolo Posted June 12, 2009 Share #2 Posted June 12, 2009 pmun, its not the back of the person that is most important or even the "other persons" but rather your path and the fact that the camera cached what you needed to see yourself in order for you to walk. Therefore a sequence of pictures don't all need to have the back of a person. (in my opinion) The way we walk through a city is nevertheless remarkable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmun Posted June 12, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted June 12, 2009 Manolo, the backs of people walking are there to provide consistency so that the variation is given more prominence. It's partly about the creases in the back of people's trousers or the crisp packets and cigarette stubs on the pavement or the different tones of tarmac and paving slabs....It's about detail. A simple and predictable composition encourages the viewer to notice the detail. Or perhaps people ignore them altogether because they don't notice or appreciate the detail. People don't seem that interested here anyway, so thanks for looking. http://www.urbanpaths.net Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted June 12, 2009 Share #4 Posted June 12, 2009 People don't seem that interested here anyway ..................... probably because what you presented is not interesting enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmun Posted June 12, 2009 Author Share #5 Posted June 12, 2009 People don't seem that interested here anyway ..................... probably because what you presented is not interesting enough. Well yes, I can't argue with your logic (for someone to be interested in something they need to find it interesting). Looking at your work, it has much more impact than mine, indeed it has more impact than most of the work I've seen. Do you equate that with being interesting? http://www.urbanpaths.net Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted June 12, 2009 Share #6 Posted June 12, 2009 Remember theese days people are pretty sophisticated visually.............. adults and children, TV, video, internet have made it possible for them to hone their visual skills. It's tough competition out their to get their attention let alone interest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmun Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share #7 Posted June 13, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes indeed, with so many images everywhere attention span is much shorter, but I’m not sure that I would call it sophistication. But yes, people often either need impact or clichés to bother looking. Nevertheless, I’m sure there are those who also take their time, contemplate and question. Don’t you think so? If there are, then there is also room for restrained images that reveal themselves with effort and over time (but perhaps not so much over the internet). http://www.urbanpaths.net Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted June 13, 2009 Share #8 Posted June 13, 2009 I'm with Imants on this one in that I find the series boring visually and conceptually, although technically the photos are good in terms of colour and composition. The series remind me of an exhibition that saw I saw years ago at the Corcoran Gallery in Washington in which the photographer presented some 50 large format shots of the same ruin in Germany shot from different angles and at different times of day, so that the highlights and the shadows formed different patterns: this was boring after the fifth pictures and pointless. Both the latter exhibition and your series are, to me, an example of giving in to a concept. —Mitch/Chiang Mai Wild Beasts of Botswana Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted June 13, 2009 Share #9 Posted June 13, 2009 Yes indeed, with so many images everywhere attention span is much shorter, but I’m not sure that I would call it sophistication Disrespect towards your audience will not get you far, spare us the "I am better than them attitude". Whatever shortcomings some may have/ not have in analysing or viewing photographs doesn't justify boring images That whole series of yours is what I would give as part of a minor technical exercise in "up and below" as a tutorial to teenage students just to get them thinking from another viewpoint not as a means to an end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scaryink Posted June 13, 2009 Share #10 Posted June 13, 2009 pmun first let me say you must have a somewhat thick skin on this forum. Perhaps I misunderstood, but the comment by stnami seems both rude and not very helpful. While his/her stuff is slick, I Personally find slick photos like slick salespeople. I prefer raw, mistake laden, unadulterated, misfocused, sometimes perfect art in photography - just like real life. As a painter I suggest you consider varying compositions from being so centered. Any subject matter can be very interesting as long as you own it and make it yours. http://www.scaryink.com/oilpaintings.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted June 13, 2009 Share #11 Posted June 13, 2009 George there is nothing rude about my comment, it's honest and straight to the point..............ps how are the rest of the men Mr Scary, better watch some of those "slick" brushstrokes and compositions . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmun Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted June 13, 2009 Scaryink – thank your for being considerate. It’s actually good to hear from other photographers and I do like straight talking. Like you, I appreciate raw and unadulterated images, especially those that strip photography down to some of its essentials; that is my ultimate aim with urbanpaths – to question what photography is. Imants, I hope I didn’t show disrespect to anybody. People have different expectations and different ways of looking at photos and perhaps the internet encourages people to scan everything much more than an actual gallery setting would. That’s all I was saying. I think your images are perfectly suited to the internet and I enjoy looking at them. Having said that, I’d also like to see them in a gallery as well – they are powerful and compelling. Mitch, thanks for your well considered response. Your comment that the series is an example of ‘giving into a concept’ is well put – I can see exactly why you said that, and I agree to some extent. http://www.urbanpaths.net Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmun Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share #13 Posted June 13, 2009 The series remind me of an exhibition that saw I saw years ago at the Corcoran Gallery in Washington......was boring after the fifth pictures and pointless.—Mitch/Chiang Mai Wild Beasts of Botswana Sometimes things are so boring and pointless - they're memorable! http://www.urbanpaths.net Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted June 13, 2009 Share #14 Posted June 13, 2009 You've got a point there: I remember that exhibition well! —Mitch/Chiang Mai Wild Beasts of Botswana Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmun Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share #15 Posted June 13, 2009 Does that not make you suspect that there might've been something there after all, even if purely a subconscious level? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 13, 2009 Share #16 Posted June 13, 2009 I can remember crashing my car, that doesn't mean it's something I want to repeat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmun Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share #17 Posted June 13, 2009 Now that's entirely different, crashing your car often involves physical pain and great inconvenience, we're talking about looking at photographs here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
antistatic Posted June 13, 2009 Share #18 Posted June 13, 2009 Footpaths are the same the world over... well at least in Brighton, London and Seoul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted June 13, 2009 Share #19 Posted June 13, 2009 no goood......... :( you need raise the bar much higher.....much..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo_Lorentzen Posted June 13, 2009 Share #20 Posted June 13, 2009 pmun, Sure people are interested. I did look through all of your albums with interest... You really captured Seoul well And there is no doubt you have worked somewhat focused on a concept, credit for that. But, I do not think it have opened my eyes and made me want to further understand the concept. What I have seen seems a bit repetitive. Please don't take this as a dismissal, Im just saying that your idea is there, but it is going to need more work and refinement to make it truly happen. and actually I would love to see what could be done with this concept. adding texture variations, streets, a city through reflections in wet streets, etc. all wrapped into your walking legs concept. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.