its back to the days of early photography

A story telling image with nice light and color, mist that makes the scene more romantic and dramatic… Of course, I have to see it not with my eyes but with my brains, to detach myself from the obvious failure of the fellow who shot it and process it, to convince myself to see all those things I if I really want to try to like it. Unfortunately I don't have to.
Regards,

Boris
 
I'd say three things:
1) it obeys the rule of thirds quite explicitly with a vertical and horizontal line leading to the subject/s
2) it is atmospheric with the mist, light, autumn leaves framing
3) it is emotional with two people walking alone in the beautiful scenery

I'm interested to know what the "obvious flaws" are? Apart from the unsubtle 1/3s composition.
 
Photography is lots of things, this includes images by people, who simply like what they like, regardless of what the history of art says, or of what is being sold at Sotheby's for millions.
Dpreview, if I am not mistaken, is a popular site, i.e. the target implicitly, is the broadest possible. You should not expect, they will showcase conceptual art as an example to imitate.
I sort of perceive, that you are trying to find your way in the maze of contemporary photography. I suggest, you just stop looking at the internet for a couple of weeks, and think about what you really care, are interested in and concerned with in life. Then get out and try to show this in the photographs the way you feel it, without worrying too much about what others think is appropriate.
Perhaps you will not become the next Andreas Gursky, but then, it might actually be a good thing.
 
The same reason people (used to) like Velvia, I think. But dpreview is a gearhead site - hardly on the front line of artistic merit or aesthetic sensibilities. That image tells a few things about the dpreview crowd but not much about the state of photography in general.
 
Margu said:
the photo linked below is rated highly on dpreview and its featured on the frontpage. this is what people who visit dpreview and consider themselves photographers like.

forgeting all the blatant flaws of this image, i just wonder why people like this image? is it the colors, the fake blur, what is it? anyone care to elaborate?

http://g3.img-dpreview.com/52D9767E5E28450B834F23D1B690F0B5.jpg
Click to expand...

Other than blaming and criticizing an entire class of internet users, care to elaborate on more of the "blatant flaws?" Why don't you like it? Or is because you know something they don't why?
 
Yes, what are those "blatant flaws"? Is the picture a bit of a cliche? Maybe, but nicely rendered. I'm always suspicious of comments about "postcard images" -- if it's a pretty picture, what's the problem?
 
Scrambler said:
I'd say three things:
1) it obeys the rule of thirds quite explicitly with a vertical and horizontal line leading to the subject/s
2) it is atmospheric with the mist, light, autumn leaves framing
3) it is emotional with two people walking alone in the beautiful scenery

I'm interested to know what the "obvious flaws" are? Apart from the unsubtle 1/3s composition.
Click to expand...

To me it is not the composition, but the used of the processing. I personally dislike the enhanced blur leaving the focus on the foreground tree brunch. Nothing leads me to the couple, they are too invisible and fail to be the heroes out there for me. The light thru the middle of the image distract me instead of leading my eye to the couple as I have already stucked on that damn foreground tree.

Everyone has his own taste of course. You have the right to like or dislike everything, no matter if you are author or viewer.

Regards,

Boris
 
Last edited:
I'll take a stab. For starters, ignoring the photo review aspect for a moment, I've been putting pictures just like this together as puzzles for more years than I care to remember. A very popular past time for many people so I'm sure this helps more than it hurts.

As for the picture, to start it is a peaceful and somewhat romantic image, two couples walking into a soft glow along a path recently washed clean by rain. You really can't tell who they are so they could be just about anyone in the viewer's mind.

The picture could be seen as representing the peaceful end of life, at least in a Western sense. The couple become an older couple walking through the autumn of their lives, the glow representing heaven in their future.

There are likely dozens of different things that people see in that picture, the two simple ones above just examples. I think this is what attracts, not the technical aspects. Sure the colors, the blur, the proportions, all those things play into the picture but they only support the image in the end.
 
I did not read whatever story is wrapped around this picture, so let's go with my impression of what I am looking at . . .

I like it very much for its soft sentimentality and its sweet pleasantness (if that's a word). Is it literally just a "photograph" anymore ? . . . I don't care.

Now Let me read the comments above 🙂 . . . .


EDIT: "Blatant flaws"? . . . that implies that there is a set of "rules" somewhere. (There isn't.)
 
other than the basic technical mistakes which i called flaws, i'm honestly intrigued as to why this image is liked so much in an age where people pay thousands for sharp lenses and 24-36mp cameras bodies.
 
The image is in the Pictorialism Style, which was popular at the turn of the 20th Century. By the mid-1920s it was outdated and replaced with Modernism. (Ref. "Pictorialism into Modernism" by Yochelson & Erwin) For me the technical errors are irrelevant; I do not like the image as it tells me nothing. Often, I meet people who buy their first camera and tell me that they want to take pictures like Ansel Adams. Why? Because it is the only photographer who's images they know.
 
Margu said:
other than the basic technical mistakes which i called flaws, i'm honestly intrigued as to why this image is liked so much in an age where people pay thousands for sharp lenses and 24-36mp cameras bodies.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it does seem to be a bit of a dichotomy. But I think that a lot of people are responding to advertising hype when they go for the sharp, sharp lens. When they vote on a picture I think they are going with their feelings and what they think they see.

Of course there are a few of us that are still happily shooting with LTM Elmars and M42 Takumars so I don't know if we are the proper demographic for your question. 🙂
 
Margu said:
other than the basic technical mistakes which i called flaws, i'm honestly intrigued as to why this image is liked so much in an age where people pay thousands for sharp lenses and 24-36mp cameras bodies.
Click to expand...


I could easily turn the question around and ask "Why do some people pay $$$$$ for technically "perfect" equipment when the images that have pleased people throughout many hundreds of years are so "technically imperfect" by modern photographic (IQ, resolution etc etc etc) standards?"

My question is rhetorical (I know the answer), and I don't mean to divert your thread. But, hey, you asked 😀
 
I don't see what additional sharpness, a different point of focus, a deeper concept, or more expensive gear would do for this particular image. Its technique is perfectly suited to its goals. Its Pictorialism may be unfashionable, but the image isn't aimed at New York galleries. Even its sentimentalism is relatively understated. The circumstances of the time of year and the weather contribute more to the photo than any heavy-handedness from the photographer.

The only truly offensive thing about it is the watermark, which threatens to ruin any positive qualities the photo has.
 
This image doesn't work on a technical level but on the emotional level and emotional beats technical 9.9 times out of 10.
Look at the cover of a romance novel or a calendar that shows the fall and you will see this type of image.

Btw the first image in photography were plenty sharp this image also has nothing to do with pictoralism furthermore the implied lack of sharpness might be caused by the fog and is a good reproduction of the prevailing weather conditions. I would say the photographer has captured the mood perfectly the image content is not my cup of tea but I can understand why this image works and is well liked.
 
Though I wouldn't call the flaws obvious or consequential, it's a little unexpected to be featured on a site run by and for people who point such things out.
My guess is that it's a both sentimental and aesthetically pleasing image, a sort of lowest-common denominator thing. Nothing too out of the ordinary, but unusual enough lighting and colors to make pause.

I'm scanning a lot of slides I shot in high school right now and was thinking about this. I remembered the times when I'd hike up to Kerry park and get those iconic Frasier-backdrop sunsets, and how excited I was to have created a technically-good image of a breathtaking sight. The technical skill was no small feat, but I realized the primary appeal is in te sentimentality and unusualness of the scene and not necessarily my interpretation of it.
Nowadays I just prefer to watch sunsets over te skyline than try to photograph them 😉
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

caila77
letters to a young photographer - the meaning of photography
Replies
4
Views
610
Godfrey
Godfrey
J
35mm Still-Picture Photography: It began with scale focusing cameras! Back To Basics. Part 1, From the first to half-frame 35s of then and now.
Replies
10
Views
1K
Jason Schneider
J
J
  • Article Article
The Leica as a work of ART: Selling the image of elegant exclusivity
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
Pioneer
Pioneer
G
What drove your decision to buy a more capable camera early on in your photography experience?
2 3
Replies
49
Views
4K
JeffS7444
JeffS7444
J
  • Article Article
The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the 110 Format By 2009, 110 was kaput. Lomography brought it back! Part 2: A selection of fascinating 110 cameras.
2 3
Replies
41
Views
5K
Timmyjoe
Timmyjoe
Back
Top Bottom