Frank ... My comments were mostly tongue in cheek. Sorry you missed that. I thought for sure you'd see the humor in those words. Don't let some jerk ruin your sense of humor. I would never mock you. Had I been commenting to almost anyone else I'd have worn my Somber Hat.
I had been playing around with one of my mistakes and got into an Artsy-Fartsy mood, and that's where the Artsy reference came from. However, I was serious about the crop. I know it changes the photo, but when i saw the dog's eyes, and the juxtaposition of the dog and holder, I was reminded of some photo's I'd seen elsewhere, and so I played around with it. You should see this mess I'm trying to save. Must have been five or six stops under exposed, grainy as all hell, but the image really grabbed me even though it was OOF, underexposed, and just crap all around. Shel > [Original Message] > From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 6/24/2004 6:05:16 PM > Subject: RE: PAW: Julian Holding Fritz > > Oh, come on, Shel. > > Some of my photos are pretty well focused. > > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2378683 > > You just haven't commented on all of them is all. > > I don't go out of my way to ~not~ focus properly. It's just that some > photos, when I look at them, speak to me ~despite~ the lack of focus, not > necessarily because of it. I kind of hope that they may speak to others as > well. It's not necessarily a look that I go for at the time I take the > photo. I know that's not the way you take pictures. You plan ahead of > time, you have things mapped out before you hit the shutter release. > Sometimes I do, too. Other times, I'm just flying by the seat of my pants. > Sometimes it's the latter photos that I like best, when I'm looking through > my contacts, deciding what to print up. This is one of those photos. > > Now, in fact, the dog was in focus in this particular photograph. He moved, > however; that's why he's blurry. > > I know very well that some are put off by these blurry things. That's their > problem. I also know that some appreciate them, which is all well and fine. > In fact, it's great. But, I'm putting these up because ~I~ like them. > > You can refer to my photos as Art if you wish. That doesn't change what > they are, which is photographs. Nothing more, nothing less. > > I happen to think that if this particular photograph was completely sharp > (both Julian and Fritz), it would be pretty uninteresting. And, maybe it's > uninteresting as it is. But I don't think so. > > Your crop certainly changes the photo a great deal. My initial thought is > that Julian looks too far back from the dog for my liking, but I may come to > think that's a good thing. It's an interesting and thought-provoking take > on the original uncropped version, though, and I like that you took the time > to do it. > > I also greatly appreciate your comments, even though I wonder if they're > somewhat tongue-in-cheek, or maybe even a bit mocking in tone in some > places. Maybe I've just been put in a bad mood by reading an Antonio > post... > > Seriously, I always appreciate your comments, Shel. Thanks. > > cheers, > frank > > > > "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist > fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer > > > > > >From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: RE: PAW: Julian Holding Fritz > >Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:06:59 -0700 > > > >Well, my friend, it seems that you've given up on the concept of focus. > >OK, I've come to accept that, and will no longer suggest that you get your > >photos, or even a part of them, in focus. I almost said "properly > >focused," but that sounded so high handed (is that the term?). After all, > >OOF has come to be your signature style, and who's to say it's not valid. > >I'll just start referring to your photographs as Art. > > > >Now, as Art, this kinda sorta maybe makes it. It needs something more, > >methinks, or, to be precise, something less. You see, the two OOF > >elements, Dog and Person Holding Dog, compete too strongly, neither is > >dominant as one would be in a more typical, run-of-the mill shot, probably > >with the dog nicely focused and sharp. Then there's the bright area in the > >background which draws the eye up and away from the subjects, causing a > >great deal of confusion to those looking for something sharp to view. Oh, > >what fools they be, for they are looking for the obvious, and this is far > >from an "obvious" photo. > > > >So, keeping with the innovative approach you've taken, I'd suggest a more > >creative - no, let's call it innovative - crop. > > > >http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/julianfritz.html > > > >Shel > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > MSN Premium includes powerful parental controls and get 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=htt p://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
