Someone's got to post the first "art" photo here. So I'll do it.


I never felt I could post this in critique. It has felt like art to me ... at least my definition of it.


Discuss.

Someone's got to post the first "art" photo here. So I'll do it.


I never felt I could post this in critique. It has felt like art to me ... at least my definition of it.


Discuss.

I know it gets cold in Wisconsin, but I didn't know it got cold enough to turn your digits blue and freeze some of them off. :)

Seriously, this photo is hard for me to relate to. I don't know what's going on, but it is different enough that I think there must be somethng you're trying to tell us. Otherwise, whay would you present it in this way? (There are easier ways to present a foot.) Maybe that's the whole point - to look at a fairly common object and to think about it in a different way - or think about it at all. Maybe there is no point at all, you just like the way it looks for some reason (which is okay). If the object of the exercise is to say if this is "art" or not, I'd say no, not to me, but I respect the effort and the courage it took to be first.

Kelly,

Thanks for being brave enough to be the first to post an image here. I'm a little confused over the forum guidelines, because it says not to actually add pics to the posts themselves.

I have to say I don't quite get that, because I like to view the pic I'm discussing in the thread itself, not use a link, but I suppose we'll get a clarification on that soon enough.

In any event, while you have the right to ask us to take an image at face value, I feel this is a fourm about creating art, and with that in mind I'd like to encourage people to give us some technical information about the image (perhaps how you processed it) and especially the creative motivation behind it.

Why did you decide to treat this photo the way you did? Did you try other variations? If so, why does this one work for you?

Of course, if you simply want reactions to the image, I respect that...

I like the shot. It is funny, and it definitely has several interpretations.
It was PJ's idea about not poting pictures in the threads, and it has something to do with server capacity. I guess there is a way to link the Gallery to the forum, so when someone posts a picture in the Art section, a new thread is authimatically is generated with a smaller preview of the picture.
Irakly


Kelly,

Thanks for being brave enough to be the first to post an image here. I'm a little confused over the forum guidelines, because it says not to actually add pics to the posts themselves.

I have to say I don't quite get that, because I like to view the pic I'm discussing in the thread itself, not use a link, but I suppose we'll get a clarification on that soon enough.

In any event, while you have the right to ask us to take an image at face value, I feel this is a fourm about creating art, and with that in mind I'd like to encourage people to give us some technical information about the image (perhaps how you processed it) and especially the creative motivation behind it.

Why did you decide to treat this photo the way you did? Did you try other variations? If so, why does this one work for you?

Of course, if you simply want reactions to the image, I respect that...

forum guidelines? Oops, I guess I just assumed the guidelines would be the same, so I didn't read. My bad, sorry!!

http://gallery.photographyreview.com/showphoto.php?photo=4652&password=&sort=1&cat=500&page=1


(If this link is supposed to show through as a picture, I guess I don't know how to do that. I copy the link into the "image" box that comes up when I click on the image icon, but it never displays as a picture, always a link.)

Kelly,

...while you have the right to ask us to take an image at face value, I feel this is a fourm about creating art, and with that in mind I'd like to encourage people to give us some technical information about the image (perhaps how you processed it) and especially the creative motivation behind it.

Why did you decide to treat this photo the way you did? Did you try other variations? If so, why does this one work for you?

Of course, if you simply want reactions to the image, I respect that...

Well, I want reactions, but upon thinking about the questions you and others raised, I started to realize that perhaps the reason this works for me is an intensely personal one. So maybe it doesn't work for others.

Let's see if I can explain it.

Foot: My feet are about the only part of my body that I have been consistently happy with throughout my life. My feet give me feelings of a positive self-image. They represent movement, action, athleticism, adventure, sensuality, sexuality, beauty, fun, power, escape, new experiences. I can associate my foot with all major events in my life.

Jeans: Jeans represent youth, activity, being "cool", hip, attentive, perceptive, independent, attractive, practical and fun. A wide bottom cut represents being thin, up-to-date, comfortable, "now". Toes peeking out from under long, wide jeans is sassy, kinda "hippy", and to me very attractive.

Color: I played with the hue slider in the saturation menu and looked at all variations. I chose this one more for the green than the blue, but I think they work well together. I just love gazing at the liquid color in the shadows and the way it plays on the texture in the highlights. I love green, I think it provides a sense of peace. It implies meadows, playing frisbee, rolling down the hill, lazy day dreaming.

The blue of the toes is striking and attractive against the green, yet still gives one the jolt of being unfamiliar. It provides a contrast without straying too far out of the color family. It implies toenail polish; the ocean; finger paints; picking blueberries.

Contrast: The harsh whites and shadows are "edgy". They remove the image from the realm of reality, remove the gentleness and softness from the skin, and further enhance the feeling of youth, experimentation, and individuality. The curves of the subject, though, keep the image from feeling harsh and cold. The pastel green calms it down while its vibrancy suggests happiness.The lighting accentuates the texture, and effectively fades the fabric in places while displaying deep, rich tones in others. I think that combination implies sunlight, and the message I get is "carefree youth, endless summer." The fact that half the toes are "missing" just further emphasizes playfulness, hide-and-seek, peekaboo.

Angle: The angle, leading from lower left to upper right, is positive, forward looking, balanced.


Now please realize that I have no idea how "official" symbolisms might differ from mine. I just attempted to explain in metaphorical, poetic language what I see when I look at this image.

Foot: My feet are about the only part of my body that I have been consistently happy with throughout my life. My feet give me feelings of a positive self-image. They represent movement, action, athleticism, adventure, sensuality, sexuality, beauty, fun, power, escape, new experiences. I can associate my foot with all major events in my life.
Nothing wrong with it Kelly, but be aware; you might create distance between you and the viewers, once you add elements that are very personal to you and the result might be that the photograph loses some of its intended impact.

Wow, all that meaning and I just thought it looked really cool.

I think I'll title it "Aging Youth"

Well, After reading that extremely long thread on photography and art I was a little surprised to see that Kelly was the first to post. I personally that find your images to be rather soothing and comforting, whether the soft lighting on your piano or blue lights streaking across the sky.
Art IS very personal. I often wonder what provokes people, what is on their mind and how or why it was transformed. Giving us a peek into what is personal to you, can bring a better understanding to your work,and sometimes it fun to just try look and enjoy, and let it take you to another place. Thanks Kelly! I think it's COOL! :)
CJ

I think its “effect hunting” sorry a good picture needs not so many words ,but that’s what I think What’s real art in photography? Its so an open question! everybody thinks differed about that. How far must you go to give it the title Art? I think that its dangers and that we god a lot of secondhand photographers how are looking for rubbish in there negative album to give that a second possibility with Photo shop
But that is not making art! The art must be born before the picture is taken, between your ears! But that’s my opinion I am only a B&W documentary and portrait photographer .

Sorry for my bad English

Willem

Willem, I agree somewhat.

Did you ever hear the quote from [some famous sculptor], who said, "I see the horse in the stone; then I take away everything that is not the horse."

In the case of my image above, this crop actually jumped out at me from a larger picture. Each time I passed over the shot, this part of the image screamed out to me. I had to chisel it out of its "stone."

I used so many words because I'm not accustomed to explaining why I like something, so perhaps I went overboard. All the words boil down to a couple of concepts: Youth, Happiness, Nostalgia. And that is what this picture says to me.

Kelly, what I like about it is this: The colors, the white background, the shadows (luscious shadows), the texture of the jeans, the composition, the fact that your second toe is longest cuz mine is too. heh
It's fresh.
Kit