Tuesday, February 26, 2008

His mouth is a carnivorous flower

I've been holding this one back because its a little riskier, I guess. By which I mean if you take an uninteresting picture of some vines, oh well, but you aren't going to get the, "What the heck was he thinking?"

Yashica FX-3 Super 2000
Yashica lens 50 mm 1:1.9
Kodak Gold 200 film
Shutter 60, fstop 1.9

9 comments:

JimII said...

I've come back to this a couple of times, all I can say is, "Disturbing."

Josh Gentry said...

I'll take disturbing.

Matt Dick said...

This is why color is a great medium.

Josh Gentry said...

This is why color is a great medium.

It's vivid, but it doesn't do much for me.

james said...

Josh, it's certainly your most... interesting... picture so far...

No, really, I have come back to it as jimii has, and it does cause a little frisson. I think I'm reacting as much to the boldness as to the shot itself. Bare skin, odd behavior, public display, self exposure. It's interesting how in just the handful of pictures you've put up, I think the experiment has had radically different emphasis from one to the next. In one it's form, in another perception, once capturing the moment, next displaying a personality. I like that you're clearly willing to try any approach that comes to mind!

Matt -- stunning sky, of course, but my favorite is that the mountains look like paper cutouts. Agree with Josh to an extent, though, that it I've seen similar landscapes that spoke to me more idiosynctratically. did YOU take this one?

Matt Dick said...

No, no. I did not take that shot. But anyone who has tried something like that has to recognize how utterly impossible it is. To expose that sky like that and to also get the mountains as anything other than silhouettes is something I would not have thought could be done.

I wonder if it's two bracketed shots put together. Josh, more than just beauty (and I *do* think it's a beauty), it's technically a superior exposure.

Josh said...

It's interesting how in just the handful of pictures you've put up, I think the experiment has had radically different emphasis from one to the next.

You noticed that ;-) I've been looking at a lot of pictures as well as taking pictures, and there is such an astonishing range of stuff. I started with a clear idea of the kind of pictures I wanted to take, and then as soon as I started exploring other people's pictures that went out the window.

I'm not sure how I feel about that. On one hand I think that since I'm just starting out I should try a lot of different things. On the other hand, I sometimes think I should focus on gettin g better at one approach before flailing around being a beginner at bunches of them.

There is emphasis among all kinds of artists at developing a recognizable personal style. Some days I understand, and others I think its boring.

This picture felt bold to me. I wanted to do something bold. Bold is more likely to fail, but if it works can be Wow.

it's technically a superior exposure.

After you've pointed it out, I see what you mean about the difference of the exposure of the sky and mountains. Technically impressive.

james said...

re: sky/mountain

I would guess that the photographer used a graduated filter (darker on top, lighter below). That's a standard technique to match sky/ground exposures, but not sure it would work on the jagged horizon like that.

Whatever the technique, I think getting the exposure right is 50% having the right gear, 50% taking lots of bracketd exposures.

Josh Gentry said...

Hm. I've read about filters, but I hadn't thought of a graduated filter. Interesting. Possibly its more than one picture combined digitally.

The filter possiblity that has sounded interesting to me is to use a red filter with B & W to increase contrast.

Blog Archive