Your efforts are good. It's good that you're looking for form and its combinations. There's both form and combination here. But there's no, shall we say, intricacy; everything is too simple. The texture and surfaces reveal themselves and nothing more. The forms don't really play with each other; more accurately, they play too "simply," without revealing the "other" play that would be captivating. Whereas the task is to find and show precisely the overlap, or rather the interaction or, on the contrary, the conflict of all this,
Your efforts are good. It's good that you're looking for form and its combinations. There's both form and combination here. But there's no, shall we say, intricacy; everything is too simple. Texture and surfaces reveal themselves and nothing more. The forms don't really play with each other; more accurately, they play too "simply," without revealing the "other" interplay that would be engaging. Whereas the task is to find and show precisely the overlap, or rather the interaction or, conversely, the conflict of all this.
Sergey Zag,
I hope to develop an eye for something more complex. For now, I'm happy with this. I spent many years without taking pictures. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
I wouldn't say it's bad here; it's a decent photo. I hope it's not a fluke given the new trends. It's amazing to switch from landscapes to MF. Anything can happen.
I wouldn't say it's bad here, it's a decent photo. I hope it's not a spur of the moment, given the new trends. It's surprising to switch from landscapes to MF. Anything can happen.
Edu,
Nothing surprising, it's all prosaic. I shot landscapes when I could get there. When that wasn't possible... well, I didn't shoot anything at all for about 10 years. Then I started crawling out into the city, trying to capture at least something. Where things were funny, where things were beautiful, where things were unusual, etc. My interest in life returned. But I had no one to show the results to. Usually, they're completely rejected! This was the first time anyone showed interest.
Nothing surprising, it's all prosaic. I shot landscapes when I could get there. When that opportunity vanished... well, I didn't shoot anything for about 10 years. Then I started crawling out into the city, trying to photograph anything. Funny, beautiful, unusual, and so on. I regained my interest in life. But there was no one to show the results to. Usually, there was complete rejection! This was the first time anyone showed interest.
Vasily Chishko, You're lucky you stumbled upon Sergey Zag :-) If things continue like this, it will be wonderful.
Vasily Chishko, You're lucky to have stumbled upon Sergey Zag :-) If things continue like this, it will be wonderful.
Edu,
I agree. It's rare that anyone can support me in this. To be honest, I received my first support three years ago on Facebook in the MF photo group run by A. Lomov. If it weren't for the members of that group, I probably never would have posted anything. And then I left Facebook completely.
Nothing surprising, it's all prosaic. I shot landscapes when I could get there. When that opportunity vanished... well, I didn't shoot anything for about 10 years. Then I started crawling out into the city, trying to capture anything. Funny, beautiful, unusual, and so on. My interest in life returned. But I had no one to show the results to. Usually, they were completely rejected! This is the first time anyone has shown interest.
Vasily Chishko, I forgot to add to my words: I'm not the final authority, I could be wrong. Eduard expressed his opinion above. That's why we have the opportunity to discuss the material. It's not so much a consensus that's important here; different points of view are important, so that we can later make our own clear analysis of the photographs. Previously, due to complete ignorance of the subject, I deleted a lot of good material. Don't rush to delete something you don't understand. Sometimes it takes years to rethink what you've captured.
[quote]I wouldn't say it's bad here; it's a decent photo. I hope it's not a spur of the moment, given the new trends. It's amazing to go from landscapes to macro photography. You never know what happens. Edu, graphically and tonally, it's very good. I wouldn't say it "didn't work," but I can't quite get all these forms to mesh. This is one of those shots you need to return to more than once.
Vasily Chishko, I forgot to add to my words: I'm not the final authority, I could be wrong. Eduard expressed his opinion above. That's why we have the opportunity to discuss the material. It's not so much consensus that's important here; different points of view are important, so that we can later make our own clear analysis of the photographs. Previously, due to complete ignorance of the subject, I deleted a lot of good material. Don't rush to delete something you don't understand. Sometimes it takes years to rethink what you've photographed.
Sergey Zag,
I also began to understand this rather late, after I'd deleted countless shots. Oh!
I agree. It's rare that anyone can support me on this. To be honest, I received my first support three years ago on Facebook in the MF Photo group run by A. Lomov. If it weren't for the members of that group, I probably never would have posted anything. And then I left Facebook completely.
I agree. It's rare that anyone can support me on this. To be honest, I received my very first support three years ago on Facebook in the MF photo group run by A. Lomov. If it weren't for the members of that group, I probably never would have posted anything. And then I left Facebook completely.
Vasily Chishko, Lomov seems to have fallen ill; I heard he has a third group, but I don't know anything about him. But Inaya's group was good, then he abandoned it and entrusted moderation and administration to random people, and everything fell apart. There's good ground for development here. And don't be shy about analyzing "other people's" photos, that is, expressing your opinion on what you've seen. This applies to my photos (I never puff out my cheeks) and those of other sane authors. Analysis is useful, and it's probably the foundation. Because there's little or no time for debriefing during filming. If there's time for thoughtful filming, that's fine. But as a rule, we debrief after the fact.
Vasily Chishko, Lomov seems to have fallen ill. I heard he's in Group 3, but I don't know what's going on with him. But Inaya's group was good, then he abandoned it and entrusted moderation and administration to random people, and everything fell apart. There's good ground for development here. And don't be shy about analyzing "other people's" photos, that is, expressing your opinion on what you've seen. Like my photos (I never puff out my cheeks) and those of other sane authors. Analysis is useful, and it's probably the foundation. Since there's little or no time for analysis while shooting, if there's time for thoughtful shooting, that's good. But as a rule, we analyze after the fact.
Vasily Chishko, Lomov seems to have fallen ill. I heard he's in Group 3, but I don't know what's going on with him. But Inaya's group was good, then he abandoned it and entrusted moderation and administration to random people, and everything fell apart. There's good ground for development here. And don't be shy about analyzing "other people's" photos, that is, expressing your opinion on what you've seen. Like my photos (I never puff out my cheeks) and those of other sane authors. Analysis is useful, and it's probably the foundation. Since there's little or no time for analysis while shooting, if there's time for thoughtful shooting, that's good. But as a rule, we analyze after the fact.
Sergey Zag, I agree here. It is in the discussion that one's worldview is sharpened by the photo, one's view of the world, and one's conviction in the correctness of one's vision is formed.
Edu, graphically and tonally very good. I wouldn't say it "didn't work," but somehow I can't get all these shapes to "merge." This is one of those cases where you need to return to the photo more than once.
Sergey Zag, You know, I liked the wall, or rather, the end, roughly in the center. It's like something alien in the whole photo. Then the wall itself: it all starts with light gray, then down, dark gray, then even darker, and then black. And unexpectedly, white at the very bottom. "Tonal perspective" is a joke, of course. The cracks add charm :-)
Sergey Zag, You know, I liked the wall, or rather the end, roughly in the center. It's like something alien in the whole photo. Then the wall itself: it all starts with light gray, then goes down to dark gray, then even darker, and then black. And suddenly, white at the very bottom. "Tonal perspective" is a joke, of course. The cracks add charm :-)
Edu, so that's how it is, yeah, there is such a thing.
Vasily Chishko, Vasily, if you don't mind, could you answer in detail: what do I like about Lomov's work? Not in terms of bad, good, beautiful, or not. I'd be interested to hear that. I have my own opinion on that.
Vasily Chishko, Vasily, if you don't mind, could you please answer in detail: what do I like about Lomov's work? Not in terms of bad, good, or beautiful. I'd be interested to hear. I have my own opinion on that.
Sergey Zag,
That's fine. But I'm afraid I can't.
First and foremost, I'm amazed by his ability to find a "plot" at literally every turn. Any part of the space around him, when shown by him, in addition to its usual head-on appearance, acquires other properties that no one else notices in real life. He sees these other properties and skillfully shapes them in the frame. The result is new images that suddenly become inherent in this completely ordinary part of space only thanks to his vision and skill. Ordinary lines are no longer ordinary lines, but lines that disrupt our understanding of this space. Ordinary planes are no longer ordinary planes, but planes that reveal something new and unseen. I'm not particularly drawn to color. In any photograph. I know that every individual color in an image has its place, plays its role, lives a full-blooded life with love and hate for each other, but I don't understand this, I don't know how. (I hope I'll learn.) Geometry is another matter. It's a powerful thing, and Artemy has mastered it. I don't know, maybe in reality, to get just one photograph, he has to walk halfway across the city and wear his feet down to the knees, but I get the impression he finds "his" anywhere. Something like that. If I could write, I'd be hanging out on a literary website.
That won't be a problem. But I'm afraid I can't. First and foremost, I'm amazed by his ability to find a "plot" at literally every step. Any part of the space around him, when shown by him, in addition to its usual head-on appearance, acquires other properties that no one else notices in real life. He sees these other properties and skillfully shapes them in the frame. The result is new images that suddenly become inherent in this completely ordinary part of space only thanks to his vision and skill. Ordinary lines are no longer ordinary lines, but lines that break our understanding of this space. Ordinary planes are no longer ordinary planes, but planes that reveal something new and unseen. I'm not particularly drawn to color. In any photograph. I know that each individual color in an image has its place, plays its role, lives a full-blooded life with love and hatred for each other, but I don't understand this, I don't know how. (I hope I learn). Geometry is another matter. It's a powerful thing, and Artemy has mastered it. I don't know, maybe in reality he has to walk halfway across the city and wear his feet down to the knees to get a single photograph, but I get the impression he finds "his" anywhere. Something like that. If I could write, I'd be hanging out on a literary website.
Vasily Chishko, you're absolutely right. I'll add my own. All his photographs are built on nuances. We all strive for that. But I'd say his nuances are very "subtle," intelligent; not everyone will notice them. They're built not only on the interplay of geometry, but primarily on the fine line, the edge of disappearance, the interplay of textured reflections. He doesn't tweak the sharpness or contrast; he delivers the photograph as is.
Vasily Chishko, you're absolutely right. I'll add my own. All his photographs are built on nuances. We all strive for that. But I'd say his nuances are very subtle, intelligent; not everyone notices them. They're built not only on the play of geometry, but primarily on the fine line, the edge of disappearance, the play of textured reflections. He doesn't over-emphasize sharpness and contrast; he presents the photograph as is.
Sergey Zag,
Texture, texture, lines, spots, colors, light and shadow, and their interactions are the main characters in his photographs. For me. And only then come the entrance, the gateway, the curb, the garbage dump, and so on—"ordinary life."
Any part of the space around him, when shown by him, in addition to its usual head-on appearance, acquires other properties, unnoticed in real life. He sees these other properties and skillfully shapes them in the frame. The result is new images, suddenly inherent in this completely ordinary part of space thanks only to his vision and skill. Ordinary lines are no longer ordinary lines, but lines that shatter our understanding of this space. Ordinary planes are no longer ordinary planes, but planes that reveal something new and unseen.
Vasily Chishko, Beautifully said! And very sensibly!
That won't be a problem. But I'm afraid I can't. First and foremost, I'm amazed by his ability to find a "plot" at literally every step. Any part of the space around him, when shown by him, in addition to its usual head-on appearance, acquires other properties that no one else notices in real life. He sees these other properties and skillfully shapes them in the frame. The result is new images that suddenly become inherent in this completely ordinary part of space only thanks to his vision and skill. Ordinary lines are no longer ordinary lines, but lines that break our understanding of this space. Ordinary planes are no longer ordinary planes, but planes that reveal something new and unseen. I'm not particularly drawn to color. In any photograph. I know that each individual color in an image has its place, plays its role, lives a full-blooded life with love and hatred for each other, but I don't understand this, I don't know how. (I hope I learn). Geometry is another matter. It's a powerful thing, and Artemy has mastered it. I don't know, maybe in reality he has to walk halfway across town and wear his feet down to the knees to get a single photo, but I get the impression he finds "his thing" anywhere. Something like that. If I could write, I'd be hanging out on a literary website.
That won't be a problem. But I'm afraid I can't. First and foremost, I'm amazed by his ability to find a "plot" at literally every step. Any part of the space around him, when shown by him, in addition to its usual head-on appearance, acquires other properties that no one else notices in real life. He sees these other properties and skillfully shapes them in the frame. The result is new images that suddenly become inherent in this completely ordinary part of space only thanks to his vision and skill. Ordinary lines are no longer ordinary lines, but lines that break our understanding of this space. Ordinary planes are no longer ordinary planes, but planes that reveal something new and unseen. I'm not particularly drawn to color. In any photograph. I know that each individual color in an image has its place, plays its role, lives a full-blooded life with love and hatred for each other, but I don't understand this, I don't know how. (I hope I learn). Geometry is another matter. It's a powerful thing, and Artemy has mastered it. I don't know, maybe in reality he has to walk halfway across the city and wear his feet down to the knees to get a single photo, but I get the impression he finds "his thing" anywhere. Something like that. If I could write, I'd be hanging out on a literary website.
Vasily Chishko, the key word in all this is "breaking"... I wonder if Lomov is a pseudonym...)
Bless you too!
Thank you very much.
I hope to develop an eye for something more complex. For now, I'm happy with this. I spent many years without taking pictures. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
Nothing surprising, it's all prosaic. I shot landscapes when I could get there. When that wasn't possible... well, I didn't shoot anything at all for about 10 years. Then I started crawling out into the city, trying to capture at least something. Where things were funny, where things were beautiful, where things were unusual, etc. My interest in life returned.
But I had no one to show the results to. Usually, they're completely rejected! This was the first time anyone showed interest.
I agree. It's rare that anyone can support me in this. To be honest, I received my first support three years ago on Facebook in the MF photo group run by A. Lomov. If it weren't for the members of that group, I probably never would have posted anything. And then I left Facebook completely.
Edu, graphically and tonally, it's very good. I wouldn't say it "didn't work," but I can't quite get all these forms to mesh. This is one of those shots you need to return to more than once.
I also began to understand this rather late, after I'd deleted countless shots. Oh!
Thank you very much!
I like his photo.
That's fine. But I'm afraid I can't.
First and foremost, I'm amazed by his ability to find a "plot" at literally every turn. Any part of the space around him, when shown by him, in addition to its usual head-on appearance, acquires other properties that no one else notices in real life. He sees these other properties and skillfully shapes them in the frame. The result is new images that suddenly become inherent in this completely ordinary part of space only thanks to his vision and skill. Ordinary lines are no longer ordinary lines, but lines that disrupt our understanding of this space. Ordinary planes are no longer ordinary planes, but planes that reveal something new and unseen.
I'm not particularly drawn to color. In any photograph. I know that every individual color in an image has its place, plays its role, lives a full-blooded life with love and hate for each other, but I don't understand this, I don't know how. (I hope I'll learn.) Geometry is another matter. It's a powerful thing, and Artemy has mastered it. I don't know, maybe in reality, to get just one photograph, he has to walk halfway across the city and wear his feet down to the knees, but I get the impression he finds "his" anywhere.
Something like that. If I could write, I'd be hanging out on a literary website.
Texture, texture, lines, spots, colors, light and shadow, and their interactions are the main characters in his photographs. For me. And only then come the entrance, the gateway, the curb, the garbage dump, and so on—"ordinary life."
Beautifully said! And very sensibly!
Thank you.
https://i.imgur.com/JNmaHI8.jpeg
!? ;)
I liked it. Thank you.