Lussiya, judging by the title, there shouldn't be any traces However, few people read titles, or even descriptions And the work is wonderful, atmospheric
Oh, these fairy tales! Oh, these storytellers! (Who remembers?) In short, for me, it's a complete fairy tale. Without it, the original photo wouldn't have suffered much.
But the author's landscape is very successful. It could have been spent another 180 minutes, it deserves it, and either filmed and edited the chain of footprints, or placed a smaller figure further away, where the vegetation in the field would mask the insertion, if it is absolutely necessary.
Judging by the grass, the snow cover is 15-25 cm thick. He may be a monk and a saint, but he's still not Peter, walking on water without falling through and leaving footprints in the snow?
Judging by the grass, the snow cover is 15-25 cm thick. He may be a monk and a saint, but he's still not Peter, walking on water without falling through and leaving footprints in the snow?
Vixtur, This is surrealism, sir. )) All your life experience in understanding cause-and-effect relationships is of little help in this case... "A tongue of flame licks a flute-like face, and the blade sings within it as it gnaws at the hilt of a dagger of eye-searing blueness, which, nestled in the shining pupil of an ox on a head adorned with a jasmine flower, waits..." (c)
Vixtur, This is surrealism, sir. )) All your life experience in understanding cause-and-effect relationships is of no help in this case..... "A tongue of flame licks a face elongated like a flute, and the blade sings inside it while it gnaws at the hilt of a dagger of eye-sharp blueness which, nestled in the shining pupil of an ox on a head adorned with a jasmine flower, waits..." (c)
Alexander Zeonoff, Surrealism (from the French surréalisme, literally "super-realism", "above-realism") This collage has nothing to do with surrealism, the plot and idea are absolutely classical in the manner of the "Wanderers", but the technique of execution does not correspond to REALISM. The tracks in the snow and " The correct "shadow" would not interfere with the IDEAS, and the scale of the monk with the size of the house and the landscape does not match (it is too small), so "The flight of the monk a second before awakening...." is not justified by any surrealism. A common technical flaw due to a lack of drawing experience.
Alexander Zeonoff, Surrealism (from the French surréalisme, literally "super-realism", "above-realism") This collage has nothing to do with surrealism, the plot and the idea are absolutely classical in the manner of the "Wanderers", but the technique of execution does not correspond to REALISM. The tracks in the snow and the "correct" shadow do not interfere with the IDEA, and the scale of the monk with the size of the house and the landscape does not match (too small), so that "The flight of the monk a second before awakening..." is not justified by any surrealism. A common technical flaw due to a lack of drawing experience.
Vixtur, For obvious reasons, I won't argue with you about the ways to implement surrealist theory in photography....but in my opinion, it is precisely these signifiers—"the absence of traces, the disproportionate"—spiced up with lines of poetry—that play into the surrealist field.
But you have the right to interpret the absence of traces and the disproportionate "screw-up" collage...who's to tell you what to do?
A classic case of not seeing the forest for the trees.
No, your explanation is far-fetched. If it's an IMAGE, and a surreal one at that, then it's even less well-developed. I don't think the author set himself the task of "works completion time - 180 minutes." This AUTHOR'S explanation more accurately explains the reasons for the "mistake," and the POEMS only exacerbate this discrepancy.
No, your explanation is far-fetched. If it's an IMAGE, and a surreal one at that, then it's even less polished. I don't think the author set himself the task of "works completion time - 180 minutes." This AUTHOR'S explanation more accurately describes the reasons for the "mistake," and the POEMS only exacerbate this discrepancy.
Vixtur, I won't "reforge" you, it's too late, sir...too late.. Yes, if I imagine the frame with your corrections... "jambs," as you call them, or "meaningful," as I call them...the content of the frame will change to the opposite and will be like in that funny video...a wandering monk.
Then why did the artist even try to realistically depict the light source's shadow, cut out the wanderer's figure, and imprint it precisely in that spot? After all, they could have made the monk ethereal, translucent, hovering above the sinful earth, or, on the contrary, waist-deep in snow, trudging through the thorns toward the light. It's the amateurish drawing that makes it comical, and not at all surreal, as you're trying to portray this piece here.
Then why did the author even try to realistically depict the shadow from the light source, cut out the figure of the wanderer, and imprint it in that exact spot?
Vixtur, Well, for one simple reason, listen... the shadow constructively contributes to the composition (the compositional and semantic center), while the absence of traces contributes to the meaning, the meaning the author was pursuing. Of course, you can redo everything, at your own discretion, go ahead. But that will be your artistic decision, not the author's. Do you understand? You're boring me. Well, you can't be so dense. Bye.
For me, the "idea" itself is completely flat and artless in its banality, so talking about the implementation is somehow pointless - even if this implementation were ideal, it would not change much... Maybe in this form it is even more authentic in some sense, I apologize -)
For me, the "idea" itself is completely flat and artless in its banality, so talking about the implementation is somehow pointless - even if this implementation were ideal, it would not change much... Maybe in this form it is even more authentic in some sense, I apologize -)
Sergey Chubarov, Here you need to understand what came first, the "chicken or the egg"... namely... the poetry or the idea of visualization)) In my opinion, this explains a lot.
Vixtur, Yes, for one simple reason, listen... the shadow constructively contributes to the composition (the compositional and semantic center), and the absence of traces contributes to the meaning, the meaning the author was pursuing. Of course, you can redo everything at your own discretion, go ahead. But that will be your artistic decision, not the author's. Do you understand? You're boring me. Well, you can't be so dense. Bye.
Alexander Zeonoff, And what meaning does the scale of a human contribute to? Probably because, how small and insignificant a mortal is in this vast and cold world, only a snowy field and the light of a lamp in a country house give a lonely wanderer hope for spiritual rebirth and a solid snow crust.
Alexander Zeonoff, poems aren't exactly parsnips either
Serg Tix, I never said the collage was by Picasso)) Don't set the bar too high, it's much simpler here. Basically, something like this..."Look at yourself"))
Serg Tix, I never said the collage was by Picasso)) Don't set the bar too high, it's much simpler here. Basically, something like this..."Look at yourself").
Alexander Zeonoff,"It's much simpler here." Yes, I can agree with that unconditionally... MUCH SIMPLER, which is why the admiration of "Everything is so harmonious, simply bravo!!!" seemed strange to me.
Alexander Zeonoff, "It's all much simpler here." Yes, I can agree with that unconditionally... MUCH SIMPLER, that's why the raptures seemed strange to me: "Everything is so harmonious, simply bravo!!!"
Vixtur, Well, as you know, raptures often come out of nowhere, like a storm in a teacup))
Vixtur, Well, as you know, our enthusiasm often comes out of nowhere, like a storm in a teacup))
Alexander Zeonoff, Surrealism is MY religion, and when someone frantically uses it as a camouflage rag to cover up their own inconsistent opuses, I get nervous.
Alexander Zeonoff, Surrealism is MY religion, and when someone vainly flaunts it like a camouflage rag to cover their inconsistent opuses, I get nervous.
Vixtur, We'll have a detailed discussion about this later. I seriously doubt your understanding of surrealism, at least judging by your works.
But I like the work.
And the shadow is too big!
But otherwise, "everything is fine"!
However, few people read titles, or even descriptions
All your life experience in understanding cause-and-effect relationships is of little help in this case...
"A tongue of flame licks a flute-like face, and the blade sings within it as it gnaws at the hilt of a dagger of eye-searing blueness, which, nestled in the shining pupil of an ox on a head adorned with a jasmine flower, waits..." (c)
But you have the right to interpret the absence of traces and the disproportionate "screw-up" collage...who's to tell you what to do?
A classic case of not seeing the forest for the trees.
Yes, if I imagine the frame with your corrections... "jambs," as you call them, or "meaningful," as I call them...the content of the frame will change to the opposite and will be like in that funny video...a wandering monk.
For the SIM code.))
You're boring me. Well, you can't be so dense. Bye.
Don't set the bar too high, it's much simpler here.
Basically, something like this..."Look at yourself"))
etc. In my opinion, this is surrealism.