Sergey Kryshen, you're right, you can't! I don't even understand why this photo won gold at one of the art photography salons...
Andrey Samoilov, I also have a similar photo with a lathe. I should try posting it. Joke. You have a wonderful industrial portrait. By the way, safety regulations are clearly violated here. It's like the soldier with the unfastened hook on the front page of "Red Star."
Your work is very clear, with attention to detail throughout. If I compare yours and Alexey's, the difference in the blurriness of the foreground and background is clearly visible in Alexey's shot (lamp, wall) and yours (tailstock and wall). Question: With such a large depth of field, what was the distance to the lathe operator during the shoot, considering that at 29mm, the aperture is only 5.6...?
Your work is very clear, with attention to detail throughout. If you compare yours and Alexey's, you can clearly see the difference in the blurriness of the foreground and background in Alexey's shot (the lamp, the wall) and yours (the tailstock and the wall). Question: With such a wide depth of field, what was the distance to the lathe operator during the shoot, considering that at 29mm, the aperture is only 5.6...?
Troitsky Andrey, This card is ten years old, so I could be wrong. I think I was about three meters from the lathe operator. And the wall here seems to be blurred in Photoshop. I wish I could find the original file, but where would I look?
Troitsky Andrey, This card is about ten years old, I could be wrong, but I think I was about three meters away from the lathe operator. And the wall here seems to be blurred in Photoshop. I wish I could find the original file, but where would I find it?...
Andrey Samoilov, the wall looks more textured than blurred in Photoshop, I think, but it's still pretty sharp. Thanks.
I don't even understand why this photo won gold at one of the art photography salons...
Andrey Samoilov, this is the first time I've heard of medals being awarded at art salons... This one probably won gold for its O.Kaledin-esque sharpness... Unfortunately, I can't find any other merits here, other than the ChZMK.
Andrey Samoilov, this is the first time I've heard of medals being awarded at art salons... This one probably received gold for O.Kaledin's sharpness... Unfortunately, I can't find any other merits here, other than ChZMK.
Author works, by the way, among the cards I posted, two are gold medalists from various salons, one is a recipient of the FIAP ribbon, and one is a first-degree diploma from the NSFHU anniversary exhibition.
Author works, by the way, among the cards I posted, two are gold medalists from various salons, one is a FIAP ribbon holder, and one is a first-degree diploma from the NSFHU anniversary exhibition.
Andrey Samoilov, I realized as soon as you started exhibiting here that you were training hard to compete in regional medal races... = tell me, how did I figure that out? …....Or should we not, for now, give away any sporting secrets to our competitors?
Andrey Samoilov, I realized as soon as you started showing up here that you were training hard to compete in regional medal races... = should I tell you how I figured that out? …...Or should we hold off on giving away any sporting secrets to our competitors for now?
Author works, even though you're the Author, you still haven't understood my words. It seems you can't read (or don't want to). You're being sarcastic. You've got the wrong address.
I don't even understand why this photo won gold at one of the art photography salons...
Andrey Samoilov, At the beginning of my comment, I called your photo "Good work." The genre is portrait, the location is a lathe shop, the model is a lathe operator, although I doubt the artistic direction (method) is socialist realism. That's quite enough to win gold at a salon (which one?)
One of the requirements for recognizing a photograph as a work of art, the most important requirement, is its uniqueness. How can you call your photo unique when I published practically the same one in the small-circulation newspaper "Monolith" in Vitebsk, I think in 1992. True, the lens was a 90mm. Maybe they weren't so strict in socialist realism, maybe they turned a blind eye to uniqueness, but at the beginning of the twentieth century, this rule was unshakable. By the way, what do our colleagues from OV have to say about this? Many of their comments elevate the concept of uniqueness to the level of a law.
Creative work and a work of art are formally similar, but they are still at different levels of value.
Ball bearings and dumplings also win gold medals. No one disputes your merits, but the discussion was about belonging to the category of "work of art."
Andrey Samoilov, At the beginning of my comment, I called your photo "Good work." The genre is portrait, the location is a lathe shop, the model is a lathe operator, although I doubt it. The artistic direction (method) is socialist realism. This is quite enough to win gold at a salon (which one?).
One of the requirements for recognizing a photograph as a work of art, the most important requirement, is its uniqueness. How can you call your photo unique when I published a virtually identical one in the small-circulation newspaper "Monolith" in Vitebsk, I think in 1992. True, the lens was a 90mm. Perhaps they weren't so strict in socialist realism, perhaps they turned a blind eye to uniqueness, but at the beginning of the twentieth century, this rule was unshakable. By the way, what would our colleagues from OV say about this? In many of their comments, the concept of uniqueness is elevated to the level of a law.
Creative work and a work of art are formally similar, but they are still on different levels of value.
Ball bearings and dumplings also win gold medals. No one is disputing your merits, but the discussion was about belonging to the category of a work of art.
Sergey Kryshen, the author has no right to judge their own work. That's for the viewers to decide. My work is finished. I'm standing to the side, nervously tugging at my beard.
Andrey Samoilov, When I saw the date in the EXIF, I realized, "Oh, there's a reason for all this; the photo must have a beard..." And so it turned out.
The author has no right to judge their own work, but to participate in its discussion... This is only welcome.
Author works, even though you're the Author, you still didn't understand my words at all. It seems you can't read (or don't want to). You're being sarcastic for no reason. You've got the wrong address.]
Andrey Samoilov, I'm not being sarcastic at all... I actually know how to satisfy your thirst for fame with minimal effort... Actually, that's true... why reveal our secrets... = Fools will come to that sooner or later, but smart people couldn't care less.
Sergio Borkoni, a reportage differs from other genres by the presence of an event. Unfortunately, this is not a reportage.
Andrey Samoilov, the interpretation of a reportage and genre varies across websites, and the point isn't in the genre's positioning but in the quality of the work. In my humble opinion, this one was a success.
Andrey Samoilov, At the beginning of my comment, I called your photo "Good work." The genre is portrait, the location is a lathe shop, the model is a lathe operator, although I doubt it. The artistic direction (method) is socialist realism. This is quite enough to win gold at a salon (which one?).
One of the requirements for recognizing a photograph as a work of art, the most important requirement, is its uniqueness. How can you call your photo unique when I published a virtually identical one in the small-circulation newspaper "Monolith" in Vitebsk, I think in 1992. True, the lens was a 90mm. Perhaps they weren't so strict in socialist realism, perhaps they turned a blind eye to uniqueness, but at the beginning of the twentieth century, this rule was unshakable. By the way, what would our colleagues from OV say about this? In many of their comments, the concept of uniqueness is practically elevated to the level of law.
Creative work and a work of art are formally similar, but they are still on different levels of value.
Ball bearings and dumplings also take gold medals. No one disputes your merits, but the discussion was about belonging to the category of a work of art.
Andrey Samoilov, the interpretation of the reportage and genre varies on each website, and the point isn't in the genre's positioning but in the quality of the work. In my humble opinion, this one was a success.
Sergio Borkoni, the interpretation on websites? How did we live before them?
Joke. You have a wonderful industrial portrait. By the way, safety regulations are clearly violated here. It's like the soldier with the unfastened hook on the front page of "Red Star."
Question: With such a large depth of field, what was the distance to the lathe operator during the shoot, considering that at 29mm, the aperture is only 5.6...?
One of the requirements for recognizing a photograph as a work of art, the most important requirement, is its uniqueness. How can you call your photo unique when I published practically the same one in the small-circulation newspaper "Monolith" in Vitebsk, I think in 1992. True, the lens was a 90mm.
Maybe they weren't so strict in socialist realism, maybe they turned a blind eye to uniqueness, but at the beginning of the twentieth century, this rule was unshakable. By the way, what do our colleagues from OV have to say about this? Many of their comments elevate the concept of uniqueness to the level of a law.
Creative work and a work of art are formally similar, but they are still at different levels of value.
Ball bearings and dumplings also win gold medals. No one disputes your merits, but the discussion was about belonging to the category of "work of art."
The author has no right to judge their own work, but to participate in its discussion... This is only welcome.