I'm very much in agreement with all of Andrew's comments about this week's photographs, so I'll just say something about mine. Yes, it is in fact more of a study than anything else (although when I set it up, and did all the chemistry, and exposed it, I was really hoping for a wowser!) but it was merely a student's attempt to just DO the thing for the first time. So as a study, with nice(!) tonalities, we'll leave it at that. (You forgot to mention the flowers -- like, you forgot Poland. Remember?) As for the title, the 1960's phrase Stan Freeburg Because, as a take off on some lady product advertisement, kept ringing in my head. Seeing that whiskey bottle just standing there may have triggered it. You had to be there, I guess. -yoram On Jun 22, 2013, at 9:59 PM, asharpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Sat, June 22, 2013 4:42 am, Andrew Davidhazy wrote: >> The PhotoForum members' gallery/exhibit space was updated June 22, 2013. >> Authors with work now on display at: >> http://people.rit.edu/andpph/gallery.html include: > > Ok, color me confused. Our two most outspoken members, who are in no > uncertain terms here to educate us, provide us with two photographs with > which I find very little to commend. More fool me, I suppose. More down > below: > >> >> John Palcewski - Ali & Fan > > A very nice portrait. I find it a bit odd that they are looking in > different directions, but perhaps the girl is fascinated with the lights, > and Ali is looking at her parents. But really, I'm nitpicking; the > photograph is fascinating. I'm sure there is a great backstory, but the > photograph carries its own with out it. Absolutely my favorite photo this > week. > >> Yoram Gelman - Jim Beam because. . . > > Well, I still don't know why. Nice tonalities, and it certainly looks like > this media brings back the simple wonderment of a picture appearing on an > emulsion. But the reason why the whisky, rum and unnamed bottle are there, > except for providing different shapes in the bottle study, eludes me. > >> Bob McCulloch - Three Dorys > > An idyllic scene, to be sure, but the three boats compete with the three > houses for attention. It might be stronger without the mansions. > > >> Art Faul - > > Well, except for the somewhat interesting structure with insulting > graffiti, I find this photograph uninteresting, very poorly composed, with > too much negative space, nothing in the negative space, and a distracting > tilt. > >> Randy Little - Kelly > > Hmm. Her face is badly lit and the hands are awkward. And with nothing > better to look at, the subject is her scarf. Was that your intent? > > > Really, I know that Randy and Jan/Art have *gobs* more experience than I > do (and probably more than I will ever have, considering that I am already > close to Jan's age), and I respect them for that, but I guess I wished the > photographs that they provided were more demonstrative of that experience > and talent. > > Andrew > -- > http://andrewsharpe.com > ___ ygelmanphoto@xxxxxxxxx www.ygelmanphoto.com
