I think for this photo to have any impact at all....or any real sense of a story to tell....you have to assume that there is eye contact between the boy in the center and the smiling girl. I don't believe such eye contact is there. She appears, to me, to be looking to his left and at a lower level than his head. Since my perception is that there is no visual contact between them, I feel it's a rather bland shot. If, on the other hand, I do assume the visual contact is there, the interest level in the shot is elevated somewhat....but not to a great degree. There's an ambiguity to this photo that puts me off a little....maybe that's its strong point and I just don't get it.
Tom
Well ambiguity is good, Tom, but I believe you are absolutely correct about the eye contact being absent - what ever she is so intently looking at is on her level (look at her eyes) and his eyes are not on her level. I'd say that what Liz saw here is best summed up in the title of Errol Morris's book, "Believing Is Seeing..." Certainly this shot has atmosphere, but that's about it.
Well ambiguity is good, Tom, but I believe you are absolutely correct about the eye contact being absent - what ever she is so intently looking at is on her level (look at her eyes) and his eyes are not on her level. I'd say that what Liz saw here is best summed up in the title of Errol Morris's book, "Believing Is Seeing..." Certainly this shot has atmosphere, but that's about it.
Well, as I said, unless you can see a print at higher res than 72ppi, there's no way you'll be able to tumble to what's actually happening. But I'm glad to see everybody's trying -- even straining -- to have it come out the way they decided it ought to come out. Careful, BD, you'll end up with a hernia.
Oh, and Tony, I've checked your web and I accept your compliment about the picture.
It seems that Tom and I have stumbled onto a way to increase "hits" on
our SmugMug accounts and receive a body-of-work critique: be less than
enthusiastic about one of RSL's images.
I wonder if fawning for favorable reviews would work?
Comments
Well ambiguity is good, Tom, but I believe you are absolutely correct about the eye contact being absent - what ever she is so intently looking at is on her level (look at her eyes) and his eyes are not on her level. I'd say that what Liz saw here is best summed up in the title of Errol Morris's book, "Believing Is Seeing..." Certainly this shot has atmosphere, but that's about it.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
Didn't I just say OH NO NOT AGAIN !!
My Galleries
Flicker
G+
that's my domain.
_________
lol!
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
You think! I have two grandsons in Babe Ruth baseball
for their first year. I need bigger SD cards.
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
www.FineArtSnaps.com
It seems that Tom and I have stumbled onto a way to increase "hits" on
our SmugMug accounts and receive a body-of-work critique: be less than
enthusiastic about one of RSL's images.
I wonder if fawning for favorable reviews would work?
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
Don't blame me, it was the new guy.