Art

damonff · February 15, 2010

I love this. Something about it.

DaddyO · February 16, 2010

I'm thinking it is.

rutt · February 16, 2010

Now that's selective color! Very sinister. Nice.

What if you crop the top just above or below the light?

bdcolen · February 17, 2010

rutt wrote:

Now that's selective color! Very sinister. Nice.

What if you crop the top just above or below the light?

Wonderful shot, Jen - really terrific. And Rutt, I'd keep that ceiling space as it conveys a sense of empty space - which is part of the scene.

rutt · February 17, 2010

bdcolen wrote:

Wonderful shot, Jen - really terrific. And Rutt, I'd keep that ceiling space as it conveys a sense of empty space - which is part of the scene.

Yeah, good theory. But I happens to scroll the top off the screen and the crop worked visually.

michswiss · February 17, 2010

rutt wrote:

Yeah, good theory. But I happens to scroll the top off the screen and the crop worked visually.

I think you are both right. For me it depends on where the eye interprets balance points for the empty space above and below. The uncropped version has balance with the top and bottom of the paintings. If cropped, I think the visual balance point would be opposite his feet, thus a crop around the lamp at the top.

I don't ask this sort of question often, but why does this image work? I think I have an inkling but would appreciate others thoughts.

spb13 · February 18, 2010

michswiss wrote:

I don't ask this sort of question often, but why does this image work? I think I have an inkling but would appreciate others thoughts.

I would like to hear the answer to this as well. I liked the shot immediately, but when you asked "why" I realized I can't put my finger on it.

I think it might have something to do with the colors in the paintings contrasting with the dark figure.

bdcolen · February 18, 2010

rutt wrote:

Yeah, good theory. But I happens to scroll the top off the screen and the crop worked visually.

Well, but is this about how big it is on what screen, or about the photograph? If it's about the photograph, rather than Dgrin display, keep the ceiling.

bdcolen · February 18, 2010

spb13 wrote:

I would like to hear the answer to this as well. I liked the shot immediately, but when you asked "why" I realized I can't put my finger on it.

I think it might have something to do with the colors in the paintings contrasting with the dark figure.

The image works for a number of reasons - politically and visually.

First the political - we have the art work on display - images from the Moaist era, with the subjects - who I would interpret as intended to be heroic - made ridiculous by the presence of what appear to be bright pink pacifiers in their mouths. I see this as a comment about the pacification of the masses by the politics of Mao. (So sue me if my interpretation is wrong

) And then we have the contrast with the anonymous modern Chinese man in his dark suit, observing the politically charged art work.

As to the visuals - there is the contrast between the bright art display and the dark, looming figure in the left foreground; the line from lower left to the right-side artwork, and the way that almost seems to meet the ceiling beam Rutt would crop out that comes in across the right top.

spb13 · February 18, 2010

bdcolen wrote:

The image works for a number of reasons - politically and visually.

First the political - we have the art work on display - images from the Moaist era, with the subjects - who I would interpret as intended to be heroic - made ridiculous by the presence of what appear to be bright pink pacifiers in their mouths. I see this as a comment about the pacification of the masses by the politics of Mao. (So sue me if my interpretation is wrong ) And then we have the contrast with the anonymous modern Chinese man in his dark suit, observing the politically charged art work.

As to the visuals - there is the contrast between the bright art display and the dark, looming figure in the left foreground; the line from lower left to the right-side artwork, and the way that almost seems to meet the ceiling beam Rutt would crop out that comes in across the right top.

OK...maybe I am not as far away as I thought I was. I had the "political" part, I just couldn't express it as well as you did.

The visuals bit...I think I still have things to learn about "lines". I am sure that on some level I know what lines work, but it is more subconscious. For now I still need to working on the "seeing". I keep wondering if I would have been able to see this shot. I have been trying to see these 'unposed' shots when I am out and about, and I am not seeing them. So I have to wonder if they are there and I am just missing them.

I do think this forum is teaching me stuff, even if I haven't been able to execute it yet.

Thanks BD.

DaddyO · February 18, 2010

bdcolen wrote:

The image works for a number of reasons - politically and visually.

First the political - we have the art work on display - images from the Moaist era, with the subjects - who I would interpret as intended to be heroic - made ridiculous by the presence of what appear to be bright pink pacifiers in their mouths. I see this as a comment about the pacification of the masses by the politics of Mao. (So sue me if my interpretation is wrong ) And then we have the contrast with the anonymous modern Chinese man in his dark suit, observing the politically charged art work.

As to the visuals - there is the contrast between the bright art display and the dark, looming figure in the left foreground; the line from lower left to the right-side artwork, and the way that almost seems to meet the ceiling beam Rutt would crop out that comes in across the right top.

Hard not to.

Previous comment was on the mark too.

For me I would add from a reduced more lengthy comment I spent too
much time thinking and writing about this image.... We are not qualified
to pin the donkey with a tail.
So I generally refrain from serious in depth comment to any shot.

What empty space? I see a part of story part way more.
If it was me I would retain the photo as is. I believe a crop would under value
all the visual elements that lend themselves to the complete experience this
photo has to offer for mission statement available in it.

Crop that out and what have ya got? Another photo in a long line of images altogether too similar.
Fellow looks at Art…. Interesting Art. Ok... Well done. Moves on.

Some time in processing. Add a wee bit edginess and drama. No worries.
Nice image. I like the Walter M. guy. He is one sharp observer standing there such as he is.
Casually pondering quiet radical with the freedom to do so.

I was seeing the pink mouths as either pacifier or pink flower. My mind settled on pick flower,
(as in speak the pretty words of Moa) but it is a pacifier.

michswiss · February 19, 2010

bdcolen wrote:

The image works for a number of reasons - politically and visually.

First the political - we have the art work on display - images from the Moaist era, with the subjects - who I would interpret as intended to be heroic - made ridiculous by the presence of what appear to be bright pink pacifiers in their mouths. I see this as a comment about the pacification of the masses by the politics of Mao. (So sue me if my interpretation is wrong ) And then we have the contrast with the anonymous modern Chinese man in his dark suit, observing the politically charged art work.

As to the visuals - there is the contrast between the bright art display and the dark, looming figure in the left foreground; the line from lower left to the right-side artwork, and the way that almost seems to meet the ceiling beam Rutt would crop out that comes in across the right top.

You nailed the political component. Those are pacifiers in "The People's" mouths as they listen to or read from Mao. There is an active arts community here that need to communicate their views on the mistakes of the great leap forward from their own personal experiences. There is also work that lays out some of the current challenges. Public dialogue does take place through the Arts. It's definitely a balancing act though, and not without risks. As is most good art. I'll add a link to the Artist's work / website to this thread in a couple of days.

On the visual side: As with most of my shots, I was lucky to be in a good spot to take the picture.

bdcolen · February 19, 2010

michswiss wrote:

On the visual side: As with most of my shots, I was lucky to be in a good spot to take the picture.

"f 8 and be there."
Attributed to Weegee ... and Robert Capa ... and several other people.

rutt · February 19, 2010

bdcolen wrote:

"f 8 and be there."
Attributed to Weegee ... and Robert Capa ... and several other people.

Weegee was an f/16 guy, actually, so I bet it's someone else.

bdcolen · February 19, 2010

rutt wrote:

Weegee was an f/16 guy, actually, so I bet it's someone else.

Could well be.

NeilL · February 21, 2010

A lot to like. It certainly holds attention.

I find myself wishing for a longer view, so the figure is more heavily framed, and beyond the figure something more like an ancestral shrine, which of course it is, smaller and glowing.

Planes/stages/levels of perspective. It's just a little lacking in mystification, even while mystification is its main idea.

Neil

phillybikeboy · February 21, 2010

michswiss wrote:

You nailed the political component. Those are pacifiers in "The People's" mouths as they listen to or read from Mao. There is an active arts community here that need to communicate their views on the mistakes of the great leap forward from their own personal experiences. There is also work that lays out some of the current challenges. Public dialogue does take place through the Arts. It's definitely a balancing act though, and not without risks.

I've got to say, this is my favorite shot on Street & PJ in a long time. While I agree with everything BD said about the political context of the photo, I can't help but think there's more going on there. The only color in the frame comes from the inhabitants of heroic propaganda of the past (pacified though they may be). In stark contrast is the colorless, slightly rumpled man in the foreground, wearing the bland uniform of modern capitalism and business. In a single frame, a contemporary China trying to balance its communist roots against the power of the market economy. I can't help but look at your picture and see a people still waiting for the Great Leap Forward.

Or am I reading too much into it?

Art

Comments