Thanks Bob and Evan. I do like to bury things in the backgrounds and in other places in the frame that relate visually or in some way to the subject but I think that Evan hit on something very important that is usually in any good photograph. Something that can't be explained by words. If words could explain it then really no need for a photograph.
First congrats Allen on your selection for the show!
Next, I agree with both Evan, Allen and Bob on the undermining discussion on photography ethics(maybe not the right choice of word selection but can't think of another right now .
I believe all opinions expressed here may fall under a modified photographer's view of "artistic license".
In my opinion, the photographer's mindset in selecting the image to compose is the way in which the display viewed is different but is still intended to be interpreted by the viewer as representing the same thing,different things or some of both. The connection of the storefronts sign to the large man( I mean no disrespect to the person or his image) brought a smile to my face! The expression of the young girl is priceless because I can imagine numerous thoughts of just what she is thinking as the man "hauls" her down the street.
I will paraphrase from an explanantion of "artistic license" and modify it for us photograher's, or some of us anyway: This is not 100% my view but just an opinion to further the wonderful discussion here.
"Entirely at the artist's(photographer's) discretion (or by accident-my words)Intended to be interpretated by the viewer.
Useful for filling in gaps, whether they be factual, compositional, historical or other gaps. My words here -or the viewers interpretation of the composition.
Used consciously or unconsciously, intentionally or unintentionally or in tandem."
My words- it allows us to determine for ourselves how we view the photo and deduce, rightly or wrongly or some of both, the photographer's intention for taking the image.
I believe the intent of a photograph is to get us thinking!!!!!
Dan
Congrats to Allen also. Great discussion here and your image did have me finding many different ways of interpreting the image. None of which were in a negative way but all different!
Nice post Allen.
Semper Fi!
Angelo
Danpbphoto wrote:
I believe the intent of a photograph is to get us thinking!!!!!
Dan
Dan, I would say that the intent of a photograph should be to get us to thinking . But unfortunately, many do not have enough in them to do that. But I think all good photographs do get us thinking, asking questions and are beyond, as Weston called it, the obvious. The easy thing to do is to photograph a noun and it still is a noun. Yep, that's a car or yep, that's a rock. The hard part is moving the image beyond that or beyond the noun or in other words the obvious.
If my images can get a smile from the viewer, get him or her to think about things or to look deeper into my images to get more meaning because there is maybe more there, then I have succeeded. And if the images look like my images look then I have really hit a home run.
Congrats to Allen also. Great discussion here and your image did have me finding many different ways of interpreting the image. None of which were in a negative way but all different!
Nice post Allen.
Semper Fi!
Angelo
airfrogusmc wrote:
Dan, I would say that the intent of a photograph should be to get us to thinking . But unfortunately, many do not have enough in them to do that. But I think all good photographs do get us thinking, asking questions and are beyond, as Weston called it, the obvious. The easy thing to do is to photograph a noun and it still is a noun. Yep, that's a car or yep, that's a rock. The hard part is moving the image beyond that or beyond the noun of the obvious.
If my images can get a smile from the viewer, get him or her to think about things or to look deeper into my images to get more meaning because there is maybe more there, then I have succeeded. And if the images look like my images look like my images then I have really hit a home run. ...Show more →
Ain't that the truth Allen!! Out-of-the-park home run!
Dan
I think your image is good in the sense that it is provocative, but not necessarily artistic (I feel that artistic is more appreciative than thought provoking). But sometimes, if an image can start an entire discussion if shown to any group, that itself is better than if the photo were artistic and left wide open for interpretation (using my definitions, which may be different than those of others).
Looking at your photo, the first word that comes to me is "choice." The second is "control." And the third, "blame."
Choice because people choose what they want to eat. People who are vegetarian or vegan do so out of choice, not necessity. And it's beyond likely that the man in the photo is not a vegetarian or vegan. That and I think how will the child be influenced by the choices the man in the photo (assuming it's the father) make that the child cannot. Choice because you chose to took that photo.
Control. What the child eats is beyond his control. What the man chooses to eat is within his control. How he diets and exercises is within his control. The child is in his control, with the child slung over his back quite easily.
Conrats again Allen!
Glad to see you get some recognition. Well deserved!
Keep letting us know how you are doing in contests and publications.
It is always nice to bring notariety to FM from photographers like yourself who don't make the PBS series, article producing publications and traveling assignment venues that most of us just read about.
This goes to all here on FM.
Dan
Dan, also if you notice I had another photo in that contest that also received a Mark of Excellence award. So I got two in the top 37. See if you can find it...
.
