The hand coming in the frame but not being able to see the fingers is a bit odd but this portrait has a ton a character and the light is very appealing. Nice work.
Jun 30, 2014 at 10:17 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
fantastic shot ... at first I did not see the arm, but when I did it took a second to figure it out ... but once I did, it still comes off as an excellent and strong photo. This one deserves a frame and a spot on the wall.
Frock wrote:
The hand coming in the frame but not being able to see the fingers is a bit odd but this portrait has a ton a character and the light is very appealing. Nice work.
Frock,
Thank you, yes, need to see if I can do something subtle with the arm...
Andre Labonte wrote:
fantastic shot ... at first I did not see the arm, but when I did it took a second to figure it out ... but once I did, it still comes off as an excellent and strong photo. This one deserves a frame and a spot on the wall.
But, honestly? I think you should put the hand back. Doesn't look right without it-especially after I've seen it. Second shot looks like he has a pile of roof tar on his chest.
Just a personal thought...take it with a grain or two of salt... Was the hand there when you took the shot? Then the hand should remain.
Not sure exactly when we arrived at the point where every shot needs major manipulation in order to be "right", but it bothers the hell out of me. Plastic skin, artificially lit 'after the fact', addition and subtraction of key elements... Just seems to have gotten out of control in my opinion.
I don't see where that hand/forearm hurts your shot at all honestly. The tats on the forearm tie into the crosses and tears on his face. The fact that you have to really look twice to figure it out makes the image stronger.
Thank you for the comments and opposing views. Mongrel raises a questions that puzzles me often - not being a regular poster on People I'm not sure how the others feel but I can guess. The issue is not limited to this board but prevalent elsewhere to some extent also.
Hand aside, my feelings are similar to those of Mongrel re reality versus the need for perfection, which broadly extends into so many other facets of our world and lives, and, IMO serves no other purpose than diminishing that which we have. Keeps the economy moving though. But I digress.
I can see the merit of each version, but aesthetically the void seems unnatural - perhaps because I know of the original version. I also agree the hand adds information to the image, albeit in an awkward manner.
I'm interested in hearing the thoughts of others, if no one wants to jump in so be it.
Thanks again for the comments and taking time to pitch in, Andre and Mongrel.
