dsjtecserv
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
I like it! There I said it.
I don't believe that the measure of a good photo is how well it reproduces "reality" or that it even tries too. Rather, it is matter of how well it communicates something, either about the place, or the time, or the artist; or a combination of those. That doesn't exclude images that attempt to be faithful to "how it looked", because is an expression of the experience of the photographer. But it also doesn't preclude other expressions of the nature of the place or time, or what it evoked in the photographer, and that can involve -- or require -- intentional alteration of the image to highlight something, or try to evoke some reaction in the viewer. The only line that shouldn't be crossed is outright deception: misrepresentation of something as something it isn't or wasn't, with the intention to deceive.
It may or may not have been your intention, but the sliding around of the "expected" colors of this well known scene conveys, for me, a gritty, muscular impression of the place, and of canyon country in general. It isn't a foreboding, like representing a latent evil, but perhaps more a warning that this land is not to be taken lightly. But at the same time it is beautiful, and inviting. I guess, that's a combination that attracts some of us photographers to places like that!
(And I think, for the reasons above, I prefer the color version; the B&W is fairly conventional in comparison!)
Anyway, good show; it's nice to see a different take on a familiar scene.
Dave
|
.