Hi guys! I've been hopping back and forth between here and the landscape forum....I've been dabbling in landscapes a lot and find it so relaxing and peaceful. I have done a few people photos too though and wanted to pop in and share a few.
The poppies FINALLY bloomed! I've been waiting 7 long years. They only bloom after a wet winter. I was so excited to see them this year.
1
2
We went for a drive to Prescott the other day to check out the antique shops and do some landscape pics of Watson Lake (I posted one in the landscape forum). We stopped by Willow Lake on the way there as it looked very interesting with the trees growing in the water. We had the 2 littlest girls with us and they wanted to go in and check out the water. It was a beautiful 80 degree day. I LOVE this image of my 5 year old even though it's stirred up a hornet's nest of controversy on my Facebook page. Society is apparently in a pretty sad place these days. I wish I could give my kids the carefree childhood we had back in the 80's. People are completely ridiculous these days.
And now, totally changing gears. I recently did a newborn shoot for a Seattle Mariners baby. He was a preemie and surprised his parents by coming 6 weeks early. Here are a couple of my favorites - shot with natural light in their very temporary living quarters in the valley.
Beautiful images Lisa. I'm hard pressed to pick a favorite as they are all stunning, but the 1st one stands out. Your choice to use a purple dress with the orange poppies was spot on. I guess that's what sets your work apart, your eye for color. Your newborn images are sure to please the parents. Well done. Thanks for posting'
Ed
Loving the poppies and #1 is gorgeous. Also love #dog licking the baby!
I can certainly see why nail polish on young girls is so highly controversial these days. I do think it would "look better" without the polish, because at that subtle angle it's not as obvious and made me look a few times to figure out what I'm even seeing.
Lisa, I don't comment here much, so take these for what they are worth.
I love the poppies shots. Here in SoCal, we get them every year, wet or dry. This year they popped out about 2 months early, and I'm disappointed we won't be able to enjoy them for as long as usual. They are my favorite flower by far, and your shots do them justice.
I can see why the shot of your daughter created controversy. I think it's because of the way she is posed; i.e. in a fairly typical fashion of a mature woman who has something to cover up. I would have like the shot so much more if she had been a natural 5 year old and simply posed with her arms down, or up in a happy expression (yes, I have experience: 5 children of my own and 16 yrs. of elementary teaching experience). I don't have a problem with the idea of the shot. I do have a problem with the pose you chose for it. It does not reflect the innocence of a child...
The newborn shots are so precious! I have attempted several of these shoots and have always come away feeling like my pictures lack something... Your shots show me what mine lack!
Mark, you agree with Facebook, as in you find the photo inappropriate? Aw, how cute. Well, I'll tell you this. The photo was reported hundreds of times and Facebook did not take it down. Why is that you ask? Because there is NOTHING inappropriate about it. So sick of prudish freaks who sexualize EVERYTHING these days. THAT is the problem, not this photo.
And FullHousePhoto - I have many, many images of her splashing and playing in the water. *I* chose this particular one to share for several reasons - one, I love the peaceful, calm, serene expression on here face. Look through my portfolio - you will quickly see that I'm intrigued by similar expressions. Secondly, the pose has NOTHING to do with adult women fashion poses, that is just ridiculous. This was toward the end of our time in the water and she was chilly. I love how her arms look and figured that this particular image would not violate any Facebook terms (even though there is nothing inherently wrong with ANY of them). That is why I selected this image.
If I had been tagging along with Lisa's family that day with my camera, and her little girl saw me and covered up like that -- and then I took the picture; yes, I think there would be something wrong with that. But I feel like a mother can take a picture like that and decide to share it as art and there doesn't have to be anything sexual about a little girl without a top on playing in a lake. Yes, her hands give the impression that she's covering up -- but if Lisa had chosen to use one of the other delightful pictures of her daughter really playing in the water and not covered up, the response by some would be worse.
Kids at this age are perfectly fine being topless, boys and girls alike. They have no idea that someone could possibly consider the sight to be sexual, so that can only come from adults who think like that. That girl would see a picture of her topless in the lake and think of it as natural.
There's a difference between a photo sexualizing a child, and capturing the innocence and serenity of youth.
friscoron wrote:
There's a difference between a photo sexualizing a child, and capturing the innocence and serenity of youth.
As you, I see this image to be as beautiful as any other that Lisa has posted of her children. An innocent lovely little girl. I had refrained from commenting in hopes that the image would me viewed for it's photographic merits and for no other reason. After all that is what this forum is all about. An otherwise beautiful thread should not have to be ruined by those trying to push their standards on others. Lisa the raising of YOUR children, and the posting of YOUR images of them requires no explanations. And as usual, thank you for sharing the beauty of your images, and more so, the beauty of your family. Your images raise one's spirits.
Ed
Evil is not in an image, it is in the heart and mind of the viewer.
FullHousePhoto's comment about the pose is actually pretty insightful. It hadn't occurred to me before, but I can see how it could be less controversial if she was playing and not covered up (actually people would probably freak out over that too). But to me, the pose appears to be more about modesty than warmth. I also wonder if the dark shadows convey more drama or maturity than was intended. It's a cool picture though and I don't know why it matters if people are offended (i.e., why be offended at someone being offended).
I also think the angle is too steep on the first couple of sleeping baby pictures.
I can’t comment on Lisa’s motivations for sharing, but I can thank her
I don’t post much critique since I’m terrible with emotional words (I’m a great technical writer though!), but I do read a lot, and Lisa’s work always inspires me to push myself to another level (whether I do something with that inspiration is my own issue!)
This set is beautiful as always, and in picture 3, I see a child in the water with great light and some trees in the back.
Clearly it’s possible for someone to project their own experiences into their interpretation of any work of art, and it’s a shame that folks have so many negative experiences to project. I think that’s a statement about the quantity of negative stimuli we experience day to day, but it doesn’t change the innocence of the image.
Lisa_Holloway wrote:
And FullHousePhoto - I have many, many images of her splashing and playing in the water. *I* chose this particular one to share for several reasons - one, I love the peaceful, calm, serene expression on here face. Look through my portfolio - you will quickly see that I'm intrigued by similar expressions. Secondly, the pose has NOTHING to do with adult women fashion poses, that is just ridiculous. This was toward the end of our time in the water and she was chilly. I love how her arms look and figured that this particular image would not violate any Facebook terms (even though there is nothing inherently wrong with ANY of them). That is why I selected this image....Show more →
The expression on her face sure is lovely.
I couldn't care less about Facebook terms, etc. That means nothing to me. As an artist, posting pictures on the Internet for the masses, you have to aware of the fact that your art will mean different things to different people. You have to be aware of that, and be ready to deal with it in a civil manner. You certainly can't help it if people tend to oversexualize images like this, of course you can't, anymore than I could help it if a pedophile "enjoys" a perfectly innocent image of one of my children playing that most of us would find perfectly normal. However, when you get that many responses to your art that lean a certain direction, you must be prepared to open yourself to consider the thinking of others rather than pooh-pooing it off as nothing, or a bunch of hype.
As I said, FOR ME, it's not about her nakedness. I find naked kid pictures cute, as a parent have taken and shown my share! It's the pose I critiqued. And, be aware, that without a backstory, people can take your pictures anyway they want. Now that you gave me some backstory, I do understand the pose a bit more. I went back and relooked at the shot, and I still feel the way I did originally, as if the shot were posed that way rather than capturing a moment in time. That's only my opinion which you can't change, nor does it seem as if it matters much to you. So be it.
Your photos are beautiful as always.
Such a sad state of affairs that you take flack over the photo. The classic nude baby on a bear rug would get the poster drawn and quartered now a days. Sometimes I think it is the evil in the commenters own mind that is coming out. Nothing sexual or sensual at all in the photo displayed. Folks are due their opinion no doubt, but my how things have changed.
Keep rockin' Lisa and I will keep admiring your craft, and hope some day I could be 1/10th as good!
I don't have a problem with the idea of the shot. I do have a problem with the pose you chose for it. It does not reflect the innocence of a child...