On 8/17/2016 6:58 AM, Tina Manley wrote:
PESO:
I posted some of these on the LUG Facebook page and there was some interest
in how they were processed. I've posted the original files - which will be
in the exhibit as 24"x36" canvas prints - and also the manipulated files
with an applied vignette which will be sold as note cards. They were all
converted with Silver Efex Pro.
http://tinamanley.photoshelter.com/gallery/Syrian-Refugees/G0000rQI3x98XfMI/
Click on each one to see them larger. 100% of the sales will go to
scholarships for Syrian children . . .
What you are doing is admirable.
Photographically, they aren't interesting to me. The portraits have none of the warmth and sense of connection with the
photographer that make your portraits of Central American children, especially, and many others from your travels so
special. Only one shows a little of this sense. Most are looking off in to the distance, and of the couple of boys (one
twice) who look directly at the camera, the sense is more of aggressiveness than warmth.
I understand that the circumstances are very different, but as a 'consumer'/viewer, that doesn't make an un-engaging
image engaging.
As a matter of personal taste, I don't like most of the vignetted images, not the vignetting, per se, but the other
processing. A couple have god-awful artifacts, as in Yusuf Damascus' hair and the line around his lower face.
On 8/18/2016 4:01 AM, Tina Manley wrote:
Which is why I post things on Facebook instead of here.
I suppose this may be your response to the lack of responses to your post here?
I can't speak for others. I was following my personal general rule not to respond to images posted that I don't much
like* - unless I have something possibly constructive to contribute. These images have been made, printed, and will be
used as you say. I couldn't see where I could be constructive.
I imagine your responses on FB have been mostly to the plight of these children and the loveliness of your effort on
their behalf. Here, for good or ill, I tend to respond to images for their qualities as photographs, unless they engage
me emotionally. These didn't, which may be more my failing than yours or theirs. The silence of others may, or may not,
mean something similar?
Moose
* Too easily confused with my other reason for non-response to posted images, not enough time. I sometimes feel bad
about not commenting on some posted images.
PS: I suppose that I should also mention that I don't respond to many of your travel posts because they are overwhelming
in number and eye glazing in repetition. Endless slight variations of the same subjects in essentially the same poses
sends me me away pretty quickly. There's clearly some good stuff in there, but it's often too much time and effort to
find it.
I imagine it's a technique to maximize stock sales? Is that useful anymore, in light of your and AG's recent comments on
the paltry income they now generate?
In any case, to me, the job of artists is to edit, and only present those versions of their works that best represent
what they are trying to create and put out in the world. You have some wonderful artistic skills, that you water down by
not editing. I'm not personally interested in browsing through stock sales sites.
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|