hi,

My new site crashed. Will let you know when its fixed.

Ivan

That is the best fashion picture posted on this forum.

T

Fashion pic. Did you mean portrait? I always though fashion, as in fashion photographs, meant the absolutely indispensable inclusion of something remotely to do with clothes.

As a double portrait, I like it very much.

Rob C

A fashion picture is a portrait and a portrait is a fashion picture. Light is a wave and a particle. You can call it a portrait if that is comforting. Call it a beauty shot because it fits the bill as well. In any case, its the best shot of a person posted on this forum.

That's an interesting exercise in symmetry. What disturbs me a bit is the fact that the chandelier at the top of the image is not dead centre. I hope your clean-up included centering that, as follows.

Click to view attachment

I prefer it the way it was originally presented. Centering the chandelier makes it too symmetric for me; it's a nice touch to have the chandelier right over the balloon.

Well, that just goes to show how different we all are, assuming you are sincere in your opinion.

When everything is so symmetrical, and the general theme seems to be one of symmetry, then something which seems to have no reason to be 'out of symmetry' tends to jar, in my view.

Nice site by the way.

I totally agree with you about Ballen and I must admit I don't see a heart in DG 's pics.I see all the correct political stuff but I dont feel the tears in his eyes or "Tassies" in a shack in an enamel mug like with Obie's pics. DG is distant, behind the camera like the glass of a car window at the robot.
I'm suprised he didn't like the lighting I would have assumed that being a Jew he would have been happy for him to be totally portrayed as a monster.Its to his credit that he saw Arnold Newman's monster lighting as unnecessary and changes my opinion about him.
Ps The pics are from ages ago I love shooting black women in back underwear on black backgrounds.I'm hoping that somewhere in my life I will become known as a specialist in this field(probably a bit of a tall order)
D

Here's the other one

Speaking about Krupp Read Arnold Newman's story about it its very entertaining.Looks like Krupp got what he photographically deserved
#
www.wac.ucla.edu/bishop/People/Arnold%20Newman/Adams.pdf

aspm,

I agree with Mark. The double portrait is one of the best on the forum. Great!

It seems too bad that to sell one has to shock, look hostile, dead, trash people etc.

Why can't you take some beautiful women in beautiful clothes doing normal human looking things. (Could it be the new thing. Women you'd actually like to know selling clothes.)

Alot of the images on the forum are beautifully done, but don't interest me nearly as much as this
double portrait.

Not a criticism of the photographer if that is what the client demands.

OK I said it. Tell me I'm an idiot.

Best,

Mitchell

For sure one of the nicest portraits i've seen posted on this forum by a long stretch!
Pentax 67 lenses have a look about them that's just gorgeous for portraits and this pic shows someone who knows how to use them. IMHO digital cannot hold a candle to this.

Gary.

dirkpieters, nice work man.

You ever see Bill Phelps?

billphelps.com

This one is special. Empathetically. Beautiful!
Maybe you are interessted in the works of Andreas Heumann: http://www.andreas-heumann.com/ (-> Photography->Portraits)

Kid of neighbours. Wonder if the post-processing is not too heavy (though I kind of like it...). I used one of the Lightroom presets. Hasselblad H1/Kodak 645H, 80mm.

Click to view attachment

Amazing shot.

I'm not sure myself, although having it perfectly symmetrical would be nice, after realising that there was a slight "off-ness" to the chandelier there was something I enjoyed about it.
It was an oversight that turned out to be useful for me, and is probably reflective of my own character (I don't think there's a single picture in my portfolio that's perfectly symmetrical, plus that sense of being jarring is ok for me).
Perhaps I will make it a point to make everything symmetrical in the future and see how I feel about it. For this shot I'll keep the chandelier as it is.

A big problem I realised during this shot was that most tripods don't go high enough to get the vantage point I need, I'm using the largest manfrotto one but that goes up to only about 6 ft+...the only other one I know that is larger is the Gitzo 6x CF one that goes up to 2.6m without centre column.
Any recommendations will be good, regarding tripods.Anyone?

I have a Majestic that goes up to about 8 feet but recently I was shooting a job for a vineyard and the tripod just wasn't tall enough for my purposes. So I rigged my gear head to a Sky High Triple Riser Combo. This is a junior mount so it was easy to figure out how to put the head on it. This stand is fairly heavy duty and goes up to 15 feet (4.5 meters) and it worked fine. Just had to let the sway of the stand come to a stop before shooting

From Matthews Studio Equipment

http://www.msegrip.com/mse.php?show=produc...oducts_ID=25041

Phase One P45+ Mamiya 120mm

@Ivokwee,
I like the oversaturated look, so for me it's great.

Mr. Pieters,

Two very nice images. Great feeling. Great light. To me, just goes to show you, makes no difference 35 versus 120 versus whatever, when you have good talent and vision. Now you've got your marching orders -- keep shooting.

Not an idiot at all. You have just posted what seems an honest, personal opinion.

I have no MF equipment; I never post anything on the web; I have spent my working life as a pro photographer. I do think I have valid opinions.

Now, with all due respect to any here who might feel offended, there is a growing danger on this thread that it might be developing into nothing short of a mutual admiration society. To be sure, there are some wonderful images here, as there are easily forgotten ones. I believe that to praise everything indiscriminately does no service to the photographers and even less to the worth of the site.

Perhaps we could all step back a little and look somewhat more critically at what is posted?

Rob C

Thanks for the Ego massage and the link I love his work
D

Had a look at his work.Thanks for the link He's work is great and thanks for the compliment.
D

Hallo PDF
I feel that David Goldblatt and Roger Ballen photographed Afrikanders and South Africans and portrayed them (I feel) in a bad light simply by photographing the freaks or the people that give us a bad name.
http://www.rogerballen.com/
As an Afrikander and a South African , I feel personally affronted when a foreigner or a non Afrikander shiows this to the rest of the world.Its a sneaky lie hidden under beautiful pics.I dont think either of them meant to show us at our worst but they did.
The pics are amazing though and lets face it you never get criticized if you do nothing.

Dirk

I would be wonderful if you could post a few of your favorite images.... I'm sure they will inspire.

You'll find more on lensmodern.com
(Very nice guy and somewhat crazy ...in the most positive sense)

Then one day, waiting suddenly turns serious...
Now the viewer becomes involved as the third point of a triangel.

Then one day, waiting suddenly turns serious...
Now the viewer becomes involved as the third point of a triangel.
Or maby as the fourth corner of an rectangle. Who are we waiting for?

Click to view attachment

RZ/65mm P45

Ray

Or it might be his younger brother...

Exactly what I expected, Witz, a total inability to accept the point made - no, a total inability to want to accept the point would be more accurate.

This has absolutely nothing to do with my personal photography at all. I might be the hottest piece of photographic talent on the planet and, just as easily, a first-year student on some little course somewhere; it matters not a jot. What does matter, is that real photographic worth is not drowned in a constant stream of praise, heaped on everything that is published here. If you do that, you reduce the value of the perceived appreciation that truly great shots deserve. And there have been some great ones here, as I mentioned in the post that went up your nose. (I´m sorry, that was no pleasing adventure for me either, your nasal passage.)

I have no intention of making a table of what I consider to be wonderful work and that which fails to turn the switch: that would indeed be invidious and unwarranted. If you are a regular visitor to the site, you might have noted my own opinions about the photographs which Michael publishes on his home page; his work covers a fairly wide gammut: I remark on that which excites me. Go check it out, if you think that matters. I do not.

So, rather than shoot the messenger, consider the message.

Rob C

after watching and enjoying this part of the forum for some long time it seems it has taken a turn to negative.

is it because some people who do not produce photographs and show them are here to make controversial comments. may be to pass the time of boredom.

these people may have points that may be valid though it is always good to be more involved than just with talk. it is always good to be respectful of others works.

this reminds me of the joke of how many people does it take to make a photograph.

400

1 to shoot and 399 to say how much better they could do it.

Dear Michael,

I don't want to be part of this anymore.... life is to short.

please remove my user account.

Thanks You

witz
www.witzke-studio.com

Hello Witz,

It would be a shame to loose your input and lovely images from this forum.

I have to admit that I find Rob C comments rude and very negative on this forum and other forums on this website but I choose to egnore him.

Actually he is coming a close second to Ray in his inappropriate comments.

I hope you will reconsider your removel.

I also had a look at your website, Fantastic work.

Cheers,

Simon

Witz,
Just ignore Rob C and Ray.

Don't be surprised or annoyed by their posts. This *is* the Internet, afterall.

Witz

Please allow me to add to what Simon and T1000 have already said. If you give into bullies you only make them stronger. Try staying around a little while longer and you’ll see the vast majority of us are much like a dysfunctional family – while we may not always get along we nevertheless respect one another.

Cheers

don

A sheepdog.

Gidday,

Took this image the other day of a well know TV presenter here in New Zealand for a charity campaign.

The lens I use was a Mamiya RZ 127mm lens which I bought second hand from KEH for $350.00 US dollars.

Personally I think the resolution is brilliant and it fits nicely between the 110mm and 140mm lenses.

Stats:

Mamiya RZProIID
Mamiya RZ 127mm Lens
Leaf Aptus75
125th Sec, F16.0, 50ISO
Bowens flash
Processed in Photoshop CS3

Cheers

Simon

hi Dirk,

I like your work!

I can, in a way share your thoughts. I am not sure that goldblatt shows them in a 'bad light'. I think he just shows them the way they are/were. The 'Some Afrikaners' bo actually took me back to my youth were, as little white boys, we played kleilat and each one would have his gang and for a day were blissfully unaware of the bigger political picture. But at the end of the day we went our separate ways. his photo, 'farmers son and his nursemaid, hymweeberg', could have been me! But I agree some of his work is a little dull. I would love to do an essay on the new diamonds and their black bmw's and gucci bags

Regards, Ivan

And that, witz, shows you are still not reading the message, just disliking the messenger.

If you disagree, why don´t you explain, here, what it is that makes you feel differently about things?

I shall give you, below, an example of the problems that arise when too much credit is given in an indiscriminate way.

For several years now I have been buying B&W magazine, www.BandWmag.com because I am interested in b/w photography and also the world of photographic collection. The magazine started off with one man´s vision and grew to a point where it had to take in outside power to enable growth to continue, a not unusual business experience. I have just stopped buying it, cancelling my order.

Why did I do this, since my love for the medium is as strong as ever? The answer to that lies in the last copy that I bought, issue 6o, the 2008 Portfolio Contest Awards. Up to page 75 there are photographs which have been rated within a category termed Excellence Award. I find every one of them shows a photographer with vision.

From page 76 to the end of the competition pictures, way away on page 223, there is a collection of the also-rans. And that´s the trouble: the bulk of the magazine is, for me, a waste of my $16.95 (actually, a lot more in €s). Had the magazine stayed with its normal format and not swollen itself (and raised the price) to cater for also-rans in what I suppose is a commercial effort to keep the contributions flowing in to further competitions, I would have been a happy camper, spending several evenings over the months to come enjoying the images longer. As it turns out, I have been totally disillusioned by both publisher and the weight of mediocre material that I find myself to have bought. The taste with which I am left is not pleasant, whereas, standards maintained, it would have been divine.

This may or may not help you to understand why I find problems with blanket praise. It might not even calm you hysteria but there you go, as you said, life is too short for some things.

To others, who find problems with myself and Ray (whom I do not know) I can only say that it surprises me somewhat: the only problems that I see with posts from either of us is that where reasoned response is not forthcoming, where points of view are not countered in any clear and relevant way, the soloution seems to be found in blind attack.

This is a forum; that implies a place where views are exchanged, not where vanities are stroked.

Rob C

hi Bob,

Nice! ( I dont want to be tooo flattering, could get into trouble)

Any tips on how I can get my 18month old boxer to sit still!?

Regards, Ivan

Hi RobC

Care to share your thoughts on the 'boemelaar' pics. I can take it on the chin.

Regards, Ivan

Ivan

Just looked through your site - you have a well-developed photojournalist´s eye, as you obviously must know. A couple of things:

Amper - Alles makes me think of Miami;
Wedding Dress, Fairview is a beautiful example of portraiture.

What is boemelarr? I can´t find a reference here, but might just be weary...

About the dog: you picked an unfortunate breed if you want still-life. I had an alsabrador, the dog-love of my life, and she was so intelligent she just knew what to do in front of the camera. Just like people, really: some have it and others never will.

Anyway, interesting photographs you are able to make. Also, it is good to see folks keeping alive the ethic of b/w.

Rob C

To no-one in particular, I´d like to say that the Grayhand set of pics of the lady by the window bring back good memories for me. Of the 60s, no less, and of Nikons and sweet dreams like that. Except that we were doing it mostly in black/white. It was an entire school of photography in those days - even David Hamilton was exploring the style... If you can find a copy of Dreams of Young Girls you will see what I mean.

Rob C

[quote=HarperPhotos,Aug 20 2008, 10:36 PM]


I have to admit that I find Rob C comments rude and very negative on this forum and other forums on this website but I choose to egnore him.

Actually he is coming a close second to Ray in his inappropriate comments.



[/quot




Interesting slant: rudeness usually implies some breach of etiquette - which one exactly am I guilty of attacking? If you include sacred cows in the equation, then you are most certainly right, but I would have imagined you to be beyond that level of analysis. Ignore me if you wish, no harm done, but do open your mind to the possibility that all here are not gods and not all work made in heaven.

There has always been a group that feels happy in a world of cotton wool, isolated from any greater reality than its own; that´s not a very progressive one to inhabit and I´d have imagined the LuLa to be a little beyond that. It seems that some might be trying to prove otherwise.

Hell, why did I have to come in second place to Ray? Failed again.

I´m a little bemused by the negative aspect that I am deemed to show; I have also been associated with the concept of bully in this thread, both of which notions I find rather surprising. I would be interested to know which photographer I have knocked and which one bullied. You might be confusing this thread with the one on LaChapelle, but that was something quite else: read the OP. Debate, discussion: it demands opinion. Not love and kisses. Though I don´t know, some might like that...

Rob C

Could we please get back to the "original post" - Show your M.F.D.B works. I for one feels it is getting too preachy . If that is what you want (you know who you are), then start another thread for lectures... Don't kill this wonderful thread.

Hi Ivan,

Take your boxer out for a nice walk before trying to take its picture. Also, it helps if you have someone on the ground with the dog to anchor it to a particular spot. Dog's have a limited attention span, so if you don't get the shot after five minutes, wait another fifteen and try again. What I've learned about photographing dogs is that you let them call the shots.

"jpjespersen", the OP, should get a medal or else!
A pity he is not longer with us.

Yes, pls. let's not kill something which enjoys so much hits and success: no matter what the opinions posted here are, they are opinions and as long it is not said in an aggressive way or harming somebody in a direct way, just let them be opinions and stand as such. And those who have images, continue to post them.

It seems simple, though we tend to make it ourselves being a "killing" issue.

Best regards,
Thierry

Well Rob,

I just don't think I belong here and I'm sure you will agree. You see, I'm a working pro shooting national print ad work for over 20 years and make a very good living at it. I visit this forum to stay fresh on photography related topics... mostly technical topics that relate to the ever changing utilities that help me stay at the top of my game. LL is the finest website I have found that caters to my interest in that area. I am not a "collector" or "critic". I do not feel that my opinion matters as to whether I "like" an image or not. I do consider myself an artist though and have an appreciation for anyone else that has an "eye" for photography. I have trouble reading your criticisms without seeing your work.... ( put up or shut up )

I'm attaching a photograph I took when I was 14 years old.... it's one that I never get tired of looking at. Shot with my 1st MF camera, a bronica EC with an 80mm nikkor lens. I wore this camera out until I bought my 1st hasselblad.
.
.


.
.
.
Before I do leave, I would like to recommend that you give some thought on your "tough love" approach to your posts. I also suggest that you start a new topic thread that you can rant all you want and if anyone feels the need for soden fuhrer then they can visit you there.