PDA

View Full Version : Artistic macro photography?



Pages : 1 2 [3] 4

Anupam Basu
02-28-2007, 12:17 PM
I agree on all points and don't see a problem in your work. There is only a problem when one tries to pass something off as alive - and in macro photography that seems to happen a lot - especially with digicams and the infinite monkeys at typewriters approach (shoot-a-thousand-frames-and-one-will-be-in-focus) that they seem to encourage.

Best,
-Anupam

DannL
02-28-2007, 12:45 PM
Might I humbly suggest some of the work from my own Angels and Insects (http://www.angelsandinsects.com) series?

Bosaiya,

I wanted to say I have enjoyed your work indeed, for some time. Thank you for maintaining your web presence. "Your work specifically" has inspired some of my very own. I should hope to eventually obtain a level of "artistic talent and awareness" that rivals your own. So, watch out! ;)

Dann

Antje
02-28-2007, 12:57 PM
Would this (http://www.apug.org/gallery/data/2/SpiderPrint1.JPG) qualify?

Cool. Yes, totally, IMHO.

Antje

Bosaiya
02-28-2007, 01:03 PM
I agree on all points and don't see a problem in your work. There is only a problem when one tries to pass something off as alive - and in macro photography that seems to happen a lot - especially with digicams and the infinite monkeys at typewriters approach (shoot-a-thousand-frames-and-one-will-be-in-focus) that they seem to encourage.

Best,
-Anupam


That's always a problem whether in photography or otherwise. Part of the human condition, I think.

Bosaiya
02-28-2007, 01:04 PM
Bosaiya,

I wanted to say I have enjoyed your work indeed, for some time. Thank you for maintaining your web presence. "Your work specifically" has inspired some of my very own. I should hope to eventually obtain a level of "artistic talent and awareness" that rivals your own. So, watch out! ;)

Dann

The more the merrier, there's always room!

Antje
02-28-2007, 01:22 PM
If you do not know it, I would highly recommend David Attenborough's series Life in the Undergrowth (along, of course, with Microcosmos mentioned before). It is simply stunning in terms of sheer photographic virtuosity but also in terms of beauty. There is a sequence of mating slugs, in episode III I think, which is the most beautiful, most passionate and most visually poetic sex scene I have ever encountered - and that includes humans! and hollywood's best shots! Now you probably think I am some hopeless insect nut, but do watch it - the smaller majority are beautiful. If we fail to capture that beauty, we need to try harder.


I absolutely agree. When I started with macro photography, I opened a whole new world for me. A world full of drama. Spider moms guarding their young, courting jumping spiders doing a flashy dance and then moving in with the female, hornets trying to chase me off with a wave of their front legs, weary young bumblebee queens trying to bring enough food home on rainy days, butterflies escaping birds with their sloppy flight acrobatics that somehow mostly do the trick - it's a richer world when you know what's going on in your backyard.

Antje

darinwc
02-28-2007, 01:36 PM
I absolutely agree. When I started with macro photography, I opened a whole new world for me. A world full of drama. Spider moms guarding their young, courting jumping spiders doing a flashy dance and then moving in with the female, hornets trying to chase me off with a wave of their front legs, weary young bumblebee queens trying to bring enough food home on rainy days, butterflies escaping birds with their sloppy flight acrobatics that somehow mostly do the trick - it's a richer world when you know what's going on in your backyard.

Antje

I think thats my point.. There is alot going on in the micro world but %99.99 of the insect photographs i see are "look you can see the hairs on the head of this fly". The photos just dont stand on their own without a long description attached to them.

Dan Fromm
02-28-2007, 02:50 PM
I absolutely agree. When I started with macro photography, I opened a whole new world for me. A world full of drama. Spider moms guarding their young, courting jumping spiders doing a flashy dance and then moving in with the female, hornets trying to chase me off with a wave of their front legs, weary young bumblebee queens trying to bring enough food home on rainy days, butterflies escaping birds with their sloppy flight acrobatics that somehow mostly do the trick - it's a richer world when you know what's going on in your backyard.

AntjeAntje, are you doing still photography or movies?

Antje
02-28-2007, 03:10 PM
I think thats my point.. There is alot going on in the micro world but %99.99 of the insect photographs i see are "look you can see the hairs on the head of this fly". The photos just dont stand on their own without a long description attached to them.

I agree - but I also think that's because most people can't recognize for instance a threatening pose by an insect. Have a look at this one:

http://www.pbase.com/antjes/image/63224954.jpg

To me, it's perfectly clear that the ant is issuing a last warning to the lady bug. But how would you tell that to someone who can't read these animals?

In the light of the whole series: http://www.pbase.com/antjes/lady_bug
this might become more clear.

I actually think that it's easier with spiders. It's clear that this one is angry: Angry Spider (http://www.pbase.com/antjes/image/34213060) while this one belongs to the most curious spider species you can meet: Curious Spider (http://www.pbase.com/antjes/image/34212402)
And here I tried to show how vast a spider's realm is for that little critter: Vast (http://www.pbase.com/antjes/image/34212405) More so if you are very small: Very small critter (http://www.pbase.com/antjes/image/46815928)

To depict what happens and not what it looks like (and to make someone care about it) is the art of it, I agree. But with all things subjective, it depends a whole lot on who's watching. Being unable to see what moves an insect or a spider is to me almost as being blind to see what moves dogs.

Antje

Antje
02-28-2007, 03:11 PM
Antje, are you doing still photography or movies?

Stills - and I know that's the point of it all, capturing what happens in just one picture.

EDIT: This is the defeated bumbler queen I was mentioning:
http://www.pbase.com/antjes/image/59572840.jpg
She fed on the shrubs there and took off later.

Antje

darinwc
02-28-2007, 05:06 PM
Now we are getting somewhere. I like these latest examples very much.

Also I was finally able to open Bosaiya's site. Morbid subject material but executed very well.

Regarding the bumbler queen.. i think the pose does a good job of representing exauhstion but I would not use 'defeated' in the title because that could also mean dead.

Antje
03-01-2007, 12:53 AM
Now we are getting somewhere. I like these latest examples very much.

Also I was finally able to open Bosaiya's site. Morbid subject material but executed very well.

Regarding the bumbler queen.. i think the pose does a good job of representing exauhstion but I would not use 'defeated' in the title because that could also mean dead.

Good point. :)

Antje

Daniel_OB
03-01-2007, 09:10 AM
darinwc
Yes, as you already said, macro world is out of our normal frame. You cannot read emotions in insects because you had no interest in it. Is it you assumption that they have no emotions? Might be they do not have that quality, but might be they have some other quality. It is you as photographer to discover it. There are out there so many books about insects and they habits and living. Photographer is not shooter but much more, and I hope you are not that digital machine-guner. Discovery…. Believe me, when emotions come in question, people that have such quality are really sooooo rare today in western world, and majority are with totally unpredictable behavior.
If you have an interest in “macro” photography (I would rather say close up in my case, but it is only name) I think you should make a lot of work and study before you take camera, and I am sure you will change your main.
Macro world is fascinating and you can make so many photographs not getting out of your backyard. I also believe that, say insects, have much better organized life than humans. We do not understand them, do they understand us? Take it as your chance.

www.Leica-R.com

SusanK
07-20-2007, 10:40 AM
Two images in my apug gallery, titled "Liquid Illusion - 1" and "Feather Abstract", are macro shots. The actual image area was about the size of a quarter for each of those shots. Both images make interesting prints when enlarged to 8x8 and 11x11.

SusanK

spiralcity
09-18-2007, 02:33 PM
An artistic approach would (or at least could) move away from any or all of these and aim to communicate emotion rather than fact.


I find that statement to be pure BUNK. Anything captured from the heart is ARTISTIC! Even if it's a technical shot. It dosent matter how you approach the photo it's all in the final result. Beauty is held in our eyes not in technical JARGON.
A beautiful insect is just as ARTISTIC as a abstract of some sort. Whatever is pleasing to ones eye is ARTISTIC.

Art is as we see it as individuals. You cant define artistic. What may seem artistic to you may be junk to another.

I find this entire thread nonsense.

John McCallum
09-18-2007, 07:09 PM
Two images in my apug gallery, titled "Liquid Illusion - 1" and "Feather Abstract", are macro shots. The actual image area was about the size of a quarter for each of those shots. Both images make interesting prints when enlarged to 8x8 and 11x11.

SusanK
Esp like the Liquid Illusion 1. Here's another example in colour http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=1224&ppuser=2165
unfortunately Robert hasn't shown a lot of his very good work.

naturephoto1
09-18-2007, 07:20 PM
Perhaps this may qualify. Leica R4SP either Leica f4 70-210mm Zoom and Nikon 5T closeup lens or Leica f2.8 60mm Macro Elmarit. Kodachrome 64, Exposure NR.

Rich

DrPablo
09-19-2007, 11:10 PM
A couple macros of mine. Both shot on 4x5 HP5+ and toned (iron blue for one, selenium for the other). Both are roughly 1:1 macro, though the one with the pennies is slightly larger than 1:1.

David H. Bebbington
09-19-2007, 11:23 PM
...
I find this entire thread nonsense.

And I find your standpoint hard to make out. I already described in post #29 the difference between technical and artistic macro photography, believe me, it is VAST. Technical photography aims to convey maximum objective visual information, any personal viewpoint in terms of light and shade, differential focus, departure from neutral color, etc. is absolutely taboo! Feel free to disagree, it would help if you quoted from your personal experience with visual examples.

DrPablo
09-19-2007, 11:48 PM
David -- I agree with what you say, but at the same time it's a statement of the obvious. There is a middle ground. Many people go out with cameras to record what they see, not necessarily to impose art upon it through careful composition, but still with the idea of a photo being 'pretty'. This is somewhat artistic and somewhat documentary, as opposed to technical photography which seeks purely to document.

In this regard, I don't separate macro photography from anything else. Your distinction is like the difference between a police mug shot and an artistic portrait. Different approach for different purposes.