as a documentary/ surveillance photograph this is good. composition, color, balance - doesn't really matter to me.
the subject is the streetcorner/intersection and that is what it shows.
it doesn't matter to me who took it.
the lawn on the right is perfect. shaggy so the root system is long in case there is a dry spell.
silver magnets, trickle tanks sold
artwork often times sold for charity
PM me for details
that's funny john--I was thinking the same thing, if the image was in b&w, you'd think it came from the historic register.
I think you have to see this one in person (hint, think 8x10 contact print). The presentation here does not do it justice.
I like it a lot. I don't know enough art-speak to explain why. I'm not sure I even know why I like it. I just do. I guess it's one of those things...you either get it or, you don't. Either way, it's no big deal.
I have even tried on occasion to immitate this particular person's style (see my gallery postings).
"Where is beauty? Where I must will with my whole Will; where I will love and perish, that an image may not remain merely an image."
It's like showing us one word out of a poem, and asking what we thought of the poem. With no context, that puppy is one pathetic lame duck! Just goes to show that an image should stand on its own merits without the artist, gallery owner, or curator there to tell us why we should see it as good.
Note to self: Turn your negatives into positives.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Originally Posted by MurrayMinchin
Hmmm, yeah. I think you've completely missed it. It is good precicely because it is so completely unpretentious. It is the ordinary. The everyday. There is subtle beauty everywhere - even in these mundane scenes that we are surrounded by. We just don't see it because...well, our hearts are hardened against it. We are numb.
I want to say it's boring and uninteresting, because that's my first reaction to the subject matter presented here. I am drawn in though; up the street, around the corner, and back over the roof tops. I can see myself riding my bike down a street like this in my childhood. Life was simple then.
I like this photograph
I'm replying without having read the replies of anyone else.
Good? As far as I can discern it is an accurate representation of some locale, so in that sense it's good. The colors appear "good". The photo doesn't interest me in any way, which doesn't make it bad, it just isn't my thing.
It doesn't matter who shot it, a pro, a master, a photographic genius. A name doesn't make something better or worse.
I see nothing of interest, personally feel the composition is very poor, it looks very much like a police surveillance image made to show everything with nothing important included. I really don't car who actually made the image, as it says very little to me.
Who's opinion is worth ZERO!
I don't think the premise of your question stated in the subject line is valid. IMO, there are no good or bad photos. The question should be perhaps, "How will the viewer of this photograph react?" or "How do you react to this this photograph?"
Originally Posted by VoidoidRamone
I think judging photos based on a set of rules like often used in cameras clubs doesn't work for me so I try to be open minded about assessing a photo. Never the less we all have our own bias when we look at photos.
For me personally the subject here has no context, so my reaction to it is as a viewer is nil. As simply a photograhic object I'm not engaged visually here either.