Couldn't agree more. My best shots are the ones I took right after my first photo class. Indeed, 4 months after I started shooting at all. (not that I claim any profeciency) Most of those shots were processed by the cheapest lab I could find, since I did not have access to a darkroom, and therefore have terrible densities.
Originally Posted by doughowk
But the shots are good. They say something.
For me, the trick is caring about the people I photograph. Or being interested, which ever one it is that I am. Or maybe it's being curious. I don't know, it's mostly emotion...
Regardless, I've been told that I think too much about my photographs. Heck, I think too much about everything. But now I'm ranting.
I'll post an example in the standart gallery, and you can tell me if it has soul or not.
P.S. I was trying to help, not promote myself...
There are some things God made not to be described, but to be felt. To say whether some picture has soul or not is a rather difficult task. Perhaps we could evaluate that (as said once Andreas Feininger) by one of the symptoms on the beholder: the stopping power. If the image is able to freeze the beholder for at least 30 seconds with pleasure, we could conclude there are soul/emotion/quality on it. As said Dr Bob : "We don't know what electricity is" but we know its symptoms.
I've been reading "The Elements of Color" by Johannes Itten:
"Between black and white there throbs the universe of chromatic phenomena. So long as we can perceive them and recognize their relationships; their inner essence remains concealed from our understanding, and must be grasped intuitively. Hence rules and formulae can be no more than signposts on the way to color fulfillment in art.
In his Trattato della Pittura, which sets up a formidable array of rules for painters, Leonardo (Da Vinci) remarks, "Didst thou attempt to create by rule, thou shouldest accomplish nought, but devise only confusion." Thus he relieved his readers once more of the encumbrance of knowledge, and encouraged them to follow their intuition.
It is not the means of expression and representation that count in art, but the individual in his identity and humanity. First comes the cultivation and creation of the individual; then the individual can create."
Interesting focus, thorugh the archaic English, on individuality.
Ed Sukach, FFP.
Interesting quote from Da Vinci. Especially considering that he was such a stickler to the rules in his paintings. In fact, I was told by an Art professor that Da Vinci, in his opinion, was the perfect example of classic compositional rules.
I just reread the quote. Are you sure he wasn't saying: If you paint only by the rules you have not accomplished anything.
I am not sure if he is releiving the readers of the encumberance of knowledge. I think he is was saying that for the knowledge to be useful that it must be used in conjunction with intuition. This of course is only based on the little that you have provided and a quick search on the net.
I know the rules to play piano. I can read the music and play the notes but that is not enough. It is pure. All feeling is removed. The emotion is not there. I know that a D# is a D# and the next note is an A flat but that is nothing without the intuition to fill those two notes with life. Inversely I cannot just intuitivly start pounding on the piano and make music. I have to have prior knowledge of the workings of a piano and even what a piano is before I can make it "come to life". There are of course exceptions, but they are an extreme rarity.
Is there a non-old-english translation of this book. I gave up old english in college. To damned mind numbing. I lose the meaning of the words as I try to pronounce the words.
the quote hints at a purpose beyond the rules but in no way says the rules are not essential.
Hope this makes sense.
Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI
So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004
Maybe this is ‘way off topic, but I think (may be wrong…) that G-sharp and A-flat are the same note on a piano. In vocal music, they may vary slightly depending on the basic key (as in well-tempered… et al.). Sorry, I had to do this – three concerts in a row this weekend – all a cappella.
I love the smell of fixer in the morning. It smells like...creativity!
Truly, dr bob.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I take the Da Vinci quote as applying to the "creative" - conception part of the "art" process - The part that Helen Van Wyk called the "What to do"; aesthetic - driven; as opposed to the "easy" part (relatively) or "How to do" as in "technique".
Originally Posted by mark
I'm not suggesting anything like a distinct boundary between the two; they are, to some extent, interdependent. I think it does contain the admonition of, "the artist Must recognize the necessity of freedom - and that the rules exist as tools to be used whenever the human being (a.k.a. "artist") chooses to use them."
Itten commented on Da Vinci - carrying *his* interpretation somewhat farther: he characterizes the slavish adherence to, "That which we can define - and understand", as a burden - and that intuition was of greater importance - not exclusive the only consideration, but more important.
Itten offers that as a moderation of "The Elements of Color", which really analyzes the living daylights (Hah! How's that for a simile!) out of color and its effect on human perception - coldly, clinically and with few areas left open to "In My Humble Opinion."
Ed Sukach, FFP.
Finally something I can answer in this thread. G sharp and A flat are the same tone. They look differnt on paper, but are indistinguishable to the ear.
Maybe this is ‘way off topic, but I think (may be wrong…) that G-sharp and A-flat are the same note on a piano. In vocal music, they may vary slightly depending on the basic key (as in well-tempered… et al.)
Ah, my work here is done.
Not to me... It depends on what the note is "doing", and in which key. The tempered scale was a brilliant innovation which allowed changer in key without having to retune. This was done by making all notes ever-so-slightly off. You won't realise how much until you've heard an untempered instrument - and tried to play it!
Originally Posted by Cheryl Jacobs
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
My wife always wonders why I take so many pictures, frequently of the same subject. I take these pictures out of interest and for just plain fun. I try different angles, composition, etc., and don't particularly worry about what is the "best". Later, when I finally get in the darkroom to develop and contact the negatives I am frequently sureprised at which seems to "work". Also, many times I will go back to old negatives and find a "diamond in the rough" so to speak. To me, this is photography as a hobby and means of relaxation as well as expression. If this is "soul" for me then so be it.