I’m not normally drawn to phone boxes, but this one caught my eye.
As with a lot of my recent shots, I have no idea what this is about – it’s an image that takes up most of the back wall – and I assume that it’s an advertisment for something. But I was so caught up in taking the shot that I didn’t really pay any attention to what it might be about. And I find this happening more and more frequently; i.e. I forget the context, and just remember what I saw through the viewfinder at the time.
And in some ways this is quite disturbing; I can wander around taking shots and become almost oblivious to everything else. Which is quite therapeutic, I suppose, but it does seem rather odd at times.
camera capture date aperture shutter speed shooting mode exposure bias metering mode ISO focal length image quality white balance
Canon G5
3.04pm on 12/5/04
f3.2
1/200
aperture priority
-1/3
evaluative
50
10.2mm
RAW
auto
I'm new here and I just wanted to say that I like your photography very much. The thing that gets you above others is the use of color: your greens, yellows and reds are saturated but the blues and greys are so very cool -- it gives an otherwordly or dreamy look to the pictures. In this picture it is the color which makes the atmosphere.
comment byCameron at 10:28 AM (GMT) on 14 May, 2004
"I can wander around taking shots and become almost oblivious to everything else" ~ lol, sounds like zen and the art of photography to me! Nice shot grasshopper...
;-)>
comment byKjetil at 11:19 AM (GMT) on 14 May, 2004
Very nice. Looks great! Special colors and the yellow at the top is great.
Although I don't want to seem like the only one who complains around here, I just don't like to overly-Photoshop feel your photographs have been having. It just seems like you rely on Photoshop a little too much. It almost seems as if you're thinking about how you'll manipulate something in PS before you take a shot (especially the flowers and swing shots of last week). Although there's nothing wrong with using PS, know it's photography first, then 'fixings' later. You still have excellent composition, so congrats. I'm sure I'll get a whipping for this one...
Wow, what a strage one. I too thought there was some severe manipulation of several photos involved. Unlike the purist above, I have to say that I'm here to enjoy what I see, and let it evoke feelings and thoughts about the art. Being PS or not, it's what I see as the end product that matters. I like the stong colors that PS helps you bring out. Blurring and such in the photos last week to me was fine and acceptable. If a novice looks at a photo, and sees the photo as truth, then PS isn't manipulating your photos into another artform other than photography, imo.
I'd like to think that there are several layers of photography, especially with the new advances in technology. There are photos that are developed, and that's it. Definately photography. There are photos with subtle manipulation. Then there are those that use photos and manipulate it into something different. It will depend on the viewer of the artform to decide where the lines are drawn, because that's what is so great about art. It's a personal experience, only defined by the observer.
Perhaps every viewer has input to give, and as the artist, take the input you are given and let it affect you as you will. Decide what you want to do, purist, subtle manipulation, or more intense, draw the lines where you will, and go wherever you want to in your search for your own art creation. It's all acceptable, and your current work (and past from what of the archives I've been able to get through in my limited time) is enjoyable by me. Thanks!
About PS manipulation. This discussion between purists and "manipulators" seems the one between realists and impressionists: should painting be a portrait of reality or a recreation of that same reality as seen and felt by the artist?
I'm a deep defensor of photo manipulation as an artistic act. People don't use PS to fake reality; people (I for one, maybe chromasia too) use it to create a reality. And it's that reality that is comunicated to others. A bit in the way of Warhol.
That said let me add that I have nothing against "pure" photographers. They're in another category. Just as worthy, just as good. Simply, another category.
The thing with PSing is that people usually forget one major component. You still need a good picture to begin with.
Shoot a good picture and PS to enhance. A shit picture will always be shit.
Plus even in terms of traditional photography, choices have been made with film and print. I don't know, but I feel like with the increase of digital photography I find more people are in some way looking for the PSing, and are quick to point it out when they spot it.
I think we are all getting too caught up with the technology that comes with digital imaging and forgetting to look at a picture for what it is, not what was done to it. I have caught myself many times when I am looking at a picture and I'm trying to figure out what adjustment and how it was done rather than look at the damn picture.
Dave's work is solid, PS or not, I give him props for being such a strong advocate for digital imaging and his continuing push of the art form. His work has inspired me to push my images and I'm sure of many other too.
Sorry Jessyel this is not directed at you, you just caught me in a ranting mode.
comment by Tom B at 09:48 PM (GMT) on 14 May, 2004
Very strange photo but the mood of the colors gets to you. I like the number of different textures as well as the eyes looking out of the frame. Good find.
comment by djn1 at 11:17 PM (GMT) on 14 May, 2004
I wish I'd been in today, I would have joined this discussion sooner. About PSing: I use Photoshop to bring out what I see as the important features of an image. In this instance, despite the weirdness of this shot, the only appreciable change that I made was to lift the yellow section at the top of the image. The original can be seen here:
On reflection I think I might well have overdone it a bit, but I did want to emphasise that section of the image.
As for Jesseyl's point regarding premeditated changes: yes, I do sometimes make decisions prior to, or as I'm taking a shot. But I don't think this is any different to selecting a brand of film on the basis that its particular characteristics will enable you to produce a particular feel to an image. What's worse, in my opinion, is using Photoshop in a haphazard way. Sure, you can often produce interesting results, but happening across an interesting shot while playing around with Photoshop isn't a route I like to go down. For me Photoshop, as PCG mentions, is something that allows you to create the reality you envisage for a given shot.
All of which could probably have been put a little more coherently ;-)
comment bydeceptive at 11:23 PM (GMT) on 14 May, 2004
Great shot Dave, very graphical.
comment by Maxine at 04:09 AM (GMT) on 15 May, 2004
What a cool, freaky shot! I love it! (even though I think it's going to give me nightmares) :)
comment by Robin Summerhill at 11:35 AM (GMT) on 20 May, 2004
Just found this site - haven't had time to have a really good look around yet...
Just for those that are curious about this image - it is part of a government campaign to publicise the 'Education Maintenance Allowance' where students can claim 30 pounds a week for staying in school. http://www.dfes.gov.uk/financialhelp/ema/
The man is supposed to be working as a sort of undercover agent in schools to inform students. He is painted to blend into the background and then moves subtly, says 'Pssst!' and delivers his message.
In the freakiest advert he is sat on a bench in a science lab and is painted to blend into a cutaway wall chart of the human body showing all the organs.
Just thought you might like to know. :-)
Robin
comment by ramsis at 11:38 PM (GMT) on 11 August, 2004
very professional work.
nice lighting.
y like it.
thank´s
comment byluis at 05:14 PM (GMT) on 22 March, 2005
I’m not normally drawn to phone boxes, but this one caught my eye.
As with a lot of my recent shots, I have no idea what this is about – it’s an image that takes up most of the back wall – and I assume that it’s an advertisment for something. But I was so caught up in taking the shot that I didn’t really pay any attention to what it might be about. And I find this happening more and more frequently; i.e. I forget the context, and just remember what I saw through the viewfinder at the time.
And in some ways this is quite disturbing; I can wander around taking shots and become almost oblivious to everything else. Which is quite therapeutic, I suppose, but it does seem rather odd at times.
capture date
aperture
shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
ISO
focal length
image quality
white balance
3.04pm on 12/5/04
f3.2
1/200
aperture priority
-1/3
evaluative
50
10.2mm
RAW
auto
This shot is irritating and is well spotted...
I'm new here and I just wanted to say that I like your photography very much. The thing that gets you above others is the use of color: your greens, yellows and reds are saturated but the blues and greys are so very cool -- it gives an otherwordly or dreamy look to the pictures. In this picture it is the color which makes the atmosphere.
"I can wander around taking shots and become almost oblivious to everything else" ~ lol, sounds like zen and the art of photography to me! Nice shot grasshopper...
;-)>
Very nice. Looks great! Special colors and the yellow at the top is great.
'Fantastic!' I thought, 'how did he do it? Several layers, borrwed photos, adding of whites and blues...? Let's see how dave managed it.'
Then your comment taught me that it was almost somebody's else work. Almost. It was your ability to spot the unexpected that showed it to us.
Great eye and, as usually, great image treatment
~the mix of color and content is interesting here~
Although I don't want to seem like the only one who complains around here, I just don't like to overly-Photoshop feel your photographs have been having. It just seems like you rely on Photoshop a little too much. It almost seems as if you're thinking about how you'll manipulate something in PS before you take a shot (especially the flowers and swing shots of last week). Although there's nothing wrong with using PS, know it's photography first, then 'fixings' later. You still have excellent composition, so congrats. I'm sure I'll get a whipping for this one...
Wow, what a strage one. I too thought there was some severe manipulation of several photos involved. Unlike the purist above, I have to say that I'm here to enjoy what I see, and let it evoke feelings and thoughts about the art. Being PS or not, it's what I see as the end product that matters. I like the stong colors that PS helps you bring out. Blurring and such in the photos last week to me was fine and acceptable. If a novice looks at a photo, and sees the photo as truth, then PS isn't manipulating your photos into another artform other than photography, imo.
I'd like to think that there are several layers of photography, especially with the new advances in technology. There are photos that are developed, and that's it. Definately photography. There are photos with subtle manipulation. Then there are those that use photos and manipulate it into something different. It will depend on the viewer of the artform to decide where the lines are drawn, because that's what is so great about art. It's a personal experience, only defined by the observer.
Perhaps every viewer has input to give, and as the artist, take the input you are given and let it affect you as you will. Decide what you want to do, purist, subtle manipulation, or more intense, draw the lines where you will, and go wherever you want to in your search for your own art creation. It's all acceptable, and your current work (and past from what of the archives I've been able to get through in my limited time) is enjoyable by me. Thanks!
About PS manipulation. This discussion between purists and "manipulators" seems the one between realists and impressionists: should painting be a portrait of reality or a recreation of that same reality as seen and felt by the artist?
I'm a deep defensor of photo manipulation as an artistic act. People don't use PS to fake reality; people (I for one, maybe chromasia too) use it to create a reality. And it's that reality that is comunicated to others. A bit in the way of Warhol.
That said let me add that I have nothing against "pure" photographers. They're in another category. Just as worthy, just as good. Simply, another category.
The thing with PSing is that people usually forget one major component. You still need a good picture to begin with.
Shoot a good picture and PS to enhance. A shit picture will always be shit.
Plus even in terms of traditional photography, choices have been made with film and print. I don't know, but I feel like with the increase of digital photography I find more people are in some way looking for the PSing, and are quick to point it out when they spot it.
I think we are all getting too caught up with the technology that comes with digital imaging and forgetting to look at a picture for what it is, not what was done to it. I have caught myself many times when I am looking at a picture and I'm trying to figure out what adjustment and how it was done rather than look at the damn picture.
Dave's work is solid, PS or not, I give him props for being such a strong advocate for digital imaging and his continuing push of the art form. His work has inspired me to push my images and I'm sure of many other too.
Sorry Jessyel this is not directed at you, you just caught me in a ranting mode.
Very strange photo but the mood of the colors gets to you. I like the number of different textures as well as the eyes looking out of the frame. Good find.
I wish I'd been in today, I would have joined this discussion sooner. About PSing: I use Photoshop to bring out what I see as the important features of an image. In this instance, despite the weirdness of this shot, the only appreciable change that I made was to lift the yellow section at the top of the image. The original can be seen here:
... archives/jaundiced_view.php
On reflection I think I might well have overdone it a bit, but I did want to emphasise that section of the image.
As for Jesseyl's point regarding premeditated changes: yes, I do sometimes make decisions prior to, or as I'm taking a shot. But I don't think this is any different to selecting a brand of film on the basis that its particular characteristics will enable you to produce a particular feel to an image. What's worse, in my opinion, is using Photoshop in a haphazard way. Sure, you can often produce interesting results, but happening across an interesting shot while playing around with Photoshop isn't a route I like to go down. For me Photoshop, as PCG mentions, is something that allows you to create the reality you envisage for a given shot.
All of which could probably have been put a little more coherently ;-)
Great shot Dave, very graphical.
Wish I could be able to use Photoshop as you do!
Amazing shot Dave, well spotted (as usual), nicely done....pure visual pleasure! (again!)
What a cool, freaky shot! I love it! (even though I think it's going to give me nightmares) :)
Just found this site - haven't had time to have a really good look around yet...
Just for those that are curious about this image - it is part of a government campaign to publicise the 'Education Maintenance Allowance' where students can claim 30 pounds a week for staying in school. http://www.dfes.gov.uk/financialhelp/ema/
The man is supposed to be working as a sort of undercover agent in schools to inform students. He is painted to blend into the background and then moves subtly, says 'Pssst!' and delivers his message.
In the freakiest advert he is sat on a bench in a science lab and is painted to blend into a cutaway wall chart of the human body showing all the organs.
Just thought you might like to know. :-)
Robin
very professional work.
nice lighting.
y like it.
thank´s
:-)