<<< o >>>look on the dark side 19 comments + add yours
chromasia.com

I had planned to go out on a macro shooting frenzy today, but events conspired against me. I had a hellish night with our almost two year old (which involved about five hours on the sofa, no sleep, and the dreaded Noddy DVD droning in the background) and then we had friends round for lunch. And by the time they left I was wiped out and fell asleep. By the time I woke up it was dark so that was the end of my great plans for the day. So, instead, here's another shot that I've been pondering over for a couple weeks but, for one reason or another, haven't put up.

capture date
camera
lens
aperture
shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
ISO
flash
image quality
RAW converter
cropped?
9.28pm on 15/1/05
Canon 20D
EF 50mm f/1.8 II
f/1.8
1/30
aperture priority
+0.0
evaluative
200
no
RAW
C1 Pro
no
 
3x2 + night shots
comment by Chelsea June at 09:14 PM (GMT) on 30 January, 2005

Ah, great- I love this. A very nice model-fashion shot. :)

comment by picturegrl at 09:22 PM (GMT) on 30 January, 2005

Is this an advertisement shot through a window, or is this a live person?

comment by djn1 at 09:33 PM (GMT) on 30 January, 2005

picturegrl: sadly it's the former, which is one of the reasons I hesitated to put it up.

comment by Etan at 10:32 PM (GMT) on 30 January, 2005

It's hard to notice the fact that it is an advertisement when looking at the nose, lips, or eyes but when you begin moving left on the cheek you can sort of notice the 2D aspect of this shot.

Even with the knowledge that it is an advertisement it is still shocking how much detail is in the nose. I can see individual pores which is pretty amazing.

comment by barb at 10:34 PM (GMT) on 30 January, 2005

as far as portraits go, this the opposite to "paying attention".
Any character this girl has, is hidden behind styling efforts and
a vacuous model-expression.
Definately got that advertisement feel, very bland.

comment by Alastair at 10:36 PM (GMT) on 30 January, 2005

"which is one of the reasons I hesitated to put it up"

I think that's a fine thing to do. I spent quite a while experimenting with taking pictures of pictures and seeing how they could be completely remade just through using a slightly different angle, or whatever.

A great picture ... looks ... cinematic!?

comment by Beth at 11:03 PM (GMT) on 30 January, 2005

I don't think I would have guessed that this was an advertisement, but now that I know - I think I might even like the picture more! It has a very moody feel to it, and I love the lights...

comment by Abhi at 11:05 PM (GMT) on 30 January, 2005

Ah well, too bad about it being an advertisement, but the image itself does pack quite a punch. I'm curious about the red/white shapes in the bottom right - are they part of the ad?

comment by tanner at 01:00 AM (GMT) on 31 January, 2005

wow, sweet shot.

i really enjoy the lights and things

comment by ddc at 01:51 AM (GMT) on 31 January, 2005

don't know what it is about this one. that stare is so real. the colors are amazing

comment by Matthew Carr at 01:52 AM (GMT) on 31 January, 2005

fooled me, but that may not be saying much. i emailed u a few days ago asking for help with code. a friend helped me setup some php stuff so i didnt have to learn movable type heh. yea i figure i will give myself a lil promo www.mothersbasement.com i hope to to contribute to the online photo community as i have been enjoying it as a viewer for some time.

comment by Ben at 12:12 PM (GMT) on 31 January, 2005

I have read a number of interesting points of view across various forums on the merits (etc) of photographing existing works of art. Should the credit be given to the photographer, or the original artist who created the work? An interesting discussion on which I haven't yet formed an opinion, but which this image raises.

comment by Mario Serra at 01:11 PM (GMT) on 31 January, 2005

Giorno per giorno č bello vedere la tua crescita. Foto sempre pių belle! Complimenti, continua cosė
Mario

comment by slurpee at 07:35 PM (GMT) on 31 January, 2005

gorgeous, both the photo and model. :)

comment by djn1 at 08:03 PM (GMT) on 31 January, 2005

Thanks everyone.

Ben: on the whole I'm starting to avoid taking this sort of shot as I'm inclined to agree that there's something a bit suspect about photographing other people's photographs. But, that said, every shot of something that's man-made is open to this criticism.

comment by Allan at 05:33 AM (GMT) on 1 February, 2005

looks like my ex-wife

comment by Abhi at 01:38 PM (GMT) on 4 February, 2005

In the end, isn't art just an interpretation of something? If you just took a head on shot of this poster, where it essentially looks like a scanned version, that's not a very creative interpretation. But I think it's perfectly fair to take another photograph and use it creatively. I consider it the visual equivalent of musical remixes that the best DJs put together. Sure, they are using someone else's songs, but they are injecting a part of themselves into it.

comment by eva at 09:29 PM (GMT) on 4 February, 2005

mrau.....

comment by Rachel at 09:35 AM (GMT) on 3 May, 2005

I think it's pretty incredible. There is so much depth in the eyes, and then there is the question of, if it is a guy or a girl. The features could really belong to either, and that's why it is so captivating.