my_daroga: Mucha's "Dance" (self)
my_daroga ([personal profile] my_daroga) wrote2008-03-11 06:48 am

Photography Experiement - Full Frame Photos

For some time, it's been annoying me that the aspect ratio for standard photo sizes has nothing to do with the actual film. To get a 4x6 or 5x7, you're cropping a significant portion of the image. Not really internalizing this, I've always composed "in camera" and am frustrated when my carefully-aligned images get cut off.

So here's what I'm doing.

I'm choosing 12 or so negatives at a time from my "best work" to get 8x12 prints done. Some of these you've probably seen before. But I want to try to find a "next level" for my photography, and at the moment this is my best next step. I'm not sure what to do with these now, but take a look and tell me what you think. Is this a quality I should pursue? To set me apart, just a little?

end_of_the_line_by_l_aurens


airport_by_l_aurens

queen_by_l_aurens

pigeon_love_by_l_aurens

serving_size_by_l_aurens

piano_boy_by_l_aurens

a_new_world_by_l_aurens

angels_by_l_aurens

depression_i_by_l_aurens

depression_ii_by_l_aurens

home_by_l_aurens

terminus_by_l_aurens

[identity profile] stefanie-bean.livejournal.com 2008-03-11 03:43 pm (UTC)(link)
The cactus with the hole in it is especially striking. The one of you at the piano is lovely, with the cheek and neck making a nice lyrical line. And I like the mirror ones, where all you see is the subject's reflection.

[identity profile] stefanie-bean.livejournal.com 2008-03-11 03:50 pm (UTC)(link)
Definitely. I like a bigger, wider photo. 4x7 seems very limiting sometimes. Or when you shrink it down w/o cropping, you lose detail.

Of course, I'm no expert ... I just play one on LJ (LOL)

[identity profile] men-in-full.livejournal.com 2008-03-11 03:55 pm (UTC)(link)
[livejournal.com profile] ceridwen_daae is studying photography in art school, and I remember her remarking to me once that "art photos" are often heavily doctored, either in the developing process, or through cropping, or if digital, through something like Photoshop. It just occurred to me that the analogy would be painting, where (in an oil painting) the artist often scrapes, re-paints, etc. In watercolor, though, once it's down, it's down forever (usually.) So in a sense, it sounds like what you are thinking of are "watercolor photographs," i.e. where the composition is all done on the camera/shooting end, and "what you see is what you get." I think that's cool; it is a more 'natural' kind of photography.

[identity profile] a2zmom.livejournal.com 2008-03-11 04:51 pm (UTC)(link)
I don't anything about photography but I like these. They elicited a visceral reaction, which for me is what art is about.

I especially like the piano one, the one in costume looking into the mirror and the first one. I like the lighting and composition in these a lot.

[identity profile] a2zmom.livejournal.com 2008-03-11 10:33 pm (UTC)(link)
Are you hoping to find a gallery that will take you on?
ext_168748: (Default)

[identity profile] phantoms-siren.livejournal.com 2008-03-11 08:10 pm (UTC)(link)
This has never occurred to me. Ever. Probably because I work in digital and I rarely buy prints (and even more rarely buy frames). So I don't pay a lot of attention to dimensions with photos (I do with paintings because I want to sell the most possible prints so I work to the most compatible size).

But these are definitely better. Significantly :)
ext_7189: (Default)

[identity profile] tkp.livejournal.com 2008-03-12 05:18 am (UTC)(link)
You know I love all of these. But my favorites are the last one, the pidgeons (which I do NOT remember seeing), the one on your most recent Landlord's Daughter add, the one of Mr. Daroga and the mirror, the kid at the piano, and the thespian in the mirror, which is so awesome it should be blown up and hung ON MY WALL.

Srsly. I'll pay you.

(Anonymous) 2008-03-12 05:58 pm (UTC)(link)
ICON! AWESOME!

--joy

[identity profile] kittyzams.livejournal.com 2008-03-12 07:59 pm (UTC)(link)
These are GORGEOUS. I could just sit here and stare and stare. I think I must have some kink for mirror photos because my faves are of the girl in the mirror and your dude with his medication. These are really interesting and I think they feel more stripped back and real without framing. Which worked out beautifully, I think.

[identity profile] eponymous-rose.livejournal.com 2008-03-12 09:10 pm (UTC)(link)
I adore these photos! I definitely think you'd lose something in the cropping - part of the impact is the wonderful sense of space they give. The first and the last are my favourites!

Would love to see more photos from you - so many talented people on my flist! It's really exciting. :)

[identity profile] beagley.livejournal.com 2008-03-13 01:42 am (UTC)(link)
Wow. Lovely.

The first image is by far the best.

[identity profile] beagley.livejournal.com 2008-03-13 03:18 pm (UTC)(link)
No no--
the first image is the best because it balances color, light, and subject perfectly. It's got it all. Seriously, it's award winning!

Second place goes to the cactus,
third place is the ladles... though I kinda hunger for a different crop.

The doves are also AWESOME, but the picture has too much extra noise and too many levels and distractions for me. Maybe consider a crop?

And, lest you think I'm just a big daroga compliment flood with no discernment, I'll say that those are the only four I like. Piano feels typical and the lighting/focus choice doesn't rev my motor, the two miniature shots feel like great ideas that never found the perfect shot, the human pics seem rich in personal impact but not for a stranger, and the black+white bus seems to be trying to picture too much at once, i.e. distracting.

They are all great source materials, and I imagine some PS work fiddling with levels and crop might produce something that turned me on more.

There, see? I can say mean things too! *grin* I'm an opinionated bastard.

Before printing the first image, I might shift the levels just a little bit or brighten... I wouldn't want the details in the tracks to get lost because of a too-dark print. The image needs "just the right amount of light", and that's challenging... similarly, I would experiment with darkening/re-leveling the cactus shot.

All just my opinions, of course...
-d