Mark Hampton
New member
Another:
Edward,
I missed this one... reading between the two you have posted allows me a space... the play of focus works poetically... there are more - post them... thanks for contributing..
cheers
Another:
and so the image moves on - a focus on detail that hardly rendered - a pull from the right - and bit of colour for the purple and blue sick out there....
it.er.toton - M Hampton
Maple syrup and cream in my coffee and licorice sticks...
Amazing artistic work by all of the member.
Thanks for posting . Its such a great inspiration for me.
May I also play?
May I also play?
Well said.Whether this is what is ment by the photographer is irrelevant - its the reader who forms the image anew - within their own context.
Hi, Mark,
Well said.
Of course that doesn't apply in the case where the hope of the photographer is that the image will in fact illustrate some objective point - perhaps exactly where one must push on a computer case to make it come apart.
Best regards,
Doug
I think that I'm agreeing with you, Asher. When we provide the building blocks I think that we are mapping the visual surface (I was going to say 2 dimentional but that is perhaps irrelevent") to guide the viewer toward our experience.
Hi Mark, and thanks for your comments. We have been dealing with hurricane Irene, and I have not had any electric or web connection to get on line. It’s getting a little better now. Just to be clear with your second question, I do not consider my photographs as illustrations (while I like the idea that these organic objects have a moment of birth) of course you could say that anything and everything we do is illustrative but that’s a different conversation and I would be on the “not really” side). But to jump out of the Rod Stewart “Every picture tells a story, don’t it” and into the discussion of eye tracking or eye gaze, I want to say that I read all of the entries to this topic, and found it very interesting. Certainly in the “old” days of art school, composition classes spent a lot of time talking about how one enters a picture and how you move around the surface of an object. And yes, Rembrandt was a master of surface to eye manipulation. I am familiar with foveated imaging techniques and enjoyed seeing the many posted images. As for the image I posted, it comes with a lot of baggage from past experiences (not to introduce new topics, but I see each of my images as an individual object). While my visual experience is to incorporate into the object (image) characteristics that will build for the viewer, an experience “similar” to mine (which was a level of comfort that caused me to create the object in the first place). So first, I don’t know what the meaning of Rocks is, or clouds or vistas from the tops of mountains or spectacular sunsets or mud puddles, but I do know that I, like others, are moved visually and emotionally by many unspoken things. So back to eye gaze and the use of foveated imaging techniques, I work to solidify the object so that the viewer might spend enough time visually moving about the image in a way that they will enjoy the experience. I have done this by isolating small areas and changing the sharpness and/or the contrast in subtle ways so that certain lines or shapes are spotted, not all at once, but step by step. And that is what I meant when I agreed with Asher when I acknowledged “building blocks and mapping the surface”. I perhaps should have shown an object that had greater depth of field qualities, but this is the one that came to mind for me.Bill,
hi and welcome to this thread - nice image of stone and light ....
how does it fit in ?
is it an illustration of an event (Dougie) rocks birthday ... is it a measure in some crude way of how much light you had measured wee your gear?
can you explain how this image fits into the previous information on the thread?
Asher,
once the image is made - burned - it is the viewers - they make the image in their own mind... you have no idea if what you see is the image that was produced .... or your invention
just a couple of thoughts
*
Hi Mark, and thanks for your comments. We have been dealing with hurricane Irene, and I have not had any electric or web connection to get on line. It’s getting a little better now. Just to be clear with your second question, I do not consider my photographs as illustrations (while I like the idea that these organic objects have a moment of birth) of course you could say that anything and everything we do is illustrative but that’s a different conversation and I would be on the “not really” side). But to jump out of the Rod Stewart “Every picture tells a story, don’t it” and into the discussion of eye tracking or eye gaze, I want to say that I read all of the entries to this topic, and found it very interesting. Certainly in the “old” days of art school, composition classes spent a lot of time talking about how one enters a picture and how you move around the surface of an object. And yes, Rembrandt was a master of surface to eye manipulation. I am familiar with foveated imaging techniques and enjoyed seeing the many posted images. As for the image I posted, it comes with a lot of baggage from past experiences (not to introduce new topics, but I see each of my images as an individual object). While my visual experience is to incorporate into the object (image) characteristics that will build for the viewer, an experience “similar” to mine (which was a level of comfort that caused me to create the object in the first place). So first, I don’t know what the meaning of Rocks is, or clouds or vistas from the tops of mountains or spectacular sunsets or mud puddles, but I do know that I, like others, are moved visually and emotionally by many unspoken things. So back to eye gaze and the use of foveated imaging techniques, I work to solidify the object so that the viewer might spend enough time visually moving about the image in a way that they will enjoy the experience. I have done this by isolating small areas and changing the sharpness and/or the contrast in subtle ways so that certain lines or shapes are spotted, not all at once, but step by step. And that is what I meant when I agreed with Asher when I acknowledged “building blocks and mapping the surface”. I perhaps should have shown an object that had greater depth of field qualities, but this is the one that came to mind for me.
Mark Hampton said:does anyone else have any thought on this?
its.way.on - M Hampton
Mark,
Did you include any processes to recruit background noise that you refer to?
Asher
Mark,
sorry, but not asleep, just away without any internet. Love Queen, but Arab Strap sits back well for me as I look at your two posts.
I really like “Its.way.on”.
Other than web, what presentation method will you use for this piece? Seeing it on my monitor is a rewarding experience, but I would love to see this in a more monumental presentation. The surface detail is beautiful and very painterly.
I wonder what you mean when you say that “i think I can move on from focus - and look at grain.” Realizing that technique is a necessity for any creation (and I find this a fascinating process), I am reminded of a teacher, many years back, who came to class and told us that she was going to show us something that wasn’t there, but that we all would see. After having us look intensely at a high contrast shape, she had us stare at a blank piece of paper. One by one each of us began to see the “after image” in a magical glow onto our blank papers (reversed of course- black was white and white was black, and when we added colored shapes the after images were the compliment of the color). We were told that it was related to the “burn” of reflective light on the rods and cones in our eyes. It was absolute magic for us. Over the years I’ve continued to note this even in live situations, but for the most part it’s use was limited (for me) to seeing what the exact compliment of a color was.
So now, in your scenario, the photons are capturing the burn and perhaps giving us an enlightened layer to work with or from. Even in my jet lag haze I’m getting excited. I love seeing things that aren’t supposed to be there. In “101” the ghostly heads remain hard for me not to see, and I think that it’s the focus that has my attention rather than the gorgeous grain.
Like me, you may be asking “so what?”.
back from Spain - where it was hot...
race.race.race - M Hampton
will post a bit more about this in travel - but it works within this thread.
cheers
Mark,
sorry, but not asleep, just away without any internet. Love Queen, but Arab Strap sits back well for me as I look at your two posts.
I really like “Its.way.on”.
Other than web, what presentation method will you use for this piece? Seeing it on my monitor is a rewarding experience, but I would love to see this in a more monumental presentation. The surface detail is beautiful and very painterly.
I wonder what you mean when you say that “i think I can move on from focus - and look at grain.” Realizing that technique is a necessity for any creation (and I find this a fascinating process), I am reminded of a teacher, many years back, who came to class and told us that she was going to show us something that wasn’t there, but that we all would see. After having us look intensely at a high contrast shape, she had us stare at a blank piece of paper. One by one each of us began to see the “after image” in a magical glow onto our blank papers (reversed of course- black was white and white was black, and when we added colored shapes the after images were the compliment of the color). We were told that it was related to the “burn” of reflective light on the rods and cones in our eyes. It was absolute magic for us. Over the years I’ve continued to note this even in live situations, but for the most part it’s use was limited (for me) to seeing what the exact compliment of a color was.
So now, in your scenario, the photons are capturing the burn and perhaps giving us an enlightened layer to work with or from. Even in my jet lag haze I’m getting excited. I love seeing things that aren’t supposed to be there. In “101” the ghostly heads remain hard for me not to see, and I think that it’s the focus that has my attention rather than the gorgeous grain.
Like me, you may be asking “so what?”.
Why you like taking photo black&white? From these three pictures, i see a desolate and hot place, i feel hot waves in the air, but don't know where it is.