Martin Stephens
New member
-
Please use real names.
Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed
Firstname Lastname
Register
We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know! -
Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!
Body Lingo
- Thread starter Martin Stephens
- Start date
Martin Stephens
New member
BODY LINGO
huh? 32 views and not a single comment? Not one remark? Not even a funny face?
huh? 32 views and not a single comment? Not one remark? Not even a funny face?
Maggie Terlecki
Moderator
Hi Martin,
I was one of the people that looked at this. Oftentimes when I'm not sure how I feel about an image, I hold back before commenting as I need to absorb. Perhaps it was that it looks like a bunch of strangers all holding themselves to themselves.. and maybe that was the point but I didn't know if I liked that. It told me nothing except that strangers don't reveal who they are; nothing new and I wasn't sure if that was the point or not. Maybe I had become like one of the people in your image, just standing around with my arms crossed.
I have a friend that did something similar with a small family, only showing them from the bottom, but hers was so expressive to me. I could see the special connection the young lad had with his dad, His dad hand and his fingers on the young boy's shoulders and the young boy's hands pushed against his hips and proud.. and I could how the youngest child leaned back on mommy's leg and mom held down a protective hand, but there was an apparent disjoint with the eldest daughter. They didn't touch, the girl had her legs together, knees turned in, hands over her crotch, very timid like. She was in the middle yet separated from both mom and dad somehow, not touching either. Now that image hit me between the eyes immediately and I can still see it in my mind. Some images do that to me. I hold on to them for years and years.
so, I'm sorry, I didn't comment earlier but it was not because anything was wrong, I just had not connected enough with it yet.
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Martin,
I must admit I lingered but didn't comment. I felt bad that I couldn't work out what was going on. The woman got me confused. I'd have thought this was a bunch of guys waiting for a free toilet! I tried to get some better explanation but my imagination failed me. So that's why I just looked.
Asher
Rob Naylor
New member
Hi Martin,
At first glance, IMO this image can fall into one of two camps.
Either it is a simple candid, but if this is the case, it lacks any purpose or a "raison d'etre" for being taken, apart for what ideas were on your mind at the time of taking, which, to me, are not being successfully conveyed through the image alone.
Or it is an abstract of the people at that time and place, but, if this is the case the composition could (IMO) be improved by the addition of a couple of modifications.
1. A lower POV with the camera kept horizontal, to give all the people the same point of reference in height (maybe here it would be about thigh height) and simultaneously this would remove the distracting converging verticals.
This would force the eye to search for pattern and repetition.
2. A tighter framing that excluded the extraneous body parts either side of the image, and hold focus on the middle five subjects.
Either way, Martin, I would love to hear your personal views of the image, what it meant to you and why you took it,
At first glance, IMO this image can fall into one of two camps.
Either it is a simple candid, but if this is the case, it lacks any purpose or a "raison d'etre" for being taken, apart for what ideas were on your mind at the time of taking, which, to me, are not being successfully conveyed through the image alone.
Or it is an abstract of the people at that time and place, but, if this is the case the composition could (IMO) be improved by the addition of a couple of modifications.
1. A lower POV with the camera kept horizontal, to give all the people the same point of reference in height (maybe here it would be about thigh height) and simultaneously this would remove the distracting converging verticals.
This would force the eye to search for pattern and repetition.
2. A tighter framing that excluded the extraneous body parts either side of the image, and hold focus on the middle five subjects.
Either way, Martin, I would love to hear your personal views of the image, what it meant to you and why you took it,
Martin Stephens
New member
Thanks for the comments folks. I enjoy hearing them. I am not too surprised that the photograph hasn't "worked" too well for anyone. It's in "RISK IT" for the reason that it is an experiment.
My thoughts were pretty simple. (1) We rely on faces to make various judgments about people as we encounter them. Can we make any interesting judgment without the faces? What happens when we look at things we normally don't, like feet and arms alone?
(2) I am fascinated by the power of the photographic edges. The conflict of what is IN and what is OUT of the frame of the image. How much must be IN in order to suggest something that is OUT? Lots of tradition says we ought not include little "partials," such as that brown shoe on the far left. Often called distractions, can they also be stimulants? Does anyone stop and imagine what person is connected to that shoe, etc?
I only had one or two of these headless images, so it isn't a very developed idea yet. But as I have opportunity, I will try to develop the idea a bit more.
The comment about lowering the camera level is very well taken. I agree.
When I showed this print in a small salon the participants were non-plussed for like a minute, before even the first utterance was made. I took that as a good sign, rather than a bad one!
My thoughts were pretty simple. (1) We rely on faces to make various judgments about people as we encounter them. Can we make any interesting judgment without the faces? What happens when we look at things we normally don't, like feet and arms alone?
(2) I am fascinated by the power of the photographic edges. The conflict of what is IN and what is OUT of the frame of the image. How much must be IN in order to suggest something that is OUT? Lots of tradition says we ought not include little "partials," such as that brown shoe on the far left. Often called distractions, can they also be stimulants? Does anyone stop and imagine what person is connected to that shoe, etc?
I only had one or two of these headless images, so it isn't a very developed idea yet. But as I have opportunity, I will try to develop the idea a bit more.
The comment about lowering the camera level is very well taken. I agree.
When I showed this print in a small salon the participants were non-plussed for like a minute, before even the first utterance was made. I took that as a good sign, rather than a bad one!
Cem_Usakligil
Well-known member
Hi Martin,
I'm sorry that I've looked but not commented. At the risk of sounding blunt, it did not interest me enough to bother replying since I did not know what your intent was. Now that I know your intent, the situation is different. The photograph is still not interesting enough to be used as a demonstration of types of body language imo. For that part, I agree with Rob's comments. As far as the edge aspect is concerned, the idea might be worth further development. Looking forward to seeing more.
I'm sorry that I've looked but not commented. At the risk of sounding blunt, it did not interest me enough to bother replying since I did not know what your intent was. Now that I know your intent, the situation is different. The photograph is still not interesting enough to be used as a demonstration of types of body language imo. For that part, I agree with Rob's comments. As far as the edge aspect is concerned, the idea might be worth further development. Looking forward to seeing more.
Martin Stephens
New member
Thanks Cem. I love blunt - not a problem. I am accustomed to direct critique process of other artists and blunt and direct is the common language.