http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2136/2203561947_a7515c99fe_o.jpg


Hasselblad 6X6 medium format film
Coney Island, NY

6/10 - I guess it is sorta urban :dunno: haha

6/10 - I guess it is sorta urban :dunno: haha

Sorta urban? Man, do yourself a favor of your life, cut the crap and pick up some good (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5157819) street/urban photography books at a library.

7/10

6/10

Sorta urban? Man, do yourself a favor of your life, cut the crap and pick up some good (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5157819) street/urban photography books at a library.

This is an architecture forum, don't be suprised to get reactions like that on these kind of shots. ;)

I'm not really fond of this one either, liked your last week shot very though.

7/10

don't be suprised to get reactions like that on these kind of shots. ;)

I know that very well. I just like to make people feel uncomfortable with myself, shows their true colors



I'm not really fond of this one either, liked your last week shot very though.


Fine, no American neo-realism for you. I'm not trying to show that you're wrong, I just need you to talk to me more about what kind of imagery you prefer the most, peeps :)

7/10

4/10 for your rude tone :gaah:

I absolutely love it!

First, you read:
Man with a bag wearing glasses
then you open and what do you see?? Right a man with a bag wearing glasses.!
Very cheeky!
Looks staged, I may be wrong, but then again doe it matter?? Does anything matter?

It is sad but totally predictable reaction you meet here!
But I guess the whole point of this exercise was to reveal it, wasn't it!?
Overall atmosphere here on this thread reminds me the BATs on STEX - all the boxes with R$$$ or CO$$$ (always $$$).

Bravo for going against the grain! It seems that most really talented people just gave up the very idea to swim in this sea of meritocracy.

BTW I'm totally with you on your suggestions.

LT1550:
Rude???
That is you criteria?? How revealing! But also very expected...

7/10
;)

I absolutely love it!
First, you read:
Man with a bag wearing glasses
then you open and what do you see?? Right a man with a bag wearing glasses.Mind-blowing isn't it? Its truly a shame the simple minded masses fail to see this is art at its highest form.

Mind-blowing isn't it? Its truly a shame the simple minded masses fail to see this is art at its highest form.

I see you are really disturbed by the issue. It's way out of your comfort zone, so you're desperately trying to defend your narrow POV rather than accept an opinion, that is opposite from yours, and move on. That is what I call "mind-blowing"

Less than avrage. 4/10

It isn't good from the technical point of view and the theme.

Mind-blowing isn't it? Its truly a shame the simple minded masses fail to see this is art at its highest form.

Exactly. I take umbrage with Major Deegan's implicit presumption that if someone doesn't find this picture to be compelling that they don't understand art--that they are wrong. How can anyone's subjective opinion ever be wrong? This is a classic example of someone explaining away an unfavorable subjective opinion as ignorance. "He doesn't like my photograph, ergo he doesn't understand it." Elitist hogwash.

^^ Notice, none of that applies to me, most of these people hardly know how to use a camera, let alone write a meaningful comment(well-written or poor , a well though comment was all I hoped for). I was argumentative and strictly logical in my claims, there were hysterical. They showed disrespect to an artist's work and all I did was to defend my POV.

What kind of moderator are you anyway for defending cultural illiteracy? What kind of comments are #2, 9, 14 and what do they have to do with the work presented at all? If I'm an elitist for trying to make people think about the world around them and for showing them a different take on mundane things, then be it. Next time you call me a "hogwash", however, keep in mind that the world does not start and end in a pretty skyline photo on your computer screen, on the streets it is a whole different experience.

I just can not understand how people don't see that the real issue here is NOT do you like it or not - that is personal choice, but the way you don't like it, the reasons given and the state of things they reveal.

cbotnyse:
yes it is a shame that people get so caught up in the make belief game that they don't see simple things anymore. That they thoughts have drowned in all the techno blah-blah or even worse - moralizing. they focus on all the wrong things.

2/10 :ohno:

Ok, not that anyone has asked, but here's my two cents...

MajorDeegan, I agree with your argument. However this image isn't compelling enough to justify your statements. When you look at Crewdson's (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5157819) images for example, the photographer does a really nice job of using the environment to frame the subject and to add to the narrative. The setting, however surreal, is always clearly defined, and puts the subject in some sort of context. The tension between the strange subject at hand and the seemingly familiar surrounding is what makes these images so intriguing.

But with this particular image, your background seems too narrow.The setting doesn't go far enough to put the subject in context, and a viewer might have a difficult time trying to draw their own conclusion.

[/two cents]

3/10

this is a very interesting photo! I really like it. But in an urban sense, no wait, in an skyscraper sense, i will rate this photo low. 5/10.

:D

6/10

this photo is horribly over exposed. and one of the least clever titles/art form ever posted on this forum. can I vote -2 ?

5/10

7/10

07

4/10