Dark or Darker

[Wirefox]

I usually know when I have hit what I think works but here I am not sure whether dark or darker works best here....or of course it may not work at all for you....opinions on a postcard c/o Rob Marshalls Medicine Cabinet.

[jiro]

I'd probably go with the 1st one, Steve. Then, I'd probably color the iris red instead of green to really compliment the black and dark concept. Just an opinion. Your control on the exposure and texture is really great!

[Katy Noelle]

Steve, this is a scary photo. Too dark for me! I think the first one is better because, in the second one, the rust color is distracting. The straight black, in the first photo, makes it more powerful. Creative!

[Colin Southern]

Here's an interesting paradox for you Steve ...

You once commented (along the lines of) how Joe McNally's work was too "commercialised"; in contrast, you come up with many shots (like this) that are obviously "thinking outside the square" - but - as soon as I saw these images (without seeing who posted them), I immediately thought "this is Steve's work".

So in trying to always think outside the square, have you in fact reached a point where this is now predictable?*

* not to be taken too seriously - terms and conditions apply - if symtoms persist consult your doctor or medial advisor - results not typical - see the reverse for further details - herewith forthwith notwithstanding hereunto.

[Camellia]

Hey Steve!

I think the first one too but I have a couple of suggestions.

1. I'd try to burn the brightest part of the the upper left just to tone it down a bit.
2. I'd like to see the eye really white with the traces of red removed.

Just an opinion from the colonies

Cheers

R

[wilgk]

I like the first eye with the second jacket - i do beleive that is called 'hedging' can be applied to bets or funds or opinions about size of derrières in jeans you name it really

[rob marshall]

as soon as I saw these images (without seeing who posted them), I immediately thought "this is Steve's work".

So in trying to always think outside the square, have you in fact reached a point where this is now predictable?*

I can do that with Wendy's (ScoutR) shots, and also ChrisC, and (hate to say this) but yours, Colin. All I need to do now is to be able to recognize my own shots, instead of being reduced to the embarrassment of saying "What t***** did that?"

I prefer #1, Steve. It has more impact, but I'd try to reduces slightly the highlights in the top-left of the jacket. I think my attention should go straight to the eye, but that bit of the jacket is very bright. Good shot.

[ScoutR]

#1 gets my vote also. I don't like the grey skin tone around the eye in # 2 nor the rust colour on the jacket. I don't mind the highlights on the jacket in #1 I think the brighter skin tones of the eye and the jacket highlights kind of balance each other out.

Wendy

[Wirefox]

I'd probably go with the 1st one, Steve. Then, I'd probably color the iris red instead of green to really compliment the black and dark concept. Just an opinion. Your control on the exposure and texture is really great!

Jiro, I did think about changing the iris to red. You are correct red and black compliment each other far better. In the end I thought that being contrary would add more impact. I think I will try red though.

Steve, this is a scary photo. Too dark for me! I think the first one is better because, in the second one, the rust color is distracting. The straight black, in the first photo, makes it more powerful. Creative!

Yes it is on the dark side. I needed this composite to have a voyeuristic feel to it. I think it stemmed from watching last weeks Criminal Minds on TV and hearing so much on the news about a recent murder here in the UK. I have to hide behind the sofa with things like this but it stuck me that you never know when there is a darkness looking into our lives. It was disturbing enough thought to materialise as an image and I knew exactly where to find the components for that image. The fact that they comprised the familiar adds even more discomfort to the end result.

So in trying to always think outside the square, have you in fact reached a point where this is now predictable?*

That is a very good question Colin. I don't think I can answer that myself but I can see why it may be happening. I suppose I have to ask myself if the work is predictable or the fact that I have executed it is predictable. I know that trying to think different has a predictability in its own way because I have had a period of bland thought and in consciously hunting for the unusual I have asked myself if I have gotten into the rut of being dismissive of anything that does not edge on the bizarre. I started off in photography looking for the unexpected in the mundane and I still like that ethos. I guess I will have to bounce between the two and shock you with a fluffy animal or two

1. I'd try to burn the brightest part of the the upper left just to tone it down a bit.
2. I'd like to see the eye really white with the traces of red removed.

Yep. You are absolutely right. It always pays to run these things past the folk from beyond the Grey Havens. You see the truth with a clarity that we Numenoreans view only through the misty veil of ages...hey that could be why your art is so vibrant. Seriously though, I will act on your suggestions.

opinions about size of derrières in jeans

Ah but there can only be one answer to that question. As long as they are filled to maximum effect size is an irrelevance

I can do that with Wendy's (ScoutR) shots, and also ChrisC, and (hate to say this) but yours, Colin. All I need to do now is to be able to recognize my own shots, instead of being reduced to the embarrassment of saying "What t***** did that?"

Amongst others I would certainly add your good self, Antonio, Raylee and the Tartan Tippler to that list but for me there is absolutely no mistaking Fernando's work. I think its is a good thing that the photographer's identity is discernable through his or her work. It gives the image a personality.

I prefer #1, Steve. It has more impact, but I'd try to reduces slightly the highlights in the top-left of the jacket. I think my attention should go straight to the eye, but that bit of the jacket is very bright

I will give that a bash tomorrow. Just taken a motion sickness tablet and the eyes are starting to droop somewhat.

I don't like the grey skin tone around the eye in # 2 nor the rust colour on the jacket. I don't mind the highlights on the jacket in #1 I think the brighter skin tones of the eye and the jacket highlights kind of balance each other out.

Thanks Wendy. Looking at that eye brow area again it does look very rough and unnatural. It is always well worth asking you guys to look over things. I get a little snow blinded after hlf an hour on GIMP

[ScoutR]

That is a very good question Colin. I don't think I can answer that myself but I can see why it may be happening. I suppose I have to ask myself if the work is predictable or the fact that I have executed it is predictable. I know that trying to think different has a predictability in its own way because I have had a period of bland thought and in consciously hunting for the unusual I have asked myself if I have gotten into the rut of being dismissive of anything that does not edge on the bizarre. I started off in photography looking for the unexpected in the mundane and I still like that ethos. I guess I will have to bounce between the two and shock you with a fluffy animal or two

hmmm, well if your shots became highly sought after and you kept shooting in the same style even if you were tired of it then I guess you would be guilty of commercialization, however if you (or anyone else) is shooting what they love to shoot and feel inspired to shoot, do you (they) have to quit doing that just because the public loves it or be guilty of selling out????

It's kind of the same as an Indie band that becomes popular, and then gets accused of selling out when they become rich and famous.... Do you have to remain poor and unknown in order to remain true to yourself????

Sorry, I'm probably way off the mark, just thinking out loud, I will go back to sleep now.

Wendy

[Klickit]

Steve, I'd go first eye, second jacket. That second jacket - I see teeth where the zip runs down on the left, which adds an extra edgy dynamic to the idea/s that the image brings.

As far being able to know who's image is whose, that's not such a bad thing. If you pick up the phone, you generally know who is speaking, don'tcha. Photos, snaps, images, call them what you will, but they tell others and ourselves more than we sometimes realise. I think that is why that Freeman Patterson quote jumped out at me when I read it.

[Donald]

Dear Mr M Cabinet

Like most of those above, I prefer Steve's first version. However, I do note the comments of our two antipodean colleagues who are obviously liberal democrats:-

I like the first eye with the second jacket - i do believe that is called 'hedging'...

Steve, I'd go first eye, second jacket.

On the question of being able to 'identify' a person's work, I don't think we should confuse a 'mark', a 'style', a 'type' with the question that started off the discussion about whether work is 'too commercial'. If I recollect, that discussion was about whether work was too 'cold' and 'impersonal' instead of 'emotional', rather than a discussion about work being identifiably from one person or another.

For example, having looked at them so much now, I think I could spot a Michael Kenna at 100 paces. But everything he produces is, in my opinion, soaked in mood, atmosphere and emotion (sure, his commercial work is, well, commercial work. Albeit very, very good commercial work). So, I think we're maybe not comparing apples with apples.

[Skitalez]

O! Impresses! Alice Cooper would estimate it. I too.
And I agree with the others - the first shot is better. Nothing distracts from the idea, is not present unnecessary colors

[Wirefox]

hmmm, well if your shots became highly sought after and you kept shooting in the same style even if you were tired of it then I guess you would be guilty of commercialization, however if you (or anyone else) is shooting what they love to shoot and feel inspired to shoot, do you (they) have to quit doing that just because the public loves it or be guilty of selling out????

It's kind of the same as an Indie band that becomes popular, and then gets accused of selling out when they become rich and famous.... Do you have to remain poor and unknown in order to remain true to yourself????

Sorry, I'm probably way off the mark, just thinking out loud, I will go back to sleep now.

No, you are spot on Wendy. Well said.

Looks like it is the first shot then. I agree now some time has lapsed since my last viewing. It does need some tidying up though. Thank you again for all your comments. Very much appreciated

[wilgk]

except for the Scotsman - liberal democrats indeed! - I thought I told you my opinion on the trendy lefty, land rights for gay whales, birkenstock shod, hirsute underarm lot

but I'm still barracking for Andy Murray tonight...his Mother looks a bit scary though...

[Wirefox]

his Mother looks a bit scary though

That speaks volumes about a man