just looking for some contructive criticism

I can't make out any detail in the blacks so I'm assuming that there isn't any. With that said I would just crop it a little harder. I'm a sucker for hard edged crops. Specifically here on the right side by the nose.

Matthew...
By "crop harder", do you mean to crop "tighter", or "closer"??
If that was done "on the right, by the nose", as you suggest, the guy wouldn't have any room to breathe, for God's sake...
The image might be cropped a bit tighter at LEFT, and/or TOP, but I like it just the way it is. The large, deep, "negative space" is meaningful, making the facial features more dramatic.
-Mark Tulk,
Lansing, Michigan, USA

quote:

Originally posted by Mark Tulk:
[qb] Matthew...
By "crop harder", do you mean to crop "tighter", or "closer"??
If that was done "on the right, by the nose", as you suggest, the guy wouldn't have any room to breathe, for God's sake...
The image might be cropped a bit tighter at LEFT, and/or TOP, but I like it just the way it is. The large, deep, "negative space" is meaningful, making the facial features more dramatic.
-Mark Tulk,
Lansing, Michigan, USA [/qb]

Both, tighter and closer are the same things. I disagree with the stock negative space and needing to breath issue. Perhaps if the shot were in a book you would want it on the left page with breathing room but as a single imagine its much more interesting and dramatic cropped harder. The blackness is already claustraphobic enough, I say bring it home by loosing some breathing room.

I know I use my crops to input an extra emotion.

Just my two cents.

I think that cropping it a tiny tiny bit might look better, but I'd haver to see both versions and compare the two. My only critique on this photo is that I really would like to see a bit more of the face. I love the lighting and the idea, but I think it would look more catching if the definition of the cheek bone could be seen and if there was just a bit more of the face lit up.

Isn't subjectiveness wonderful?!

I don't think you understood what Mark was asking there Matthew. He was asking what you meant by "harder" and just gave you two similar, but more standard choices to choose from. I think "crop harder" means that you hold the mouse button down really hard when you drag across the image. :-)

Also, in my opinion, this image would only "breathe" easier on a two page spread if the right facing page were also black. If it were on a white page then the edge of the image would in essence be a wall.

I like the negative space too, but the only reason that I wouldn't crop some off the top were if you could see more detail in the spikes of the hair. I think that's an important part of the personality of the subject, yet you can't see it very well.

Back to my cave.

quote:

Originally posted by Brooks Ayola:
[qb] Isn't subjectiveness wonderful?!

I don't think you understood what Mark was asking there Matthew. He was asking what you meant by "harder" and just gave you two similar, but more standard choices to choose from. I think "crop harder" means that you hold the mouse button down really hard when you drag across the image. :-)[/qb]

I understood what he asked and answered. After all it was my words he was quoting so obviously I should be expected to understand that which I explain. Harder and tighter are the same to me. I suppose I see things in a more three dimensional way.

[qb]

quote:

Also, in my opinion, this image would only "breathe" easier on a two page spread if the right facing page were also black. If it were on a white page then the edge of the image would in essence be a wall.[/qb]

Indeed. I also suggested the two page spread idea. However as the single image, that it is, I stand by my crop. Its much more interesting to me personally.

Woh there kid! You seem to be a little defensive.

I interpreted his 'tighter or closer'? comment as him using two words that mean the same thing (but are both more common words used to describe a crop) and you obviously interpreted it as an either/or thing, otherwise you would never have said they mean the same thing. I'm just saying that I didn't think he was asking you if when you said 'harder' did you mean either tighter or closer. Does that make any sense?

I also read your spread comment and was only adding that the spread would need to be black for it to 'breath' more, in my opinion. The color of the facing page was NOT mentioned in your scenario and I think it's a pretty important element don't you?

I'm also a little confused about your use of the word claustrophobic. You're telling us that's it's claustrophobic enough, but you would crop it tighter. That seems like a contradiction to me.

quote:

Originally posted by Brooks Ayola:
[qb] Woh there kid! You seem to be a little defensive.

I interpreted his 'tighter or closer'? comment as him using two words that mean the same thing (but are both more common words used to describe a crop) and you obviously interpreted it as an either/or thing, otherwise you would never have said they mean the same thing. I'm just saying that I didn't think he was asking you if when you said 'harder' did you mean either tighter or closer. Does that make any sense?

I also read your spread comment and was only adding that the spread would need to be black for it to 'breath' more, in my opinion. The color of the facing page was NOT mentioned in your scenario and I think it's a pretty important element don't you?

I'm also a little confused about your use of the word claustrophobic. You're telling us that's it's claustrophobic enough, but you would crop it tighter. That seems like a contradiction to me. [/qb]

Come on now Brooky, enough with the kid and defensive talk - theres no need.

Yes Brook. I like hard, I like tight, I like dark, I like close. I like those things, that's why I said "bring it home" by making it moreso claustrophobic. Its a positive, not a bad thing.

I say, have some fun and play with things.

The name's Brooks. Did I call you Matty? To a 40 something isn't someone just out of school a kid? I can't imagine how condescending you are to people much younger than you. Look, You misunderstood Mark's question and I was just trying to clear it up. I'll stay away from the student area.

quote:

Originally posted by Brooks Ayola:
[qb] The name's Brooks. Did I call you Matty? To a 40 something isn't someone just out of school a kid? I can't imagine how condescending you are to people much younger than you. Look, You misunderstood Mark's question and I was just trying to clear it up. I'll stay away from the student area. [/qb]

Simmer down love.

I agree with "Brooky". I like it as a two page spread with the black on the blank. but i like the subject on the right side...I tried it and grew the black from the pic to the left side of the "spread". His face all the way to the right with a large black space behind him works quite well. I think it would work well either way...different, but effective either way.

Usually or commonly, magazine "sprrrreads" have a lot of copy on them...as in the opening page of a story about rastamen in Vogue. GEt ready for that...I love when a good designer puts sensible copy in a sensible typeface all over my work...as long as i know its coming It is fun to design an image for copy all over it. It may be what I enjoy most about commercial work...I love getting an accurate acetate of where the copy wil be and working within those confines...especially on SSSSSPREADS!!!!

The only thing you have to do if you add black to the left side of the "sssssspread" is finish off the remainder of his shoulder in photoshop so it isn't chopped off, clone some flesh onto the pup. works pretty well.

I wouldn't crop any closer to the nose though...no way. It works better when you crop down from the top to the tip of the spikes...maybe even into the topmost spike...it draws the weight of the attention down into the most interesting parts of the image..the face and the shoulder etc and keeps the spikes. wow what a bonus

This image also works quite well as a square...simply balanced in a formal and traditional way...nothing wrong with that..sometimes you just have bite the bullet accept convention.

Mathew, I took a look at your work on your web page. looks ok if a bit contrived. You seem to have the dream of shooting "sssspreads" baby. (I like spreads, especially when my wife takes a bundt cake and ....censored)

A little advice to you in your endeavours. crop harder and tighter until you lose the sophomoric quality of the work that you are putting forth. Your book looks like it was done by a student in the sense that you have not pushed these ideas enough. Not a rip, just an observation..one that i endured when i was a landscape architecture student....they would say and sometimes yell...."Bushes!...more bushes kid!!!!...and lost the reefer plants along the driveway...not enough roundness to them and they make lawn jockey look like hes sad and out of rolling papers, very distracting!!!!!"


I strongly feel that you have seen some work somewhere out there that you like and are trying to emulate a style. Your lighting is ok if a bit restrained...use of color..take it further. wardrobe...work a bit more to get some reeallly good clothes...make up? straight out of the fifth element...if you want this sort of "reactionary take on the make-up convention"..take it a hell of a lot further than this..there are people already doing this sort of thing and if YOu do it...you got to do it better of different or as good...dont rely on the make up artist...tell her what you want, its your shot..tableau..etc.

DOnt be scared to grab...but make sure you make it your own and push it hard. I think you really want to get nasty with this stuff and are holding back a bit.

Helmut Newton was able to say so much about some very taboo **** in the most subtle/not subtle way. He was brill at it because he pushed it in terms of make-up, location, casting, color, wardrobe, styling, point of view, juxtaposition, he never had to actually say..."red represents....."

The choices he made with regard to all those above mentioned elements conspired to result in top notch inuendo and suggested debauchery and lots of other societal/sexual tension...plus some very modern concepts about who women are and who men are...plus the clothes of course...thats what it comes down to though...it's all about the clothes kid.

I hope i didnt get out of line...i wandered over to your page and took a browse...i dont have a page or any spreeeads...i have a stack of withered prints with unidentified stains that I bring into the AD's office. Then, i pretend to trip on something and they fly all over his desk and floor...works good though, I always get hired after I load the gun in front of them.

quote:

Originally posted by ohgimmesomebeer:
[qb] *snip*[/qb]

Mister Beer.

The two page spread idea was mine.

My work? Of course it is contrived, what isn't. Everything has been meticulously planned and thought out at nauseum to happen exactly as wanted. I am a control freak and at this point wish to leave nothing at chance. From the strung out planning and organzing of a half dozen bodies and elements, to the thousands in clothes, to the actual afterthought click of the shutter. Its all planned.

I wasn't aware this was going to turn into a, "You don't know any better because you post in the student section type deal" but getting back to the original topic.

You contradict yourself Mister Beer and thats fine. However I do find it odd that you critizise my already harsh crops saying to do it moreso and then want to crop the subject at hand here in such a way that has no direction or feeling felt crop at all. Seems counter productive and unrefinded to me. :shrug: I know what I want, but I wonder if you and Brooks do? That's where I'm at a loss. Do you know what a hard crop is?

The fact stands. I gave my opinion and stand by it because its what looks fresh and good to me. I wouldn't have it any other way, and why would I?

If you are going to criticise say something of worth besides throwing words like, "kid", "sophmoric". I am far past the point of a student and know exactly what I am doing and exactly what I want. I don't appreciate the talking down to. There's no reason for it, so cut it out.

Lets get back on topic and have a discussion and try to understand what each other are saying instead of instantly yelling, "you're wrong".

Be productive now. Instead of talking down lets the both of you have an intelligent discussion. I'm willing.

indeed, the two page spread

contrived is apparent and affected. Of course when you get down to it, everything might be contrived. It is when you are aware of it that it becomes an issue, it becomes an almost affectation. Planning is a different thing.

Dont mind my asserbic ways. I have been spoken to in much more condescending terms, or, at least in my my mind they were condescending, perhaps not.

This is not a tit for tat...you once said that the horizon in the center is boring and implied that it should never be there. I have thought about that for a long time and decided that I would like to interact with you on related compositional issues...so what?

Yes Im a bad boy, a very bad boy....lighten up and see that I also am constructive, as hell. I wont mince words...your words ,at times, contain the seed of the condescending as well...deal.

Sometimes, meticulous plans need to be dumped in recognition of greater things. That is, perhaps, the most difficult thing to do in any discipline.

Sorry, my work is not on the internet, your work is here and promoted. You have shown it, requested crits. It has been presented.

The Discussion of art does not require that artists be in the discussion. Some may take issue with this and believe that only artists may proceed with this dangerous thang.

Qualifying statement: I qualify

Can a moderator please lock this thread. I think everything constructive has been discussed, over a month ago and now its become something it shouldn't.


I know cannot contain myself to keep from responding because its turned into a me vs. you battle instead of something valuable. Thanks.