HOME | DD

Delacroix01 In reply to Delacroix01 [2009-07-26 00:27:49 +0000 UTC]

i meant "i just *don´t" understand why you are off-centered".

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

tonepainter In reply to Delacroix01 [2009-07-26 01:37:02 +0000 UTC]

Me likes off centered very much

For why great images are often oft centered, check out the following: Rule of thirds

Or even this: Golden Ratio (scroll down past the math to the bit on aesthetics)

Or it could just be (and most likely is) that this particular framing of the model and the landscape appealed to the photographer.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Delacroix01 In reply to tonepainter [2009-07-26 02:00:04 +0000 UTC]

No, i just saw his gallery.
98% of his works are off-centered on model, centered on landscape.

Besides my OCD screaming , what bother me about it is that, at last for painting, we use to off-center an human mainly on a mood despite/exclusion of the object.

The off-center could be to meld the model to the landscape, but i don´t think he is really too worried about it, as her hair apears fully. He could take the hair off instead of placing it on the darker area of the photo, for a less contrast meld.

Also, to off-center an human, not on an intention of exclusion, i think one need to rethink the entire image balance. Because, at least in my opinion, the proximity of her back to the sky(on the right side), the fact that the right side of the image is lighter, and that the model is off-centered to the right. All that make the photo rotate...(it is going to fall!)

I read your critique also, well i dont agree very much. But i guess it is just an incompactibility of mine with the photographer style(as almost all photos on his gallery are similar).

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

tonepainter In reply to Delacroix01 [2009-07-26 02:58:58 +0000 UTC]

Well, that's the wonderful thing about art... «chacun à son goût»

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Delacroix01 In reply to tonepainter [2009-07-26 03:47:02 +0000 UTC]

Sure

Not bother more about it =/ , but take a look at her featured deviation: [link]

Perfect off-centering. It is imediatelly countered by the cascade light. I think the entire balance is perfect. Focus the black space between body and water. It do not give me the "excluded/out" feeling i said about off-centering; btw
it is exactly the oposite, it is so good that i sense the model is very close to the cascade(while, actually they are far).

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

tonepainter In reply to Delacroix01 [2009-07-26 04:50:10 +0000 UTC]

I agree that the photo you linked to is wonderful; it's one of my favorites. The way the curve of her body pose matches the curve of the cascade really brings the picture alive for me.

I'm certainly no expert on photography... but I find myself frequently returning to =bellabrooke 's work because it is of such high quality and it evinces such an intensity of commitment to her art. Likewise, I find =dwingephotography 's work to have attained a quality surpassing most of what I've seen on DA. I'm just learning this stuff, and I'll think about your comments more.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Delacroix01 In reply to tonepainter [2009-07-26 07:46:33 +0000 UTC]

It is funny. I really agree with you about the very strange comparison you just made there!(model-photographer)

When i saw her "gallery", at first i was astounded by the model ( obviously =/).
But then i noticed something even more important. The entire "gallery" is consistent(400 photos!). Without compromising the plastic aspect of the model(she still changes a lot).

What is amazing(the consistency!!), considering the many different photographers.
Often i think her "gallery" is more coherent being shot by many photographers, than many photographer's galleries shooting diferent models/objects/etc.

That is why i think its interesting the way you just misslinked in your post the work of a model and the work of a photographer, as if it was the same kind of thing.
But somehow i agree with you...

Or, she really *really* know how to pick the people she work with,
Or, she is kind of changing the way ppl work toward her.

...Anyway the consistency is so amazing that i can see a gallery, instead of what was suposed to be a portfolio.
(Portfolios use to be so "frankeinstein-like", each piece from one side and so.)

( PS.: =/ this particular picture above is kind of an exception though... just my opinion >.< )

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

tonepainter In reply to Delacroix01 [2009-07-26 22:22:54 +0000 UTC]

I think what you're finding is that when a model has thoroughly mastered her craft, as =bellabrooke certainly has, then she is capable of making an artistic contribution every bit as much as a top photographer is. I suspect that's not the conventional way to view things, but if you think about it, which is the more complex machine to master: the camera, or the human body?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

dwingephotography In reply to Delacroix01 [2009-07-26 20:51:02 +0000 UTC]

Brooke is amazing, I am humbled by her talent.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0