Take this image, for example (screenshot with surrounding text):

Screenshot of Pictory blog

This came from one of Pictory’s recent blog posts (here, specifically). On its own, the image doesn’t mean much to me. An older lady spending some time with a hobby, perhaps. Some focused light and nice, deep shadows. But with the text, it turns into a human story, and gives a new meaning: in this case, it screams of loneliness and abandonment.

It’s quite a sad image. Yet there is an uplifting message, that you make your own happiness.

This would be lost without the text.

In your situation, would you have done anything different?

Shoot, I can do this. I’ll embed it here:

“Women in Art,” they call it, but it’s 500 years of iconic images of women, set to music & morphing from one to another. So really, it’s Women in Art, over time. It’s pretty neat, too – I’ve watched it several times now, each time focusing on something different.

The first time, I watched the eyes.  Always open, mostly gazing back at me.  They’re clear, a little too large, almost symmetrical. Beautiful, lovely, and exactly what they tell us to do when making portraits.

The second watch through, I watched the lips.  Small – almost too narrow to be natural, but delicate and lovely.  Over time they seem to shift from thick, to thin, then back to fuller proportions.  While narrower, there’s always an implied lushness of some sort in them.  What we do with lipstick nowadays, I suppose.

In later watching, I tried to absorb the entire faces.  It struck me that there’s always the smoothness, often a bit of a blush – again, what we do with makeup – but they’re also high-key.  Watch again: you’ll notice that features are washed out. Similar to a Hollywood glamor shot from the earlier 20th century.

While obvious up front, I noticed that the older images seemed to be more… well, honoring the beauty of the female.  As we get closer to the modern age, you’ll see more abstracts images, and more… creative interpretations.  While this is certainly a feature of our more modern age, I suspect that similar impressionistic work must have existed in days of old.  But it didn’t survive.

I suspect in 500 years, someone could make a similar montage, covering 1000 years.  And in doing so, much of what we see today would not be represented.

It make me wonder: what, of my own work (and the modern era) would really stand the test of time?

I’m a bit torn on the subject. I admit to not being a fan of online learning, and I expect “books” to be purchased. Electronic books? Garbage, to me. I want my cellulose interface.

This isn’t really a book, though – even though it’s described as one. It seems to be more like online non-interactive instruction. A subtle difference, to be sure.

Ultimately, I’m not sure why people even care. It should be easy enough to grab a one-year subscription & save copies of any content that you care about. Even though that may not be strictly legal, I doubt that anyone could possibly get a conviction so long as it’s used for personal use.  Shoot, a typical browser will cache the content.

So I’m torn, but I’m thinking I’ll go for it.  Ultimately, I’ll doubtlessly save copies of text that I find useful, and read what I can stand.  And maybe print off a bunch of pages so I can stand to read it in the first place.

At the very least, at least the money is going to the content creator, not the publisher.

Started in an attempt to see if I wanted to stay with MF film. Turned into a challenge to see how many OK shots I could drag out of the 3 rolls of 120 Delta 400 iso in my Rolleiflex 2.8F that’s had too little use since I bought it in 1980.

As a recent entrant into the world of the 60′s-something Rolleiflex, I’m pretty amazed.  I recently went through my first roll (on Tri-X), and ended up with only one keeper – and a personal one, at that (picture of my daughter). I have a long way to go, but at least I can enjoy some of this gent’s work.  Particular favorites:

• Barclays 3 Cash. Wow, I think this is the best in the set.
• Fresh Air. The look, the framing, the slightly off-kilter eyes that aren’t quite in sync.  Beautiful street portrait.
• Polar Explorer. There’s almost joy on the gent’s face.
• 28 June 1996 ~ 9. This is about as good as street photography gets.  Again with the off-kilter eyes, but this time in combination with the anti-Gaddafi sign. So much that could be read into it.

Contrast his work with:

Monopoly Die

Not the best, as I was testing a close-up lens attachment.  So very far to go…

An extra thanks to Mike (proprietor and general know-it-all of TOP) for pointing this one out.

I say this not as a plea to puchase something & make me some money, but rather as a warning (one that I think is mandated, but I could be wrong): treat all links on this site as possible referral links and, when in doubt, ask me. 

And if you do want to buy something from Amazon, why not make me a few pennies? Your charges will be the same, and it’ll ever-so-slightly offset the cost of hosting. 

Don’t want to make me some money? That’s cool – do it for The Online Photographer. He deserves it more than I do! 

OK, got all that?  Take a look at that pic again (and soon, it may go away!).

I’m not sure why, but this picture really speaks to me.  What does it say to you?

Summarizing from that link:

Uzbek photographer Umida Akhmedova is awaiting trial and is facing a potential sentence of six months in prison or three years forced labor. At issue is a 2007 work called Men and Women from Dawn to Dusk that contains approximately 100 of her photographs of life and customs in Uzbekistan.

I missed this when it was initially important, but fortunately Mike Johnston at The Online Photographer won’t let me forget.  He posted a further link today, which has entertaining comments and a link to another 50 pictures from this lady.

Personally, I don’t see anything degrading.  I suppose if I were raised in Uzbek society, I might have a different perception.  But I wasn’t, and now I don’t think I’ll be going there any time soon.

I suppose they don’t want me there, either.

In particular, I note his update from 12/22/2009, where he highlights Joseph Holmes’ observation:

If you get close enough to start making out too much film grain, you naturally back off. If you move in and see sharpening artifacts, you feel like something has gone horribly wrong.

Go read the whole post.  I’m still pondering it, but I think it’s great for perspective.

I recently stumbled across Nadya Gorodetskaya’s work (NSFW). I can only describe it as fascinating – an inside look at life in Russia, from a perspective that few outside of there can see.

Having been there at one point, I see the character of what I loved in Russia – the warmth, the social aspect, the unity of family and life-long friends. I particularly like her bathhouse photos (all links NSFW). There’s an old-world feel to them, with an intimate and yet jovial feeling.

Her flickr photostream is also worth a good look.

• Yousef Karsh on Audrey Hepburn

There are several things about this photo.  First, it is much, much better in print.  It’s larger, there are better details, and it’s much more impressive. I believe that this is true of all of Karsh’s work.  See it in print, or you lose much of the intent.

Now, the subject is Audrey Hepburn.  Ms Hepburn is, of course, one of the most beautiful creatures to have lived on this planet.  But she was much more than that, even in 1956.  Go ahead, read the Wikipedia article on her.  It’s worth it.  When Karsh was doing her portrait, he captured a great deal of the suffering and sadness that went with her.  He also captured her elegance and her subtle strength.

This image is on the back cover of Regarding Heroes.  Again, highly recommended.