DSLRUsers.com

Hello,

I've been incredibly lacking inspiration recently. I haven't taken many shots at all, and any that I do take I quickly throw out.
SO I started looking around and have been kind of captivated by William Eggleston again.

SO here is my attempt at that style. Does it work whatsoever?




I'm sorely hoping that getting my new camera is going to respark my creativity, because it is sorely lacking!!

Cheers

Not your best I'm afraid Matt, but I'm sure once you have a D200 in your hands you'll feel the spark and tingle of creativity again. Nothing like the high of lust to get the creative juices flowing..

For me this shot has too much negative space, you left so much room uptop but crop the table setting, the lighting isn't anything to write home about either. Overal it just doesn't excite me.

it woudl work better if sam was looking the other way
into the void

or dramatise it more by shooting it wider
woudl be a bonus if there was a small element in the top left that
hints the reason why sam would be looking up

but i liek the space used

Yep,

Have to agree with you both. It's not a great shot by any stretch of the imagination.
Why did I take it?
I liked the utter lifelessness and blandness of it, if that makes sense. Awful wall colour, bad seat cushion cover, disinterested face on sam, standard crap condiments laid on the table, smear marks on the wall.
I purposely added space to the top to reflect the "nothing' of the scene.

Oh well, you lives and learns don't cha

Thanks for the honest feedback guys.

I think it would look better if she was looking in the other direction as well, but also if the pic was captured at a lower level, maybe horizontal to her rather than looking down at her.

i actually like the grey blue tones of the wall and suporting colours
subject matter is good too
if you can make a scene like this work then more credit to you

I like this. The emptiness of the top half, the bored stare that leads out the image and the dull colours work really well for me. So, this was taken at Tetsuya's, was it?

The only thing I find slightly distracting is the perspective that makes the salt and pepper shakers look too big and important.

Cheers
Steffen.

Matt,

I don't think it's an inherently bad image at all, and I thought it might look better as a contrasty B&W without the condiments.

Something like this (If you want me to take it down, say so):



Cheers

Wow Macka! I like what you've done with the shot.

Matt - after reading you explanation of what you were going for, the shot definite meets you design, it's just a design that doesn't work for me very well. I prefer a bit more dramatic impact, like your self portraits, they excite me, where this brings me down (as you said with the lifeless, blandness, emptiness).

Like it Macka.

I tried a B&W and while it looks great it wasn't the style I was after.
The muted colours were kind of part of the focus. I don't mind yours at all though.

Craig, you raise an interesting point here....because of my description, after your comments, of what I was trying to achieve you can see more merit in it perhaps?
To describe or not describe the artists intention, that is the question. Would like to hear comment on that....is the description of what an artist was trying to achieve during creation a help in understanding, or maybe a hinderance in that it biases the viewer by not letting them make up their own mind?

Or, as I suspect, have I been at work too long today after watching England his morning?

Well I'd happily state that on a semi-regular basis there are shots that at first I don't get, but after finding out more about the artists intentions I can put myself in there shoes and gain a better understanding of their aim and there for judge the result accordingly.

I guess if the shot was really excellent, no explaination would be required, but sometimes I'm too slow or the message isn't clear enough (or a bit of both).

I think part of my problem is I am usually comparing someones work to there previous submissions, (definitely in your case Matt), so if something doesn't have the zing or impact to it that I'd exspect I can either.. assume you missed the plot, or assume that you had a different goal behind the shot. (In this case I did the first).

On the other hand, if the artist had to explain their intention then:

1. Every piece of artwork you saw would contain a whole heap to writing to it
2. Wouldn't give an opportunity for the viewer to express their own opinion and perspective of the pic/artwork

I've been to a few exhibitions where the artists had their descriptions of what they were trying to create with the artwork and personally I felt that the descriptions were full of jargon and in some cases, utter non-sensical crap (much like what I'm saying here )

Personally I'd prefer to appreciate the pic or art piece for what it is, without knowing the artist's intention. If I find out later, that's alright but I wouldn't need to know to critique or have an opinion of the piece.

Don't get me wrong, I'm by no means saying that after my description here you should all see merit in this shot....it is still a very ordinary shot, even after the words.

I agree Caig, I've seen art that I've looked at and shrugged, only to be given information abot the intent of the piece and I've re-looked, and thought about it some more.
Other times the artist is trying to polish a turd

rokkstar wrote:Other times the artist is trying to polish a turd

The harder you polish the more you smell like shit.

Hey Matt,
I like the style and treatment, but as others have stated it isn't quite there.
Just consider it a test shot.
Every time I shoot a new location I consider it a test shoot, knowing that if I ever return I will know the area and hopefully get better results...!!
Some sort of psychology in my reasoning...!!!
Marty

rokkstar wrote:Like it Macka.
I tried a B&W and while it looks great it wasn't the style I was after.
The muted colours were kind of part of the focus. I don't mind yours at all though.

Well, glad you (and Craig) liked it, even if it's not really what you were going for. Just throwing an idea out anyway...

Matt.
Mostly your picture works....beautiful space. nice muted tones and colours, a model that fits the image. Where it slightly lets you down is in the composition because your model is looking out of the picture space and when we follow her gaze to see what she is looking at we are 'walked' out of the image. The purpose of composition is to prevent the eye from leaving the image space. Anything that does this is a good thing. For instance....if she were gazing down and slightly right....we would look down. And if the knife and fork were the other way around they would lead the eye back into the suger bowl thing which could lead the eye back to her face etc. The lines in this kind of image should be loosely triangular or circular. These are the classical portrait compositions. Get 2 sheets of A4 paper and draw a triangle on one and a circle on the other. Sey up your portraits so that objects and lines follow these shapes and see the difference. Hope this makes sense.

Matt. K wrote:Matt.
Mostly your picture works....beautiful space. nice muted tones and colours, a model that fits the image. Where it slightly lets you down is in the composition because your model is looking out of the picture space and when we follow her gaze to see what she is looking at we are 'walked' out of the image. The purpose of composition is to prevent the eye from leaving the image space. Anything that does this is a good thing. For instance....if she were gazing down and slightly right....we would look down. And if the knife and fork were the other way around they would lead the eye back into the suger bowl thing which could lead the eye back to her face etc. The lines in this kind of image should be loosely triangular or circular. These are the classical portrait compositions. Get 2 sheets of A4 paper and draw a triangle on one and a circle on the other. Sey up your portraits so that objects and lines follow these shapes and see the difference. Hope this makes sense.

Excellent advice, thank you Matt, appreicate the time mate.