[ Post New Message | Post Reply to this One | Send Private Email to Mike Dixon | Help ]

Response to something murky

from Mike Dixon (burmashave@compuserve.com)
Struan: Thank you for a very useful critique. Your first was funnier, but this one is much more informative. You seem to object to a sense of "art for art's sake" in the first one, and I recognize what you mean. One objective of the photo was to abstract her face down to the minimal features needed to convey a mood. Definitely an arty thing to do. I may try another print with greater facial detail (it's on the negative--it wasn't far underexposed) just to see how a less dramatic but more factual version of the image works. It's a valid criticism, but I don't think it's a serious flaw. It's a bit different than what I usually do, but they're my photos and I'll do what I damn well please. ; )

Tom: Almost all of my b&w images on the web are scans from prints. I can usually muddle through and get the computer to almost do what I want it to, but in the darkroom I can usually nail what I want pretty quickly. The jagged border on 35mm and the smooth black border on 645 come from negative carriers that have been filed out. I don't have any kind of objection to digital imaging (I may even be getting a good inkjet in to next few months for color printing and experimenting with b&w); I'm just much more comfortable and efficient working in a wet darkroom.

(posted 8612 days ago)

[ Previous | Next ]