Howdy, y'all. I've been lurking here for awhile, and decided to post for the first time.

I'm curious what you think of this, what it makes you think about this young man.

(On a secondhand note, this photo proves that Ilford SFX does not do anything more interesting to skin tones than does a normal film with a deep red filter, but gives a lot more grain).

-- Michael Goode (mike@mikegoode.com), April 21, 2001

Answers

About the young man, this photograph makes me feel like he was simply asked to remove his shirt and stand still for a few moments while being photographed. The photograph has barely any impact on me. The subject is engaged in nothing; his expression is blank; the background is studio-esque and boring; his posture is impatient. If this was a fashion shot for perhaps the belt, then I'm not compelled to go out and buy the belt.

Digital: If this is a photograph to test film, nothing can be judged from viewing only this marginal quality scan. I'm not convinced that optics or film can be properly judged from a jpeg, anyway, unless there is something particularly extraordinary about one or both. From the artifacts, particularly on his arms, I believe the photograph is sharp, it's just the scan makes it look unsharp.

Composition: Pretty good!

Technically, I think the contrast is ever so slightly high to portray a person with so much skin showing.

Overall: The photograph almost completely fails for me. I'm not left wondering or asking or hanging or amazed or interested.

Respectfully submitted, however.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), April 22, 2001.

Oops. My last sentence didn't come out right. I'm interested in your work! Please know that! It's this actual photograph that has left me basically disinterested. Please don't take that wrong. One great thing about this photograph is that you posted it, which is a heck of a lot better than I've been doing lately. How about some more.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), April 22, 2001.

either he needs a feed or I've had one too many ;)

He looks relaxed.

-- Nigel Smith (nlandgl@unite.com.au), April 22, 2001.

Tony, thanks for the reply. As to the technical details of the film, you can't tell from the jpeg, but it is from a high quality scan, and anyway, I've printed the original neg--and the grain was noticable on an 8x10 from a 645 neg. That would not necessarily be bad, but the Ilford SFX doesn't do anything interesting for me with portraits besides giving high-contrast and big grain--the tonalities are really not that different from a normal b&w film (ilford delta) with the same (#29) filter.

Part of the purpose of this roll was to see how SFX did for portraits, but that was not the main purpose.

As to the aestheticism of the image, my thoughts are that the flat lighting doesn't do anything good for the image. I think maybe the two things I was going for in the image probably conflicted--the purpose of the shirt is to show his athleticism (this would be shown by other frames on the roll that I haven't scanned), but the pose, at least how I see it, and was trying for, emphasizes personality more than form.

Oh, and Ed is a medium distance runner, which explains his physique.

-- Michael Goode (mike@mikegoode.com), April 22, 2001.

if this ed is a runner, then maybe you should be looking at his butt and legs instead of his upper body :) I recommend biking shorts.

-ed (lame photographer and also a part-time triathlete)

-- ed (ekang@cse.nd.edu), April 23, 2001.