Discussion in 'News - Discussion' started by CSBC, Jul 25, 2016.
I could just about live with the photo but the pretentious judge-justification was a smidgen OTT.
It is not a photograph that I would choose to own . If it was in a wast basket I would assume it was chucked out.
Most of my Chinon EE shots are as good/bad as that......
You decide which is applicable...
The kind of stuff we used to bin!
Makes you wanna give up!
No! Not now that I've just seen a competition-winning standard that I'm actually capable of achieving!
Actually, I quite like the photograph. However, what the heck is 'added authenticity'? And how does 'adding scratches' get it for you?
The sort of thing that film photographers used to take great care to avoid (dust, scratches, colour shifts from out-of-date film and so forth) are all the rage nowadays.
Late last year I met a young chap using a Nikon F2 at a re-enactment event and, out of a general interest in his work, have kept track of him through social media since then. He has a good eye for a picture, but he uses ancient film and processes it using bizarre concoctions of his own devising.
I often think "well, that would have been a great picture if it'd been on decent film and processed correctly" however his on-line circle of friends and followers rave about his work as it is.
He's happy and his followers are happy so who am I to criticise if he decides to process 1984 rolls of HP5 using a mixture of Rose's Lime Cordial, golden syrup and Camp Coffee? As long as he's enjoying himself where's the harm...
Perhaps it was selected to get more publicity, not that I'm cynical.
Maybe it was the only entry? I spent a few minutes on the site looking for the non-winners with no success.
Well quite. But 'added authenticity'? C'mon. They're havin' a larf.
I made a book in second year at art school - actually I made five. The idea was to make a book, with some kind of concept behind it, and then to make four more versions of the book with one thing changed in each to see how the change affected the reading of the images. I started out with a series of images shot on black and white film. I made a series of 'interventions' to the negatives, including shooting them with a digital camera, cutting them up into shapes and rearranging them, and then finally, scratching line drawings onto the emulsion and making prints from those. The point was to make the first run of prints truly a one-off because the unadulterated negatives were then destroyed...and to see waht I could do with the 'broken' negs. But 'added authenticity'? No.
Separate names with a comma.