1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

Pheasant Pen

Discussion in 'Appraisal Gallery' started by geoff_piltz, May 22, 2020.

  1. geoff_piltz

    geoff_piltz Well-Known Member

    Polite comments welcome.

    Pheasant Pen small.jpg
  2. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    Hmm, what to say that won't offend? It is an OK record of the thing, apart from fact I can't really see how mono is improving the creative result over colour, which would tell me more about it. If it is IR, it really only succeeds in looking like over exposed non-IR.

    If the interest is supposed to be in the shapes and textures, then sun overhead / behind it is not going to help. It flattens it all into an overall grey.
  3. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    I'm sorry but I can't really see the interest in it. As Mike says, it is a record of it, which maybe OK for memories sake, but for interest of another viewer, it doesn't really work. IMHO only of course, others may think differently.
  4. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I don’t get much sense of a pen, but I’ve only seen them in woods, not in the open. As a documentary shot I’d expect greater sharpness. I suppose from the greyscale of the greens it is IR but it doesn’t come across as deliberately so.

    Edit. to explain my last comment, it looks like overexposed mono.
  5. geoff_piltz

    geoff_piltz Well-Known Member

    Shot in colour at widest aperture, converted to greyscale and contrast increased.

    Is documentary the only purpose of photography? Can nobody see the picture in the picture?
  6. MickLL

    MickLL Well-Known Member

    If you mean can I see that it looks vaguely like a face then yes I can. If you want more of us to see that you need to do some work to emphasise it. IMHO photographers are a pretty unsubtle bunch and you need to hit them in/with the face before they see much !!!

  7. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    Is documentary the only purpose? No of course not. Most of us will make a record shot, for like I said, memories. A lot of our holiday photo's are just that. Is everybody else interested in them. Probably not. They weren't there. I would view a documentary shot as being different to a record shot though. What you have posted in my view is not documentary.It is a snapshot of what you saw and to be honest as a viewer, really not very interesting. To you who experienced it, it may be.

    If that photo is taken out of the ordinary record/snapshot type of image however, then the photo is more likely to be of interest to someone else. Perhaps because of the technique used, or more than likely because of the photographers seeing eye.

    Can I see the picture in the picture? No, not really. At a push, and because Mick mentioned it above, perhaps a face. But that really is pushing it for me.

    Edit to add.

    Being honest. All I see is a rather grey looking mono image of some plywood in a rural setting. I had no idea what it is. Granted, you have informed me, but that is it. It has not been made to look appealing to me as a viewer. Nothing in it makes me want to look further and to see what I can see. Many photo's that I like looking at, here or elsewhere, I keep coming back to. Many make me feel a "wow". I wish I had taken that etc.
    Last edited: May 23, 2020
    Craig20264, RovingMike and MJB like this.
  8. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    Sorry, I was crediting you with the "face" not being the purpose of the shot. Otherwise, as above.
  9. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

  10. Stephen Rundle

    Stephen Rundle Well-Known Member

  11. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    Not really, no.
  12. geoff_piltz

    geoff_piltz Well-Known Member

    Yes, I'm learning that. I assume that most of the people here cannot see anything in cubist art. I saw it straight away which is why I shot it. I particularly like the drooping "eyelid". And I shot from low down to get the backlight shining though to create the thin "mouth". I have already tried to emphasise the face with the foreground and background out of focus, the background highlights blown out and the image converted to grayscale to remove colour distraction. Any more emphasis really would be hitting people over the head with it. When I or my wife look at it we can't see anything but a face. Either we have too much imagination or, more likely, I have misjudged just how much visual imagination other people have. Perhaps I should have titled it "Cubist Art Installation" to give viewers a push in the intended direction.

  13. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    Er, struggling to see that as cubist (and I know a thing or two about art).

    Sometimes it helps to describe what you see/were aiming for when initially posting, as constructive feedback can then be given not just in general but more specifically on what you were trying to do.
    dream_police likes this.
  14. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I certainly don’t see a face, the step to cubist art isn’t one I could take with seven league boots.
  15. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    I wouldn't have called it cubist either. To give you the benefit of the doubt, I have googled cubist art/photographs /cubist art installation to see if anything remotely similar of the style you have presented was found. I didn't find anything. My search brought up what I thought as cubist.
    I agree with Zou. If you present a photo and want constructive comments rather than perhaps general comments on what we see, then perhaps tell us what the intention was.
  16. MJB

    MJB Well-Known Member

    I had to Google "cubist art" just in case what I thought was cubism, wasn't. I'm really not seeing a face.
  17. Craig20264

    Craig20264 Well-Known Member

    I can only get a face with some ridiculous processing.

  18. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    In fairness, having looked at this a few times, I sort of get what you mean about the picture in a picture. The whole piece of wood is a bit like a cubist picture in itself (at a push) dumped in that environment. There is insufficient definition in the "face" though to get that without being told. I think therefore the quality of the image on the whole lets you down and your meaning and intention are lost.
  19. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Not helping!

    I would suppose that the pheasants can enter and leave through the openings and behind the screen there is a fenced in area with food that acts as a roost safe from foxes and raptors.
  20. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    We have a single bewildered (and sometimes noisy) male pheasant that has lived amongst sheep in a nearby field for the last few weeks. Perhaps it has escaped from something like this, but still has PTSD from its incarceration therein - I would.

Share This Page