|
I really want to play, but I cannot find the drat photo I want to talk about. Somebody help me! It's a publicity photo for The Sopranos: It is a full length portrait of 3 people: Paulie, Silvio and Chris(?). They are wearing dark trenchcoats and are standing in a butchers/meat packers. There's a pig carcass hanging up behind them I suspect it is a Leibovitz, but my google skills are waek and I cannot find it.
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2009 16:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 06:54 |
|
|
Mannequin posted:Hmmm, I thought initially you were talking about a Leibovitz shot as well, but I was thinking of something else. The photo you're talking about seems impossible to find now, and I really want to see it! Doesn't sound like a Leibovitz shot or I think it would have turned up by now. I've sort of found it.... It's in the 'The Sopranos' companion book - which is not a bad book, but I'm not enough of a fan to pay the price for it: http://www.amazon.com/Sopranos-Book-HBO/dp/1933821876/ref=cm_cmu_pg__header There's a really lovely photo-of-a-photo, which I am almost hesitant to post cause the photo really loses its impact:  If you can find the original, then you'll see why I like it - the lighting is really good and there is a real atmosphere to the situation and characters. The crap copy loses all of this. I'll explain more if I can find a decent version... The Sopranos photos always give me strong mixed emotions:  (is this Leibovitz?) I like the way that the characters are independant from each other and separate entities - in some cases, not even focussed on the same subject. That's kind of rare in an ensemble image. Usually, everyone is in the same plane, looking at the same thing and usually physically touching each other. In this case, all the characters are separate and you get quite a cold emotion from the, On the other hand, I really dislike the fact that all these shots are obviously cut and paste composition jobs - which does grate quite badly.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2009 09:13
|
|
|
KingColliwog posted:I really like this desaturated, over-sharpened look. Seeing stuff like this has made me rethink my policy of trying to make my stuff as bright and colour-saturated as possible.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 07:23
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Harsh dude, harsh. But yeah., looking back, I explained myself dumbly - what I should have said that usually I keep things as they come out of camera and if I do tweak the colour saturation, it's usually up by a little to make things look light and bright when it is stuff like flowers and greenery Stuff like architectural work will get desaturated a little. I've never considered drastically desaturating people, though. I think I will give it a try in the future.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2009 04:53
|
|
|
Bread Zeppelin posted:A parallel to work being considered good on the merits of the photographer's name is pictures of famous people considered good just because of the subject. Every year in the Communication Arts photography annual there are at least 3-4 snapshots of celebrities. If the subject was anyone else it wouldn't even get good comments on flickr. Other than judges' response of "Oooh celebrities!" can anyone explain why this is? Get out of my head, you.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2009 14:32
|
|
|
plaguedoctor posted:He says he did all that in-camera, but... gently caress. How? The only thing I can think of is a shitload of lighting so that he could get the sky like that. I am guessing expose for the sky, then a big light rig set up high to expose the foreground. Kind of ironic to do all that and have it end up looking like a photoshop HDR hack-job
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2009 15:23
|
|
|
notlodar posted:Or he used film? plaguedoctor posted:Yeah. That photo is at least 27 years old. I am not surprised that he used film, but I don't think that is significant: that photo's main characteristics suggest to me a big lighting rig.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2009 06:42
|
|
|
Frinkahedron posted:I've always liked Annie Leibovitz's portraits of the Bush administration that she did for Vanity Fair's Is that first one a composite? I am not sure if I like something photoshopped together when it is to do with a news article. It doesn't feel like it has any integrity. On the other hand, I really do like the individual portraits.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2009 14:37
|
|
|
brad industry posted:I really like this one, but then I am a sucker for clean lines. They have their own elegant beauty and the subdued colours add to it Regression posted:I promised some content in return. I might have the following from the art thread, which I haven't read in a while: I don't like this one. The loungers clutter up the image and your eye fluctuates between two different points of interest (them and the girl) If the photographer was aiming to capture an emotion, he should have just included the girl and the pool, so we concentrated on her and thus were more likely to empathise with her. It's too messy to convey anything
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2010 04:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 06:54 |
|
|
brad industry posted:Do you really think this photo is about the girl? Or an emotion? She's slap bang in the middle of the frame and the only object that is in focus. So, yes, I think she is the key subject here. If his intent is elsewhere, then to me, it simply looks like a poorly composed and misfocussed shot.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2010 06:10
|
|