Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Artists and scientists  (Read 3595 times)
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8887


« Reply #20 on: December 28, 2013, 06:04:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Nope, you're the one missing the piont, Ray: the point being, why on Earth would anyone photograph such an unattractive pair?

That's not a point, Rob. That's a question. I took the shot because I found the pair of young ladies interestingly dressed and representative of a class of young chicks who are striving to be 'cool'. They stood out (or sat out  Grin ) against the surrounding, milling crowd of conventionally and rather boringly dressed people.

Quote
Those hideous pop socks would have been enough to put me off for life. Their purpose, however ugly they may be per se, is to be worn under trousers and eliminate the need for tights, whilst allowing the while the more comfortable wearing of shoes..

Oh! You've got rules for wearing clothes, have you? As a person who claims to have an artistic streak, you should know that it's sometimes okay to break the rules.  Wink

I don't mind if you think the photo is hideous, but surely you can see the logic to the argument that it must be you who are missing the point, the point being that which causes me to find the shot interesting.

I also find a bit of humour in the image, thanks to the high resolution of the D800E. On the one hand we have the symbolism of the message on the tattoo, which is well-described as follows.

"Going "down the rabbit hole" has become a common metaphor in popular culture, symbolizing everything from exploring a new world to taking drugs to delving into something unknown. (Think The Matrix, for example, where "following the white rabbit" and later choosing the "red pill" starts Neo off on a journey of philosophical realization from which he cannot return.)

In Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, the rabbit hole is the place where it all begins. It's Alice's unthinking decision to follow the White Rabbit that leads to all of her adventures. The pop culture version of this symbol perhaps doesn't take into account the "unthinking" nature of this choice quite enough. After all, Alice's decision is pretty foolhardy; if this weren't a magical fantasyland, she'd probably be killed by the fall, and she has no idea where she's going, what she's facing, or how to get home. You may also notice that going down the rabbit hole is a one-way trip Ė the entry, but not the exit, to the fantasy world."


And on the other hand we have the rather contradictory and alarming message of pictures of gaping mouths with fangs on the lady's miniskirt.   Grin

Have you got the point now, Rob.  Wink
Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #21 on: December 28, 2013, 06:49:47 AM »
ReplyReply

I find myself in agreement with many of Robís observations here on LuLa, but really, when it comes to matters sartorial should I trust a man who sports a pigtail and wears a bandana?

;-) 
Logged

Alan Klein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 751



WWW
« Reply #22 on: December 28, 2013, 08:22:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The scene was sufficiently interesting for me to take the shot regardless of whether the guy at the back is leering, (and from his position there was probably no reason to leer), and regardless of the fact I couldn't read the tattoo or the brochure that the other girl had in her hand.

I'll be kinder than Rob and say that the girls, while not my type, are someone's type so they make an interesting pair.  However, the boy at the top is looking out beyond the girls and beyond the frame of the picture.  Why is he there?  He adds no interest to the picture.  He has no relation to the girls.  Where you zoomed in on the girls, well that wouldn't work either.  The boy's shoes are in the background messing up the view of the girls.   There has to be some relationship between the players. http://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/5344384185/


The point is that resolution to find tatoos or whatever is no substitute for content.  You can't be hopeful that it will be somehow hidden in the millions of pixels any more than a film photographer hopes to find content in grains.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #23 on: December 28, 2013, 09:54:15 AM »
ReplyReply

"That's not a point, Rob. That's a question.

Ray, that's artful dodging on your part.

"Oh! You've got rules for wearing clothes, have you? As a person who claims to have an artistic streak, you should know that it's sometimes okay to break the rules."

Not rules, Ray: raisons d'Ítre for pop socks and many items of apparel. If one is to break rules, it's incumbent upon one to know why the rules exist and what they happen to be. The same is often said of photography, and in that context make similar sense. These two unfortunates are babes in the woods.

I've sometimes thought that Alice would have been a better invention had she come from the mind of Warhol instead.

;-)

Rob C
Logged

Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8887


« Reply #24 on: December 28, 2013, 10:07:49 AM »
ReplyReply

However, the boy at the top is looking out beyond the girls and beyond the frame of the picture.  Why is he there?  He adds no interest to the picture.  He has no relation to the girls.  Where you zoomed in on the girls, well that wouldn't work either.  The boy's shoes are in the background messing up the view of the girls.   There has to be some relationship between the players.


Of course there's a relationship. Isn't it obvious that all three people are waiting for something or somebody.

The picture doesn't tell one precisely what they are waiting for, but all three people are definitely engaged in the same activity of waiting, and all three are preoccupied with something different, as is often the case in any street scene.  The young man seems a bit disturbed, pursing his lips whilst staring along the direction of the rail. The girl with the black hair is on the phone to somebody, "Where the heck are you? I've been sitting on these hard stone steps for ages", and the other girl appears to be a bit worried about her smoking habit.

However, I agree that the guy's blue shoes are not ideally positioned. Nothing's perfect, but he is a bit out of focus, which is more apparent on the full size image. I would change the color of the shoes before making a print, or if making a crop of just the two girls, remove the shoe and replace with the background of the step.

Quote
The point is that resolution to find tatoos or whatever is no substitute for content.  You can't be hopeful that it will be somehow hidden in the millions of pixels any more than a film photographer hopes to find content in grains.

All photographic content is defined by resolution. No resolution... no content. All content in film consists of grain.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2013, 05:23:28 PM by Ray » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #25 on: December 28, 2013, 10:13:31 AM »
ReplyReply

I find myself in agreement with many of Robís observations here on LuLa, but really, when it comes to matters sartorial should I trust a man who sports a pigtail and wears a bandana?

;-) 



Trust him with your soul - well your Leicas, preferably - Keith; the two realities have sound reasons for being. In the case of the ever-thinning nag's appendage, it exists because my wife used to cut my hair as and when she though it required it, and I returned the compliment - we both abandoned hairdressers in '64 or so and I saw no reason to take up the slavery when she was no more; the bandana remains - usually - reasonably well-attached to the head in mild winds where the baseball hat vanishes, as recounted before. My very first one (bandana) got quite a good airing on our old friends' boats, where I like to believe I lent the entire enterprise a distinctively fetching piratical air...

But be assured: the tail doesn't project through the opening in the rear of the baseball cap. Ever. It grows far too low to be able to take advantage of that particular rabbit hole. I think the younger Agassi did that hat's-hole-piercing trick rather well.

;-)

Rob C
Logged

niznai
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #26 on: January 01, 2014, 09:05:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Ha. I can tell youse guys are not smokers. That girl is not worried about her smoking at all. That thing in her hand is the tobacco pouch with the government mandated warnings printed on. Ha. 36 megapixels of resolution beaten by a guy with poor eyesight, no hair, few teeth left and a lot of bad habits.

Bernard, I don't think we're on the brink of a manufacturing revolution either. 3D printers may suggest that way, and their prices are indeed coming down a lot, but I think some materials will remain the realm of specialist shops to print in. Take for now titanium which is very expensive to print (in something the size and precision of a camera body for instance). Not to mention that forged materials have strength given by the very treatment they underwent and that can not be replicated by 3D printing nor do I see how it would ever be. It's like copiers and faxes. At first they were clumsy and expensive, and you had to walk down to the corner shop to get a copy of your birth certificate for 2 bucks or some such, now everybody owns a printer. Not a top end one though. And getting the most of a top end A0 printer requires knowledge most of us can't be arsed to assimilate.

Likewise CNC. Sure, you can get anything done these days (we are at the stage where the service is offered to the large public) but some things are more expensive than others. I have seen an engine block carved out of a block of forged aluminium, but how many of us would be able to afford the machine, or the price of doing it for that matter? Or how many would actually have the knowledge needed to program the machine to do it?

In the end, I see it like the story of the copier. In the future some of us will probably have a household grade 3D scanner-printer/CNC machine at home for menial duties like printing a door handle or machining a screw, but when necessary we'll email a CAD file to the shop doing the serious stuff for a fee. Difficult/specialist materials will remain the realm of expensive specialised services. Just think a specialist coating or some such. Your car will still be manufactured in China/Taiwan/etc, your camera likewise and parts for it will still have to be ordered from the manufacturer. Not too bad if it keeps prices down.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2014, 09:11:43 PM by niznai » Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8080



WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 01, 2014, 09:16:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I agree that few people will own at home the high end tools needed for some applications. But I believe that:
- the design software and electronic building blocks are a lot easier to access already,
- some fab labs will soon be easily accessible in urban centers that will cut down manufacturing prices dramatically.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8887


« Reply #28 on: January 01, 2014, 10:20:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Ha. I can tell youse guys are not smokers. That girl is not worried about her smoking at all. That thing in her hand is the tobacco pouch with the government mandated warnings printed on. Ha. 36 megapixels of resolution beaten by a guy with poor eyesight, no hair, few teeth left and a lot of bad habits.

Nonsense! In Australia we have 'plain' packaging mandated by law. There are no brochures inside or outside a packet of cigarettes.

It's also clear the girl has a 'roll your own' cigarette between her fingers. It might not even be tobacco.  Wink
Logged
niznai
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #29 on: January 02, 2014, 12:02:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, sir, we do.

And if you look closer the "brochure" is actually the rolling tobacco pouch with the exact same warnings/pictures we have here as well, which fits in with the rollie she's smoking.

I can post a picture of my pack of tobacco with the same picture if you want.

Bernard, yes, that's pretty much what I think too. But I am not sure we'll ever manage to get as close as you suggested when you said we'd actually become involved in the design of cameras (or other fine mechanical/electronic devices) even if at some point we'll have access to very good specialist services. 3D printing for instance a tooth implant or a dental bridge or bones or articulations is already here, but not for everybody. Precision machines cost a pretty penny, the material is very expensive and an hour's time of the engineers who use them is not cheap either.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2014, 12:15:00 AM by niznai » Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8887


« Reply #30 on: January 02, 2014, 04:19:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, sir, we do.

And if you look closer the "brochure" is actually the rolling tobacco pouch with the exact same warnings/pictures we have here as well, which fits in with the rollie she's smoking.

I can post a picture of my pack of tobacco with the same picture if you want.

I stand corrected. I'm not a smoker and I'm not familiar with rolling tobacco pouches. However, 36 mp of resolution is not sufficient for me to determine the origins of the brochure. Perhaps the girl is studying the brochure so intently in order to work out how to light the cigarette she's just rolled.  Wink
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #31 on: January 02, 2014, 11:09:47 AM »
ReplyReply

I stand corrected. I'm not a smoker and I'm not familiar with rolling tobacco pouches. However, 36 mp of resolution is not sufficient for me to determine the origins of the brochure. Perhaps the girl is studying the brochure so intently in order to work out how to light the cigarette she's just rolled.  Wink



Now you are discovering the real social significance of your image!

You've captured another commercial plot to hook the young on weeds. For my generation, it used to be Hollywood cool wot dunnit. Just like Robert Mitchum taught a generation to walk. He was cool; far more cool than Steve McQueen who, in celluloid reality, needed a Mustang and/or motorbike in order to get there. All Mitchum needed was a suit.

True stars of Silver Screen and Photoplay. Now we have pretty boys, weightlifters and plastic girls. Louella, Hedda and Walter would be turning in their graves! But boy, would they have had material to crush!

Rob C

P.S. I have just realised that I no longer watch tv programmes that are less than an hour in length. I may have stumbled upon another item of social significance almost as strong as Ray's: if the makers can't be bothered to persevere with the thing for an hour, why should I?
« Last Edit: January 02, 2014, 11:16:25 AM by Rob C » Logged

niznai
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #32 on: January 03, 2014, 04:17:37 AM »
ReplyReply



Now you are discovering the real social significance of your image!

You've captured another commercial plot to hook the young on weeds. For my generation, it used to be Hollywood cool wot dunnit. Just like Robert Mitchum taught a generation to walk. He was cool; far more cool than Steve McQueen who, in celluloid reality, needed a Mustang and/or motorbike in order to get there. All Mitchum needed was a suit.

True stars of Silver Screen and Photoplay. Now we have pretty boys, weightlifters and plastic girls. Louella, Hedda and Walter would be turning in their graves! But boy, would they have had material to crush!

Rob C

P.S. I have just realised that I no longer watch tv programmes that are less than an hour in length. I may have stumbled upon another item of social significance almost as strong as Ray's: if the makers can't be bothered to persevere with the thing for an hour, why should I?

What are you on about, Rob? There's no commercial on the cigarette packs/pouches. Just the govt regulated warnings.

PS. I was more partial to the Charlie Chaplin school of cool.
Logged
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1680


« Reply #33 on: January 03, 2014, 06:08:29 AM »
ReplyReply

I think that there are many scientific/rationalist minded people out there who admire and dabble with art.

I think that there are some subjectivist/intuition-driven people who take a very aggressive stand against the relevance of science and scientists.

(Perhaps) more specifically, there is a number of (educated) culture/arts/social science people who are very negative towards natural science. Either because it is "hard", because it is "emotion-less", because natural sciences have been highly "successful" in what it does compared to some humanity sciences, because (they believe that) it carries an inherent cynical view on man, society and religion, or something else.

I have an interest in both camps, and I think that life would be less interesting if I had to choose only one for both work and spare-time.

-h
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad