« Bill Jay's Vision | Main | OT: Teas, Please! »

Tuesday, 11 December 2012

Comments

This is one of the most consistently interesting sets I've EVER seen. Real good company around here.

These pictures make a 'monkey with a camera' out of me. I just don't seem to have a photographic eye. Oh well, back to contraption building.

[Don't be discouraged. Remember, you're still the best photographer of John Robison's life and the things that are important to John Robison...that's how I keep discouragement at bay, anyway. --Mike]

Wow! This is better than Flickr!

It was fun to play along. You posted about ten percent, by my math. I didn't make the cut. That's OK. It just means that I'm not ready to run with the big dogs yet. I'll play again. It was fun to look at all of the great photos that you did post. Thanks.

I think maybe I like set no. 2 better than the first set -- but not hugely, they're both full of good pictures.

I suspect this (dealing with 400 submissions) is less stress for you than it would be for me (not necessarily less work, which is different). I think I get "aesthetic fatigue" before then. But then you've had more practice.

Fun, thanks!

The phases of appreciation/frustration, as told by Mike while viewing the submissions, were probably felt by those who submitted during their own selection process. I know I did. Also, I over-thought it long enough to decide enough other pictures had flooded the inbox to satisfy the exercise.
Some of the pictures posted and my stuff, too had something interesting in common: Some part of the composition served as a stand-in for a horizon.

Juan's photo up top is fantastic. I'd love to see that as a print offer!

It's interesting how many of these "horizonless" shots have implied horizons in them. Maybe something in us just yearns for a horizon.

Are we allowed to express a preference? If so, the snow scene by Kazi Ushioda is practically a photographic Haiku.

Call me whiny, but I'd rather go for a monthly basis. I never thought I'd ever say that, but I actually like this photography site because it doesn't show so many photographs! Instead we get an enjoyable and enriching read.

OK OK, I realize you never said you'd do it till the end of days :-), you only said "next week" but it got me thinking about "what if" your site was more media centric.

Oh, and I should not forget to say I really liked the selected photographs, superb !

Greetings,
S.

"Maybe something in us just yearns for a horizon."

Or maybe that's something I was looking for. [g]

Mike

There's great talent amongst your readers. I hope that you enjoyed reviewing the submissions as much as I enjoyed the ones you chose to share.

Some very, very nice stuff there - both sets.

I think you should pick the images that you like not the ones you think other people will like; otherwise you might just drive yourself nuts!

These are all wonderful images! And having reader participation via image submission, beyond just comments, is very much appreciated and enjoyed!

Mike,

Thanks for the work you put in; I have empathy, and the inclusion. I'm very honored. Nice that both you and Elizabeth mention Mike Chisholm; I find his work inspiring myself, as well as his blog.

Bron

Great Post and images Mike, really enjoyed that. Too bad the picture I forgot to submit was not picked :)

Just wanted to say - some really nice stuff in there. Wow! I need to get out and work harder.

Ray

I vote with Michael T. Post what you like without feeling like it has to meet any standard but yours!

Mike,

You're a braver man than I.

I like to think that I've got a pretty solid sense-of-self, photographically speaking, and that I don't need validation from someone else. Even so, I couldn't help but feel a twinge of pain that I didn't get picked. Then I thought, "Hey -- I think my photos are better than some of the ones that got picked." On one hand, that's a good response, because it means that I'm pursuing my own artistic vision and have a clear enough idea of what I'm trying to do that I'm not swayed by a spur-of-the-moment informal selection process. On the other hand, perhaps I'm delusional.

Either way, I hope the sampling of reader's work doesn't upset the wonderful balance of writing and responses. It's a great little photography hangout in this niche of the internet. I'm not sure I'd want to add on a potential stress of aggrieved artists.

It's definitely intriguing to see other reader's work, though.

Thanks for making the call, Mike (this and next week's!) It yielded a fascinating set, many of which I wish I'd shot or could shoot.

It's also intriguing to see what "grabs" you and what you think your readers like. I like the result like most of your readers (if the comments are an indication).

Although I'm a verbal person, I like it when pictures do the talking from time to time in a photography blog. Most of the pictures published in this call and in TOP in general, speak to me. I'm still not fluent in the language of photography though. So I can't say I get it all the time. "Horizonless" doesn't mean landscapes, I get that now.

Next time, I'll submit my entry earlier to improve its chances of being picked (didn't "make it" this time). What would it be about, I wonder.

You may feel conflicted, but it was fun. Thanks.

"Even so, I couldn't help but feel a twinge of pain that I didn't get picked."

Hmm, the problem there could be that I didn't get an entry from you, Mark...sure you sent it? I've been checking the email spam folders, too.

But, SERIOUSLY now, it's not a contest. I tried to make that clear. I wasn't trying to pick "the best" or "the most popular" work. In some cases it was just that a few things seemed to go together. So, really now, people should NOT take it personally if they were overlooked.

Mike

From where I'm standing, both of the "above the fold" images have horizons. Am I wrong, or was that your intent?

I know it must be a lot of work, but also wonder if from this exercise you get a warm feeling of pride about how good your site's audience is. I know I would.

Excellent photographic sets, excellent indeed, a joy to see.

My favourite shots are David Blanchard's stone in a melted spot in the snow, and the cat photo by Gus Ginge, from the first set.

Both feature a roundish orange shape in the middle of the picture, and I don't know what that says about me or the mood I was in when I looked late last night. However, both show a small, nicely noticed moment that wouldn't last forever, and it's nice to see an honest, unsentimental photo of a cat, on the internet.

I hope I'm not being rude to the photographer here, but are you sure that Gus Ginge is the photographer's name? Maybe you've mixed the name up with the title.

Er, it's not a self portrait, is it? : ]

Very strong set — loved it!

who is casten bockermann.. love the photo and the name....ann

I particularly like Paul Wicks' photo, but then I have a penchant for pictures of the sea, and also for images that tend towards a two dimensional plane (rather than having an apparent three dimensional "depth" - I like "surface", if that makes any sense...)

"From where I'm standing, both of the "above the fold" images have horizons. Am I wrong, or was that your intent?"

Will,
You need to look at the top image a little more closely! :-)

Mike

Lots of chops out there.

Very good photos here, fantasy, view, colors. I really like them. Well done.
robert

My own 2 cents - the sequencing / juxtaposition in the second series works better for me. Despite the variety, theres a flow. Nice one.

Love the photos and the idea. And Mike we appreciate the effort and anguish that comes from choosing. Hard enough to select one's own photographs.
From someone who missed the cut.

Ah, that river in Iceland is getting really popular. I recently bought a huge print of this picture by Hans Strand http://www.hansstrand.com/Hans_Strand/FA_River_Arch.html only to find a similar one online a few weeks later (lost the link, sorry).

Great shot, well done. Wish I had a chopper in Iceland ;)

Good stuff here. Interesting theme.

The comments to this entry are closed.