« News Flash: Flash! (Weegee the Famous) | Main | Sunday Support Group: Family Matters »

Saturday, 09 June 2018

Comments

Beautiful work - thanks for mentioning it.

These are lovely, especially when viewed at full size on his site.

You're absolutely right about his work being unfinished. I would certainly enjoy looking at some more of his Hamtramck photos.

I also like his work, but I have often wondered how far you can go with post processing before an image becomes more an illustration than a photograph. I am not sure he has crossed that line, but none of these images came out of the camera looking like they do. There are photorealistic artists that go the other way and draw or paint images that look like they came out of a camera. I don't know if any of this makes a difference when talking about art, but it might make a difference when talking about photography.

Couldn’t agree more, lovely stuff. Perfect compositions.

Agreed. Based on those 10 images I would love to see more of Roy's work.

And hoorah - we are talking about images again, not cameras ;-)

What an eye! I really admire these. Thanks for showing us Mike and thanks to Roy. He should be better known. I am sure that his show will go well.

Dying to know what his gear is, just gorgeous.

I am struck equally, by the images and by the way they are presented. I'd like to use something like this for my own work -- do you know what software Roy Feldman uses?

I liked the square format right off, and he makes great use of it. Lots to look at in each picture. Thanks, Mike. Bill

The square format synchs with me. My vinyls are all stored in square folders, and so are my CDs. For some strange reasons, I like the square format. Some say it represents a sort of round form - well balanced and never needing to decide which way to tilt a camera.

It looks like digital stuff with psuedo-film-like frame edge treatments added, not native square film shots. Still, some of it pretty good, but the fake film edges are cheesy if in fact it is shot on digital.

Good stuff! The square frames and color treatment suggest (to the contemporary viewer) that this work was formatted for use on Instagram. Complete? No, but then his other work also is presented more like passing impressions rather than persistent studies.

An aside, the frame Mike shows, above, reminds me of the days when modifying Polaroids was popular.

I may have to uh, modify some of the comments I've made in the past about digital and color vs film and b&w - hey I'm very willing to learn...
Lovely,interesting images; couldn't care less if they are "pure photography" or not - don't really know how they were made.
I would like prints though:)

"Rarely, but every so often, grace commands chaos and renders beauty. Photographing it doesn't follow a predictable pattern, it's a serendipitous practice with a frequent occurrence of failure."
Great writing too.
This and your two sentences, (the description of Alissa and the parenting thing) made me read them out loud, even though it's 3 am and I am on vacation in a camper van in Bilbao, Spain.

In the Update Roy Feldman wrote, "The featured picture was cell phone … "

It must have been the camera he had with him :)

Liked what we saw in the Hamtramck pictures. All but maybe two of them Had To Be Color

"The featured picture was cell phone, car window, turn off the wipers. No hocus-pocus."

Speed: "It must have been the camera he had with him :)"

Made me giggle so hard I almost had to change my panties. Now about that "hocus-pocus"... that's be a terrific name for a plug-in, wouldn't it?

Good stuff. Especially relevant in regard to the next article on IQ. Vision trumps everything. I especially like the chapel portrait with its layers of repetition, and the cat poking out on the left side in the window self-portrait. Having said that, I think the film markers on the border detract rather than add to the photos.

The comments to this entry are closed.