• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

A collection of non-art

Jarmo Juntunen

Well-known member
First one shows a juveline female homo sapiens, shot through a dirty cabin window. It has no arrangement and looks terribly underexposed.

_smaller.jpg


In the second one the same subject is completely lost in the reeds. You can barely see her eyes. And there are definitely no catch lights in the subject's eyes. Her wardrobe is a haphazard collection of sporty but certainly not stylish clothing, suitable for a Norther family outing. But not for fine photography.

_smaller.jpg

The third one shows our subject on a wooden bench of a church. Depth of field here is way too shallow for a portrait.

_smaller.jpg

Now, seriously, do you think I really care about any such nonsense? Hell no. I'm just a proud father with a camera and a youngest kid still willing to pose for me.
 
Ha, go for it Jarmo! Missed opportunities are cause for regret, especially with juvenile homo sapiens. Thanks for sharing these.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
First one shows a juveline female homo sapiens, shot through a dirty cabin window. It has no arrangement and looks terribly underexposed.

_smaller.jpg


......The third one shows our subject on a wooden bench of a church. Depth of field here is way too shallow for a portrait.

_smaller.jpg

Now, seriously, do you think I really care about any such nonsense? Hell no. I'm just a proud father with a camera and a youngest kid still willing to pose for me.

Jarmo,

The first is outstanding art and beautiful to boot. A series like this would be well worth an exhibition on it's own. The third's narrow depth of field is an asset, adding an aura to the little girl's presence.

If we all could naturally do such "unart", then there would be no need for museums, as such quality would not be rare and worth saving for future generations.

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
First one shows a juveline female homo sapiens, shot through a dirty cabin window. It has no arrangement and looks terribly underexposed.

_smaller.jpg


In the second one the same subject is completely lost in the reeds. You can barely see her eyes. And there are definitely no catch lights in the subject's eyes. Her wardrobe is a haphazard collection of sporty but certainly not stylish clothing, suitable for a Norther family outing. But not for fine photography.

_smaller.jpg

The third one shows our subject on a wooden bench of a church. Depth of field here is way too shallow for a portrait.

_smaller.jpg

Now, seriously, do you think I really care about any such nonsense? Hell no. I'm just a proud father with a camera and a youngest kid still willing to pose for me.



Jarmo,

The under exposure in the first appears to have enhanced her coloring. Is that what happened?

Asher
 

Jarmo Juntunen

Well-known member
Jarmo,

The under exposure in the first appears to have enhanced her coloring. Is that what happened?

Asher

No, I don't think so. She has what you might call rosy cheeks. And she had an active day of running up and down the seaside in cold weather. At least that's my theory.
 
Top