Cool And Refreshing by Markjay photo - Canon DSLR Challenge photos at pbase.com

photo sharing and upload

picture albums

photo forums

search pictures

popular photos

photography help

login

Canon DSLR Challenge | all galleries >> Challenge 31: Create a Still Life (Hosted by Lonnit Rysher) >> Exhibition > Cool And Refreshing
by Markjay

previous | next


25-NOV-2002	Markjay

Cool And Refreshing
by Markjay

Sony Cybershot
1/125s f/2.2 at 9.7mm iso100 hide exif

Full EXIF Info
Date/Time	25-Nov-2002 22:52:24
Make	Sony
Model	Cybershot
Flash Used	No
Focal Length	9.7 mm
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
Aperture	f/2.2
ISO Equivalent	100
Exposure Bias	1.70
White Balance	incandescent (3)
Metering Mode	matrix (5)
JPEG Quality	(6)
Exposure Program	program (2)
Focus Distance

other sizes: small medium original auto

previous | next

Please do not delete, update, or otherwise edit others' entries
* Submitter retains all copyrights *

Canon DSLR Challenge		26-Dec-2004 18:35
Markjay - Excellent advice for Victor to try some high key shots. :) Now THIS is what we're all here for!! Cool! Victor - That is so excellent that you're starting to appreciate the shot! That never would have happened if you didn't take the time to stop and ask questions! See, you can have an appreciation for the quality of something even if that something is not your 'thing'. ~ Lonnit

Canon DSLR Challenge		26-Dec-2004 18:30
Markjay - BTW, in case you didn't see it on the thread, I posted twice that you have a shot in pending - size overun. Nice shot BTW, so you'd better get it back in the running! I don't think Victor is 'fishing' at all. His style is very different. I think maybe he's more of an earthy guy whereas you are more high tech. I happen to love high tech, hence I love your syle. :) Since he's coming from a different perspective I really think he's actuallly being very open-minded in trying to learn more about a style that is not his own. I applaud him for that. Instead of just condemning it b/c he doesn't care for the style, he's asking questions to try to learn more about it so he can understand it better. I like that. More people should be that way. :) ~ Lonnit

Guest		25-Dec-2004 14:25
The best way I can describe high key images would be: high contrast images that contain large areas of light tones, with few middle tones or shadow details. I hope that helps, victor. Now... go out and create yourself some high key images, just for the personal challenge of it :-) Markjay

Victor Engel		25-Dec-2004 08:55
BTW, this picture is starting to grow on me. I don't think that would be likely to happen with an inferior picture. -- Victor

Victor Engel		25-Dec-2004 08:54
Markjay, I think you maybe missed the point of my post about high key. Let me try again. First let me say that top on my list of candidates for a topic if I were to ever get the opportunity, is exactly that: high key. The main reason for this is that I don't know what it is. My post was an effort to try to find out what it is. There are a couple of threads I participated in on dpreview where I tried to discern what it is, and the best information I got was that a picture I posted was NOT an example of a high key image. I thought it was an example. That means I don't know what high key is, or else the person who corrected me doesn't. Someone here commented that your picture is high key. I questioned whether it really is because I don't know. So far the answer I got does not clarify the definition of high key for me at all. As to my other comments, my goal is to learn here. I've posted before that I frequently don't understand why certain pictures get really high scores. Lonnit's winning picture from the last challenge is an example. I don't want to get into that and clutter up this conversation here, and I don't know if I need to get into it there either. Let's just say that my tastes are different from others', and I'm trying to get an understanding for others' tastes. That is the goal of my posts specifically on this picture. I can honestly say I am not on any kind of fishing expedition, unless you count fishing for knowledge. -- Victor

Guest		25-Dec-2004 03:52
lonnit and victor; i want to thank both of you for your thought provoking comments. the only reason i asked victor to continue via email, was that he appeared to be simply on a fishing exposition. the comments being here in the gallery are extremely important... i understand that and encourage it wherever possible. to answer vitor's question regarding if this image is high key or not based on the fact that it was planned and created as a negative art image; again i'll state that art / photography is very much viewed by different people in different ways. as we all know, you can show an image to 12 diferent art enthusiasts, and sometimes obtain 12 different 'meanings' that they feel the image is trying to express. with that in mind, if you feel a high key image is only one if it starts out as one and ends up as one in the finished product, that's ok. think about this however; you take a photograph right out of the camera, then you run it through an 'action' in photoshop that creates a totally different look... in this case let's say that look is a water color image. are you now going to reject the fact that the end resulting image is now a water color image, simply because it did not start out as one? i hope this answers your question but, likely it will simply provoke more questions lol (which is part ok and part of the fun of the dicussion). markjay

Canon DSLR Challenge		25-Dec-2004 03:36
Markjay, I happen to be glad this discussion is taking place here where everyone can read it and think about it. These kinds of discussions are why we're here - to learn how to be better shooters. Thinking about and discussing it helps clarify things. I know it might be hard to listen to "negative" comments about the image, because it is your baby, but like I said, good art is contoversial. It's an honor to have your work talked about. I for one, who liked it very much before, have even a deeper appreciation of it after all this talk. :) You are very talented and I'm sure you know that already. You don't have to defend your art to anyone. You can explain it, if you are so inclined, but you don't have to defend it. The more 'artistic' the shot, the fewer people you will find who understand it and like it. You can talk to Rod about that. :) I've recently posted some more "artsy" types of shots. I really, really like them myself, but positive comments have drastically dropped in number. The more people that like it, the more you are appealing to the "lowest common denominator". ;) The less the mainstream appeal, the higher the pricetag seems to go. BTW Victor, please don't think any of this is directly referring to you. I'm just talking about people in general, so please dont' take offense. :) ~ Lonnit

Canon DSLR Challenge		25-Dec-2004 03:25
The fact that it's a negative is part of its creatiivity and art. It's seeing from an uncommon perspective which puts it out of the realm of the "average" person's shot. What about the assorted chemical processes? It's the unusual processing that can sometimes be the biggest difference between a snapshot and a piece of art. Generally though, there will be other factors of composition, etc.A polished look to a picture is what separates the novice from the pro. As you point out, there is an art to the lighting as well. The blown highlights are part of the artistic touch. Intentionally blowing highlights is not a mistake, it's a style of art. Unintentionally blowing highlights is user error. Sometimes a user error is a lucky thing and creates a great shot. But a pro can intentionally make a great shot and knows what it will look like before it's taken. Why must it have coke in the glass? Coke in the glass would be the everyday way of taking the shot. Again this shows more creativity. This shot is all about things not being as they are normally percieved. It's seen from the eye of a true artist. I don't see where anyone would be offended by this discussion. Art is subjective. Great art is contorversial. The fact that this shot has drawn us into this discussion is proof enough. ;) I'm enjoying this chat b/c any time we get into analyzing a shot it gets us thinking more about it and that's a learning experience. Warmly, Lonnit

Guest		25-Dec-2004 01:44
victor; why are you so obsessed with this image? rather than fill up this gallery with 50 word essays, please feel free to email me with any questions you might have and, i will be more than happy to answer them. no offense, but you are simply going around in circles here. markjay

Victor Engel		24-Dec-2004 21:16
Question for MS (others may answer if they wish): You stated this is a nice high-key. But is it really? I'm still trying to learn exactly what high key is. From what I understand, it has partly to do with bright lighting, light colors, squelched shadows, etc. Here we have the impression of a high key image, but it's done by inverting the opposite of a high key image. So is it really high key? -- Victor

Victor Engel		24-Dec-2004 21:12
Markjay, I really appreciate your remarks. They answer some questions in my mind. My comments, by the way, are based upon what I see. I recognize that I see the world differently from other people. Here, I see a picture that is an obvious negative. When I see a negative, I get an urge to invert it. That's just me, I guess. Now that I know the image was planned as a negative image, I won't look at the reversed image anymore. -- Victor

Canon DSLR Challenge		24-Dec-2004 20:22
i'm not offended, vitor. i find it odd that i am presenting the image in it's present state as it was planned photographed(as a negative art image), yet you are generating your second 'revised opinion' based on the positive image which is not how my image was presented to you? i find that really odd. you can feel as you wish. i will tell you this... NOTHING i do in photography is an 'accident' as you called it ;-) i have been practicing the art of negative art for 6 years. markjay

Victor Engel		24-Dec-2004 18:54
Thanks, Lonnit, for taking the time to post your thoughts. However, it doesn't really completely answer my question. I think some of the attributes you praised come by virtue of the fact that this is a negative image. If this were truly a great image, you could say the same things about the positive. What I can say about the positive is that the setting is polished. The surface on which the can and glass were placed is clean and very reflective. This produces the nice, clean reflections that make the picture work. The condensation on the can looks really good, and I like the lighting, except that the can is a tad blown. The glass, on the other hand, has some random drops on it that don't work for me. Also, the glass is filled with water but is next to a can of Coke. What's up with that? It must have been to create the hand drawn look you referred to at the bottom of the glass, although to my eye, that was just an accident. The colors on the reflection of the glass also look weird. I find myself wondering when the reflection is showing (the Coke machine?). All put together, my reading of the picture is that it is a picture that was nice and happened to look better by inverting it. In short, it's a novelty. -- Victor P.S. I really hope I'm not offending anyone, especially the photographer by these remarks. I'm being frank in an effort to understand others' perceptions and perhaps my own.

Canon DSLR Challenge		24-Dec-2004 05:43
I'll try Victor. :) It is very artistic - the fading of the can off the page, the almost hand-drawn look of the lower half of the glass, the "new" fresh colors, the overall fresh clean look of it. It's refreshing and alluring, it could sell product in a magazine or be hung on the wall as art and be just as comfortable in either place. It's completely polished and professional. I'm not the least bit shocked that it has won awards. I knows it when I sees it baby and this is IT! I've always had an eye for what's good. If I could actually produce what I know is good, I'd be a VERY successful photographer. I just wish I knew how to make a shot as good as what I know is good. What I do know is that very few of my shots are really good, if any. Ok, maybe I've got some "good" ones that meet my standards, but I sure don't have any great ones! I can spot talent in a heartbeat, in virtually any of the arts, whether it's an artform I enjoy or not. Hate opera, but I know when someone is tops. Actually, it gives me a chill and makes my heart race when I come upon something that's truly top notch. Now, if only I could find some way to be on the outside of me looking in so that I could somehow apply that abilty to recognize, and turn it into an ability to create. :( Very frustrating b/c I KNOW where I want to be and I'm nowhere near it. I don't even know how to get there. I just keep reading and exposing myself to the good stuff and hoping it rubs off. What I do know for certain is that this smacks of talent. It just may be that you don't appreciate it b/c it's not your style. That's fine. Most people do judge things according to their own taste. Perhaps I'm just a freak that I can appreciate how good something is when I don't actually care for it. Doesn't seem logical, but somehow THAT seems to be my talent - spotting talent. ;) ~ Lonnit

Canon DSLR Challenge		22-Dec-2004 23:33
victor; i understand completely how you feel about this image. this is art / photography and as such, there's always going to be a personal taste issue involved. for example, there are very famous paintings i do not like or can't relate to yet, they are famous and popular nonetheless. FWIW, this particular image has won several photo contests so, there must be something appealing to it.... maybe the colors, maybe the composition, maybe the shadow / highlights or moisture on the glass, who knows? thank you for your comments. markjay

Guest		22-Dec-2004 23:08
why not just ask everyone to be more specific, victor ;-0

Victor Engel		22-Dec-2004 08:43
Lonnit, can you be more specific? This, I guess, is an example of an image that just doesn't grab me at all. Obviously it does you, though. So I'm wondering what you're seeing that I'm not. To me it just looks like a picture of a can of Coke next to a glass with some sort of color inversion applied. -- Victor

Canon DSLR Challenge		22-Dec-2004 04:27
I'm jealous, Markjay......what is "high key," anyway? How is it achieved? Shu

Canon DSLR Challenge		22-Dec-2004 04:17
That is truly fantastic! WOW! ~ LOnnit

Canon DSLR Challenge		22-Dec-2004 00:25
Looks real refreshing. Nice high-key - MS