Regards,
K.Polak
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
DSLRUsers.com
A discussion forum - and more - for users of Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras.
Opera by me... (8 images)Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Opera by me... (8 images)
...few shots of overshot subject. Any comment are welcome!
Regards, K.Polak 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
6, 7, 8 Are my favourite shots in this series.
I think with the Opera House being such a well know Aussie Icon, I prefer more intimate and personal angles compared to the standard postcard/tourist shots. I've tried to keep your interesting style of photography in mind around boston.. but I can't re-create or emulate it... Looking at shot 5, I think it would be intesting upside down..  but maybe that's just me.
Alpha_7,
You are right. It is dificult to invent something new about Opera, but I include overall shot to give an introduction to whole series. Personally I like the most #3 and just behind are #4 and #5.
It needs practice. A lot of practice. Thats all 
Regards, K.Polak
Hmmm,
Krystian, as I indicated in another thread recently, I feel that this edifice is an abomination, something of a cultural embarrassment and, photographically, it has been done to death. I believe that where interesting or striking photography is concerned the Sydney Opera House can no longer be shot for what it is but, in the finest Minor White tradition, shot for what else it is. Some of your extracts show an inclination towards this but stop short of where I feel they need to go. But then that is just me and they are not my shots .... so I guess it is down to you. One of my personal beliefs is that the SOH looks better from a distance and gets worse the closer you get. Because at close range the structure is always receding away steeply it is almost mandatory to use a camera or lens with at least rise and fall to attempt to arrest some of that diminishing perspective. A little bit is OK but with this subject getting just a little bit is bloody hard. Cheers, I love the acutance of your shots by the way. _______________
Walter "Photography was not a bastard left by science on the doorstep of art, but a legitimate child of the Western pictorial tradition." - Galassi
taking a closer look at your 3 favourites #3 reminds me of the legs or landing gear of two giant space ships, with their towering forms disappearing out of shot #4 I'd like to see more balance in this shot between the black lower portion and the white "sky" upper portion... I'm not explaining it very well, but I initally didn't like the black bit at the bottom... but given that it's there, I felt the white was overpowering it..(I'll shut up now) #5 I can't get over my inital reaction (albeit a junvenile one) that it's sexually suggestive, I have however come to terms with it being the right way up.. and not upside down Every spare moment I've had I've been practicing, experimenting... and slowly learning from my mistakes...
Sheetshooter,
Thanks Sheetshooter. I think I know what you mean. I have done few more 'shapy', linework shots. But they dont fit my needs about this series. I want to make it easy digesting for average viewer. This is reason for the subject and b&w. I know it is not inovative, but I just hope to show Opera from almost 'tourist' sort of view with touch of artistic licence  I think and hope this put more diversity in portfolio.Alpha_7,
I like this shot since this particular place is quite different. There is always almost nobody, no tourist, not photographers, barely security. It is somehow alienated, different face of this building. #7 also indicates that feeling. And as well as you said, has a bit futuristic feeling.
I know what is it. Shots 4, 5 and 6 actually dont fit the series. Note that they are in fact negatives of others, darker building and white background.
I will tell you what is a keyword for your initial reaction - curving layers
Regards, K.Polak
Walter sir I thought you were just being witty and kind of cheeky with your comments about the opera house being an eyesore but i now see you don't care much for the magnifient building. I think the opera house can be photographed and presented differently it is the most interesting structure i have ever seen, and i can photograph it differently everytime i do, there is so much dimension to it. Honestly I don't like the 1970's styled beige polished concrete panels under the sails they are not elegant unlike the wonderfull geometric patterns in the sails therefore i would have to say i only like the opera house sails. I think the further you get away from it the more 1970's it looks, i think the whole island should be white, to me it seems like all the aesthetic qualitites are in the sails and that they were just dumped on some 1970's styled beige block. Krystian i think this series is not as minimalist as your previous post which was pure genius but i like your crops because they show the details in the sails which are the most beautiful part of the building.
Wendell,
I am not joking or being witty about my perception of that edifice. It is what I truly believe ... and I am not alone. I recall a Russian columnist in one of the Melbourne newspapers once describing the SOH as the kind of kitsch mantelpiece ornament that an odolescent buys for their first new abode. When one adds to that the fact that the building is unsuited, in fact incapable, of performing the task for which it was first conceived then one has to suspect that as a structure it is somewhat a matter of form over function. Or perhaps after its birth it found its true role purely as a tourist attraction and that the principal cast performing there are the streams of gawking travellers on day excursions. It is also a readily identifiable icon of not only Sydney but of Australia. During the Annual Report season my agent in New York always sends the brief that when photographing CEOs of foreign-owned corporations to either include the Opera House or a kangaroo in the shot. I do a lot of trips down the Hume to the closest kangaroo warning traffic sign with these chaps rather than include this testament to cultural immaturity on a National scale in the picture. A few years ago I did an all night shoot of the Opera House (in drizzle) from across the stream shooting the tetsts of the current lighting. Funny innit? Thirty two years old and it has only just recently been appropriately lit. A guy of your age is more likely to find the "70's" aspect more jarring than I do. I just find the whole bloody thing jarring. Whenever I return to Sydney after a time away it is always the sight of the Sydney Harbour Bridge that fosters a lump in my throat. If you have an interest in free-form architecture then may I suggest that you have a look at some of the more recent structures being built overseas. One that springs to mind is the central House Of Worship for the Baha`i faith in New Delhi. (Here is a loink for a taste: http://www.indiatravelog.com/delhi/lotus-temple.html) Cheers, _______________
Walter "Photography was not a bastard left by science on the doorstep of art, but a legitimate child of the Western pictorial tradition." - Galassi
My God, it looks like two Operas facing each other 
That is a bit too much oranges
Regards, K.Polak
I like 7 and 8 the best krystian....lovely abstracts.
You see I would say that the Sydney harbour bridge is somewhat underwhelming, whereas the Opera House is a magnificent piece of architecture. It is no more iconic than any other piece of world cultural architecture in any country...The Taj Mahal, Houses of Parliament, Eiffel Tower, Empire State Building. The fact that seeing it day in, day out, on every postcard, every time you pass the harbour catching a ferry to manly, every time you talk to somone about Australia, doesnt help. I think the interior was re-designed by someone else wasnt it? Not sure on that one, but I think Urzton didn't design it like that in the first place. Could be wrong. Matt
Actually walter I should have choosen my words more carefully in describing the opera house as the most majestic buildig in the world, it is not.
As I have stood in St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican City, Italy and that is trull y a majestic work of architecture so is the Duomo in Florence Italy, all built hundreds of years ago. How could i have almost forgotten these wonderful places? Architecturally they surpass the opera house, but the opera house is the best in it's class, merging of geometric and organic architecture for the time it was conceived.
Previous topic • Next topic
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|
- Mods Database • The team • Delete all board cookies • Reset blocks • All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]
