The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

New style with the GRD2

Maggie O

Active member
Get a grip, Maggie: I only said "moving towards kitsch", having thought that we wanted a real discussion rather than political correctness...

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
Oh Mitch, lighten up- you should know by now that was mostly teasing. I'm sorry if you thought I was seriously offended or something. I have a very firm grip. (All that sting bending, you know.)

That said, "kitsch" can be imprecise and loaded. It reminds me of "camp," and the Byzantine discussions of aesthetics that set off, IIRC, mostly by Sontag. And I won't even go into the whole kitsch-art thing of the 80's. Discussions of that in art school often led to fisticuffs.

So, here's a question to ponder- at what point, percentage-wise, does desaturation of a color photograph move it into the realm of kitsch? And at what point does it then leave that country and return to the respectability of B&W photography? How much is too much and how much is too little?
 
M

Mitch Alland

Guest
Maggie, I'm not that serious either. On your percentage question: I don't know about the kitsch-limit, but desaturisation goes beyond the pale — heh-heh, or should it be "reaches the pale"? — at the point when it looks like selective colour, which it does, to me, in these pictures. And at which point does selective colour begin to look kitschy — who knows? All I know is that it's difficult NOT to make selective colour look kitschy. But remember my feeling merely was that the desaturisation of these pictures took away from what the B&W ones were expressing.

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
 

Maggie O

Active member
But remember my feeling merely was that the desaturisation of these pictures took away from what the B&W ones were expressing.
I wouldn't say "took away," as that sounds, for me, too pejorative. It did change what was expressed and definitely altered the mood and message. Now, as to what that message is or what is being communicated, that, I reckon, is up to the artist.

It's an interesting thing to consider, how the same images communicate different things, simply by different processing. I imagine that your photos would communicate a very different message if they were printed in a Zone VI style. I'm sort of stumbling around here, but I think there's something similar going on with high contrast, grainy B&W (for instance) that is pulling similar levers to other "extreme" ways of printing, be it desaturated color, toning B&W prints, alternate chemistries, gum prints, etc...

What makes something feel like a gimmick and what makes something not? Is it sheer force of numbers? More people print like X, so X is good and non-X is bad? I don't know myself, this is going to require more thought on my part.

Well, off to stew in my head. :salute:
 

helenhill

Senior Member
Maybe with faded colours, its truer to say that the photographs have a nostalgic air to them - and perhaps I can see where you're coming from when one considers how often nostalgia is kitsch (maybe even the very definition of kitsch). I don't at all get that feeling with these photographs, though. Whether the B&W originals are better or not is a different question, and in some cases I think the B&W is definitely better: the man in the top hat for sure.

Sepia is another 'look' that invokes nostalgic sentiments - could that be considered heading towards kitsch, too? Sometimes, I think it can be. On the other hand, for some people, anything in black & white, regardless of tone, might seem contrived & retro (somewhat related to that, I've had someone tell me that a perfectly ordinary-looking black & white image was "cool because it looks so retro"; I certainly wasn't thinking "retro" when I made the conversion, which was not sepia or even particularly grainy!)
WELL SAID ...TO THE POINT & BRILLIANT
Thanks ! helen :clap:
 

cam

Active member
...On the other hand, for some people, anything in black & white, regardless of tone, might seem contrived & retro (somewhat related to that, I've had someone tell me that a perfectly ordinary-looking black & white image was "cool because it looks so retro"; I certainly wasn't thinking "retro" when I made the conversion, which was not sepia or even particularly grainy!)
a lot of people thing my work is "retro" precisely because most of it is black and white. i'd go even further and say a lot of mine can be considered "stylized" as well since i push the contrast and sharpen, which often pulls the grain out (rather that hide or subdue it). i often work an image for the texture of a picture, not just shapes and tones. i work it to my aesthetic.

that said, it is clearly not everybody's cup of tea and i occasionally get criticized for over-sharpening (whilst i, personally, love the bite). funnily enough, however, when i try to subdue this tendency and present a more "realistic" picture, i usually get called to task from those who like my usual way of working -- i.e., where's the contrast? where's the grain? etc.

so all my work *is* stylized to some extent, but it is part of the voice of the images. my voice, my aesthetic... i'm sure some would call it kitschy or gimmicky but i could frankly give a rat's ass about that. like i said: my voice, my aesthetic.

as to the rag on selective colour -- phooey!!! i probably use it more than most, but it is always a colour that existed in the original -- never added. if i keep it in, it is to make a point -- usually humorous or ironic. on one of my more successful images, i kept it in merely because it was so stunning in real life and the geometry of it worked. in all cases the colour adds to the pictures. does the selective colour make them stylized? hell, yes! but i also feel there wasn't a picture without the colour. that, i think, is the key to when to use it.

desaturation can be looked at the same way. some people like colour, some don't. i'm one of those who doesn't particularly love it (i'm talking street shots here), especially when the image is strong enough to sing out in black and white. but sometimes a picture needs some colour to add texture, mood, etc. i personally like desaturating the colour in those cases as i feel that it allows colour to add rather than distract from the intent of the image.

all these thoughts are subjective, though. they are mine. they may or may not be yours. one of the joys of this forum is we all have very distinctive looks and likes, and aren't afraid to voice them....

BTW, Ellemand, thank you for letting me stay (even if it was just to keep your crush, Lili, happy:ROTFL:)
 
E

ellemand

Guest
Cam.
I do agree with you in most of your contribution. Personnaly I will never give up my b/w work added a good shot of contrast. That's what I love the most. But I'll always look at and try out other things - just for the fun of it.

Off course you can stay - and that is not just to keep Lili happy. I miss a avatar from you. If that looks good I proberbly will fall a little in love in you too :thumbs:
_________________________________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellemand/
 

otumay

New member
I've tried a few colour shots and desaturation. Your photos were inspirational to me. I am not sure I'll use the GRD2 solely for b+w anymore.
 
Last edited:
E

ellemand

Guest
Hey Osman.

I'm glad, that my photos has been an inspiration for you - then my "try-outs" have given something to evolve others expressions.
The photos you show here are very good - I like the tonality.
________________________________________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellemand/
 

Brian Mosley

New member
Hi Ellemand,

sorry I'm late to this party, but I just wanted to add that I like your shots above very much... just the right amount of desaturation and tonal 'feel' for my liking - together with the lovely sharp details.

Fantastic! thanks for sharing.

Kind Regards

Brian
 

Brian Mosley

New member
p.s. I posted the above comment from page 1... and having read the comments on page 2 feel somewhat of a politically correct simpleton! lol

I don't know a lot about art, but I bl**dy well know what I like!

Kind Regards

Brian
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Just me sweetheart. LOL


Not sure if labels are a good thing or a bad thing on some ones style. Reason i say that is someone may have a series of images than a week later change there style with something else. Not sure if one should get pegged with a certain style attached to it. This desaturated look works on these images but may not be very good on others of a different look of images. Our well known Jim Colum moderator has a certain look to his work which is mostly seascapes with IR and such but even Jim switches that around also when he maybe doing something else. i guess i just can't put a label on Jim like that because even though most of his work is like that he does move it around. Maybe i need that second espresso. LOL
 
E

ellemand

Guest
Guy; well spoken.
I didn't try to make a new style for me. I tried out a new style - and it was fun :)
I'll never give up my b/w-work, but I found this "new style" interresting - and I know it can only be used to some sort of my work.
Thanks for the discussion - it's great :thumbup:
____________________________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellemand/

P.S. Lili; I have a lot of money :ROTFL:
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I have no money but I am a nice guy.:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:


Well I think this is important here . We should be experimenting and trying new things than along the way if you find a niche than it is all good. As a Pro i never took the specialist stance , i may not be the best at one thing but I believe i am good at many. I kind of rather have it that way to be honest. i like doing lot's of different type of work. Now i may not be the 25k a day fashion shooter but i rather do different things and just be good at them. I get bored easily I guess but i don't want to be the best in one filed of work either. Hope that made sense.
 

DavidE

Active member
Here are a couple of shots from the PMA convention last month. Hope it's OK to post them in this thread (they're from a DSLR).

I used a Canon 40D with a 50mm f1.4 lens, and it was my experience with this camera and lens at PMA that led me to purchase a GRD2 a few weeks ago. The 40D was too heavy to lug around all day, and I wasn’t able to focus it as quickly as I would have liked. I learned that I prefer a wide-angle or normal fixed lens, but need a much smaller and lighter camera.

These shots were slightly out of focus with color that was too saturated. I tried dropping the color a bit, and also tried them in b&w. Then I tried this desaturated approach, which I liked mainly because the model's expression in the second shot seemed melancholy, as though she had worked too many years at the job and was ready to quit.

One of the camera manufacturers (I think it was Samsung) had the two models at the booth, where you could jump in and grab a quick shot. I don’t know anything about fashion photography and still feel awkward imposing on people to take a photo, but I did the best I could (why pass up the opportunity?). These were the only shots that were interesting.

I agree with ellemand that this kind of desaturation should be used sparingly and only when it draws something from the content.


 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
We want you to post pictures anywhere on this site and glad you identified what camera. That also helps people
 
Top