Critique Welcomed Super Bright White Light....

[Dan Cattermole]

Hey folks... I'm certainly here and absorbing the great comments on this thread.... I must say a big thank you to those involved.

My intentions are of that to describe the image that you see. ultimately, I wish for people not to think that I have the lack of ability to control the exposure as I am a proud manual 35 film user ........... but more to see the image as an effort to artistically approach, if not breach the 'comfortable' boundaries of photography as we know.
We all here know what it is I like to do, whether it is technically debatable through the quality of the image, or the scenario of the image.... Regardless, an achievement of intension(s) displays a success in the result! At least I hope anyway...
Blowing out the highlights of any image is generally deemed to be an opening of critique for those who ascertain an understanding of exposure, and should generally be accepted by the photographer if that was the mindset..... I give my honour that I do.
In this case it certainly is the intent to present a 'super bright white light' as titled, I say no more......

However, opinions and critique are certainly more than welcome. I really do appreciate it.

 

[Pete Askew]

What a wonderfully interesting thread. First up the image in question. I don't object to the blown highlight area although I don't think it would work any less well if there was a touch of texture there. I personally would have liked to have seen a bit more black space above but I like the image and what I like about the work Dan presents is that he uses himself as part of the concept he is presenting. And he produces potent images as a result.

As regards the issues Hamish and Keith raise, I like it when people learn a craft that they use to make art. This is probably why I like the work of those artists who can exhibit a great technical skill (should they choose to) rather than those which are more ideas driven. Here I would contrast someone like David Inshaw with Tracy Emin; the former has huge technical skills and talent which he uses to create conceptual paintings and, let's be kind, the other doesn't: she has rather shallow ideas and absolutely no ability (see I'm being kind!). I would say the same should be the case with photography; the production of an artistic work should be the result of a deliberate action rather than by taking loads of pictures in the hope that something good or 'artistic' comes out. I think that the comparison of Capa with Weston is good in this respect and, if you have ever seen the original prints from the work of Capa you will soon realise that it was certainly content rather than technical perfection that was the defining element with most of them. His skill was in capturing important moments by placing himself in a position that he could record them. I appreciate technically superb images for the skill, control etc used in their creation but then I have a background in technical imaging. But my personal interests are in more artistic images.

So, back to the blown highlights? Fine if they add to the image (ideally one would have intended them but serendipity often needs to play a role - the key is to remember the lesson learned and use it again) - just look at the work of Lillian Bassmann for example, beautifully crafted images then manipulated chemically to burn out detail.

Not really sure where I'm going with this but I guess I tend to judge images rather than photographers. It's just that some photographers create images that I like / admire more often than others.

 

[Chris Dodkin]

For me - the highlighted face indicates the overpowering light that's falling in him - so it adds to a 'religious' feel to the image

I smile and cringe on other forums when I see people who would prefer to engage in endless technical discussions around technical limitations, rather than embracing them and actually taking a damn photo!

 

[Graeme Harvey]

It's a striking image that would be perfect to catch the eye for advertising/magazine cover/poster.

 

[Brian Moore]

For me it comes down to a visceral reaction. I can admire the work of so many technically competent photographers, but unless I have that gut feeling that makes me pause and say "Ooooh" (more or less) then I'm merely admiring the technical competence unemotionally. Its the emotional component that turns me on, not the technical component. Super Bright White Light brought forth that visceral reaction in me. The composition and the idea behind it made it possible for me to love this picture, but it was that blown highlight surrounding the upward gaze that really connected with me.