Photo super étrange; Je la regarde depuis des minutes et je ne sais pas encore pourquoi elle attire tant.
Some are turned off because they naturally want to "resolve" what's happening in the image.
I really like the idea and the longer I looked at it, the more I felt how amazing our system of sight is. Look at the way colors blend and refuse to blend. It says a lot about how we perceive what's in front of us.
It's sad when the public starts complaining about art because "it's too hard to look at". If you don't like the technique go back to Flickr and leave this alone.
I think this is beautiful, and think Mr. Morell has managed to make something we've all seen hundreds of times into something quite unique and interesting.
see pictures from Abelardo Morell and his Camera Obscura
Thanks, This is beyond my imaginations how a photo is taken. Many many photos of old faithful have been
taken and none like this
I like the fact that we can experiment with techniques. For me a good photograph is the one that catches the eye immidiately and you don't have to wonder what this is. A photo doesn't always have an explination that goes with it. Without an explination, I wouldn't have had a clue what was going on here...
I also don't like it.
I love this guy's stuff, and this picture's great but it wasn't what stood out most to me from the "Visions of Earth" story from a few months back. There were some where the twigs and leaves on the ground were integral parts of the finalized obscura image, and those ones really resonated with me.
I like. Nobody need to be normal always, we can escape the photographic standard and still produce beauty
This is the oldest and truest form of photography. The simplest form of a lens and image there is. Go Google search "Camera Obscura" before you assume that this is a canvas or an overlaid image. Hyper- real sharpness and hyper-color is not the only type of "real" photography. Amazing image that isn't the mainstream.
Yes, I too agree with Sandra Hickman. Pictures should be pleasing to the eye, and understood. This one could be a paper 'snow storm', an explosion of ice, but it does not resemble water! When I do visit 'old faithfull' some day I will surely enjoy seeing it. My first no-no this time. j.e.s.
Duality is a natural law - the counter-balancing forces of positive/negative, which manifest as attracting/repelling, male/female, affirming/denying, for/against, yes/no, like/dislike. The political system of democracy is designed to accommodate this lawful polarization of opinion.
The comments on today's photo are once again exemplifying a polarization of opinion, as did yesterday's photo of the polarizing polar bear.
Morell's photo is hard to appreciate without background information on the photographer's project and novel technique. I think the detail of the ground actually works well with the geyser image. The fragments on the ground give the impression of exploding debris emanating from the eruption of water.
Sorry.. but give me a good nature or animal photo to appreciate more than this type of so called technique. I don't make any sense of it.
Looks like what could have been a good shot, ruined on a dirty and littered canvas. I don't appreciate having to differentiate between the two images.
Awesome! Nearly anyone can stand and take the same picture of the national parks that millions of people have taken! The challenge in today's world is to take these shots in a unique way. This is an amazing blend of old and new technology. So cool!
No need to go back to Flicker Jack. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. What a dull world this will be if everyone liked or disliked everything at the same time. A good artist must take the pain of critism. I'm a professional photographer who also works in oils and spray can art. I can never please everyone all of the time. Even I don't like some of the stuff I produce at times but sometimes those are the ones that sell.
@isaiah wiggins Me too
@Lawrence Sibley If "Morell's photo is hard to appreciate without background information on the photographer's project and novel technique" is true, then the it fails as an image and the creator has failed at the job of presenting the subject.
Appreciating it for the technology is like saying "I only ever make phone calls from an iPhone, it is a poor phone and no-one can hear me but the technology is fantastic"
There may be ways of using this technique to present great images, this isn't one of them.
@Dan Prosser I have to agree with you. I was not impressed.
@Dan Prosser It's not overlaid. The ground is literally the "paper" on which it is taken.
@Dan Prosser Me too !
@Dan Prosser Agree
@Sandra Hickman Well said.
It is hard for me to grasp that the creator has failed in presenting the subject since many times NG does not include the original written presentation that was submitted with the photo.
Im not saying it is either a success or a failure since I dont have enough info about it.
But if I did have more info on it, I don't consider myself expert enough to judge anyway, such as when I look at a museum abstract oil painting that looks to me like a kids finger painting. Sometimes I just look/stare and hope that the knowledge will arrive to me in the future about why a professional editor made the selection, at which point I can then form my critique if in fact I do choose to critique.
I can appreciate the techniques and processes involved.
With that said, this photo and the magazine story on Morell's photos weren't to my tastes either. I have a hard time differentiating between the image and the surface. In the magazine photos, I often couldn't tell why Morell chose a particular 'canvas' for a given image. I doubt his choices were random, but it seemed like certain canvas and image combinations weren't well matched.
To each his own.
Subscribe to National Geographic magazine and save. Print and digital editions available.