Julie, here are my images from last semester. I’ll upload some more later.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Or you can simply visit: My Gallery
Categories
Julie, here are my images from last semester. I’ll upload some more later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Or you can simply visit: My Gallery
7 replies on “”
wow i totally see what you meant about combining prints to improve the overall aesthetics. while i’m totally exhausted and dont have the brianpower to comment on specific pieces, i will say that i can see why these work so much better in small groups than as individual images. i’ll try to comment more specifically later.
ps. i’m so jealous that everyone prints color. i’ve never taken a color class (my last school didnt offer color, hence all the b&w) and im dying to take one!
well, you’ll just have to get in there and start taking classes then. You already fit in the dynamic of the group!
well thank you! i felt pretty comfortable yesterday once i got over the whole ‘these people are probably wondering why this random girl is in their class’ thing. i want to take classes. i dont know what is offered in the summer but i think i’ll be able to better handle a studio class then (right now i’m glad i’m taking the art history one because work has been nuts here lately and i’ve gotten out late every day this week so far…)
anyway, i think from this group of work, the ones i like best are…
although i found them all interesting in their own ways. the first two i thought were really excellent pairings of images. i can see why dornith would say these worked so much better together than separate. not that the shots are bad on their own, but they convey a completely different message when put together and i really like that (especially with the one with 6 shots together). the last one i think i really like a lot for the colors and the short depth of field.
i was curious why you chose to make a couple of those pictures so narrow (the last 2 you posted… particularly the last one). it kind of makes me want to climb into the picture so i can see what you clipped out (as if the narrow space was an opening to the real setting)!
i want to write more, but i have a meeting in 7 minutes. ttyl!
the last two are an experiment in answering the question “how much of the image is necessary to convey the same message”
the original image is the size of the space shown on the thumbnail, but the image is cropped to only show what I think was absolutely necessary. When I met with a href=”http://www.johndarwell.com/”>John Darwell last semester, he posed that question to me, so I started looking at things differently (thus why the tree/telephone pole image has such a shallow depth of field). I expanded that thought by cropping out everything that wasn’t completely necessary to the statement I was making.
Interestingly enough, Brent made a very similar comment on the very last image, saying he kept trying to get closer to the image to look through the “slot” that it created, like he was looking at the world through a mail slot.
I’ve been wondering what you could do with a single image and multiple “windows” on it. Done in such a way that you can figure out it’s still the same image.
I had one of those at the critique. it had two vertical windows.