Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Death-defying self-portraits


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#16    Child of Bast

Child of Bast

    Queen of the UM Asylum

  • Member
  • 4,872 posts
  • Joined:17 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Female

  • The Mad Hatter: "Have I gone mad?"
    Alice: "I'm afraid so. You're entirely bonkers.But I'll tell you a secret: all the best people are."

Posted 31 January 2013 - 03:10 PM

The purpose of sharing these photos were not to convince anyone that they are anything other than what they are presented as. They are art - nothing more, nothing less - and as such, certain non-essential aspects of each photograph have been removed to convey the emotion that the artist intended. I don't understand why the subject of "shopping" was even brought up as it was clearly stated in the accompanying paragraph description that harnesses were used to protect the artist from unnecessary injury. If you cannot see said harnesses, it's obvious they were removed. Art is about conveying emotions, not about trying to convince you of anything through faking photographs.

'A phantom,' said my Uncle Mycroft, who had just materialised, 'is essentially a heteromorphic wave pattern that gains solidity when the apparition converts thermal energy from the surroundings to visible light. It's a fascinating process and I'm amazed no one has thought of harnessing it - a holographic TV that could operate from the heat given off by an average-size guinea pig.' ~ First Among Sequels, Jasper Fforde

#17    orangepeaceful79

orangepeaceful79

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 2,461 posts
  • Joined:05 Jan 2012

Posted 31 January 2013 - 06:13 PM

View PostLady Kasey, on 31 January 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

The purpose of sharing these photos were not to convince anyone that they are anything other than what they are presented as. They are art - nothing more, nothing less - and as such, certain non-essential aspects of each photograph have been removed to convey the emotion that the artist intended. I don't understand why the subject of "shopping" was even brought up as it was clearly stated in the accompanying paragraph description that harnesses were used to protect the artist from unnecessary injury. If you cannot see said harnesses, it's obvious they were removed. Art is about conveying emotions, not about trying to convince you of anything through faking photographs.

It seems apologies may be in order.  My purpose in commenting on the shopping/not shopping was a discussion I was having that in my brain was focused on technique - which is a part of photography.  I wasn't bemoaning the fact that the artist had used harnesses and then edited them out, I was commenting on it as part of his overall technique.  Apparently I didn't do a very good job of communicating that.  I think they are strikingly cool images.  My thing is that whenever I see a strikingly cool image I want to know "how'd they do that?"  I was discussing that aspect, mostly.  

Sorry for derailing the thread.  Muh bad.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users