Fri, Nov 29, 3:02 PM CST

flower, part two

Mixed Medium Landscape posted on Jun 09, 2006
Open full image in new tab Zoom on image
Close

Hover over top left image to zoom.
Click anywhere to exit.


Members remain the original copyright holder in all their materials here at Renderosity. Use of any of their material inconsistent with the terms and conditions set forth is prohibited and is considered an infringement of the copyrights of the respective holders unless specially stated otherwise.

Description


I started with the same photo I used in my previous post, merged another photo with it & did some color manipulation & layer blending in photoshop. Does this muddy or adulterate the purity of the original photo or does it enhance it somehow? Would a viewer's reaction to it be different if they hadn't seen the original? If they suspected that the transformations were randomly generated by a piece of software? If this was an oil painting rather than a manipulated photo? Just trying to stimulate some thought about art & perception here - if you find this to be meaningless drivel, sorry to have wasted your time...

Comments (3)


)

zoren

9:10PM | Fri, 09 June 2006

as long as you challenge yourself, your intentions, and your own manifesto of creative vision, why do you need others to give you the answers?..... I believe a 'finished work of art', no matter the medium, should speak for itself to any viewer... I think the question is, what is criticism?

)

eyeland

11:47PM | Fri, 09 June 2006

I don't think there is an answer, just different points of view and modes of perception (which may or may not be biased in one direction or another). I just wanted to try to find out how others experience art & what critical filters they might apply. It won't change my approach to my own art or how I view others art - it's just something I have a curiosity about...

)

TwoPynts

11:55AM | Wed, 21 June 2006

In answer to your questions: 1. In my view, it is muddied, only because the original seemed clearer of purpose. There seems to be more randomness going on here than in the first version, and the central focus is no longer "as focused." 2. Yes, it probably would have been different, but still I find the image busy. 3. If is it is randomly generated by software, then it could loose some integrale value. If the effect is seemless and enhances the image, then I am all for it. 4. In THIS case, I would say an oil painting would be more impressive than a maniped photo, though I would still not find the subject matter of as much interest. I know you did not ask, but if it were me, I would have honed in on the mandala aspect of the blossom and cropped in tighter, allowing all other surrounding details to blur and fall away. I should not need to mention it, but obviously this is all just my view of things. If an image speaks to the artist in some way, then they should be happy with it.


0 17 0

Privacy Notice

This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.