 |
| Gypsy |
 |
| Enchantment |
beauties stolen from Vision Light Gallery
I hadn't heard about this until now.
1 hour ago
WELCOMES YOU to his little home in cyberspace.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- The Griper
- Me, I consider myself simply as an individual. I seek not to convince but hope only to inspire others to delve deeper into their own thoughts and ideas.
Popular Posts
-
"Grandpa, why are you so opposed to Socialism?" Grandpa just grinned as he responded, " Because, boy, I have more confidence ...
-
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide f...
-
One of the foundational disagreements in politics in this nation today is founded in the concept of collectivism. Another term that is used ...
-
As it stands now the government of the States are subordinate to the central government that they set up when they all agreed to abide by t...
-
“Grandpa, there is an article in the Washington Post about the cause of the Civil war written by E.J. Dionne and claims that slavery was the...
Stats History
Blog Awards
A Helping Hand
27 comments:
There is a Place for Black and White and there is a Place for Color. This is True in Photography and this is also True in Philosophies and Thoughts, for Some Things are Black and White and Some Things are more Gray. Come to Think of it, though, Even Black and White Photography also Contains Gray. She Chuckles at that Thought while Hitting the Publish Button.
"Even Black and White Photography also Contains Gray."
remember this too, lista, the gray areas are the result of the lack of sufficient light being reflected upon the object. this is true in photography as well as in philosophy and thought.
Photography is two dimensional. Only the gray provides shading to give
perspective and depth.
very true,BB, and isn't it how the photographer lights up the subject of the photograph that determines the perspective and depth desired hence the beauty and mood found in the photograph?
in both of these photos you can see that the photographer used very different lighting on each of these girls thus creating and manipulating a very different perspective of them.
you can almost sense an innocent wildness within the gypsy girl while the other you can almost read her thoughts as she seeks to understand what is out there for her.
and to me, it is the direct result of the lighting that gently yet warmly caresses each of them that captures these moods.
and when a photographer can do this it seems as if he reveals all of the mystery that can be found in his subject
and to me, a colored photograph can never reach as deeply into the depth of a subject like this as black/white photos can.
"remember this too, lista, the gray areas are the result of the lack of sufficient light being reflected upon the object. this is true in photography as well as in philosophy and thought."
The Only Way to Get Adequate Light, Griper, is by Truly Listening to Each Other and this Requires a Humility that Most of us do not Have. Instead, we Assume that we Can See the Black and White Clearly just from Our Own Perspective and this Explains the "Lack of Light" and thus the Grayness. To Deny that the Gray is there is Only a Reflection of the Depth of Our Ignorance and Pride.
The One Who Views the Above Picture Knows Only that the Picture is Beautiful. We Forget that the "Object" in the Photo is a Person.
What we do not Know is what she was Actually Feeling While being Photographed or what she is Feeling as you Look at Her. For Example, does she feel Admired or Resentful because she is Enslaved? Is She Treated with Respect at the Studio? It is Impossible to Know These Things Unless you Talk to Her, Listen to Her and Take her at her Word in what she Says.
When we Refuse to Listen and Think that We Know Everything, this is when the "Lack of Light" Produces Gray and Once again to Deny it's there, Only Reflects the Depth of Our Ignorance and Pride.
I Look Forward to Responding more to the Last of your Comments, but for Now, I've Got to Run.
Similar to b/w photography is sepia which
varies the brown/tan intensity. Perhaps these
types of photos delight
us as our natural viewpoint
is the color spectrum and by eliminating the spectral band, the intensity is increased?
(and by default, a person who is colorblind would find them unremarkable? :)
photography, like any art form, is not about the object, lista. it is about the photographer and how and what he wishes to communicate to the viewer.
it is about the viewer seeing, and feeling what the photographer wishes us to see and feel.
the object of the photograph is only the means that the photographer uses as the means of this communication.
so, yes you are correct, we cannot know the real feelings or thoughts of the object in a photograph and we, the viewer should not be trying to ascertain what those feelings or thoughts actually are.
we can only know what we see and feel as we study the photograph and that is what art is all about.
ahhh thought to ponder on, BB. and to take into consideration when discussing the issue. :)
The grey scale. Ah yes, brings back memories of my printing years.
She Smiles at the Next of His Comments, that is the One just Above the Last of my Comments. She Smiles because he is Still Focusing on the Photographer and not On the Person in the Photograph.
Do We Really Know that there is a "Innocent Wildness" in the Gypsy, or are we just Guessing? Just as a Person Viewing the Picture, I could Guess just as Easily that the Gypsy Looks a Little Sad and is Possibly Ashamed and Perhaps that is a Reflection of my Bias, yet you are Biased too. Don't we all just See what we Want to See? Do any of us Really Know?
You’re the Photographer and she is Sitting Right there. Why don't you Ask her?
She Smiles Again, as she Views the Second Picture and Sees in the Direct Stare of the Girl's Penetrating Eyes the Words "Don't you Dare!! As soon as this is Over With, I'm Going Home."
"and when a photographer can do this, it seems as if he reveals all of the mystery that can be found in his subject."
Yeh, but It Only Seems that Way. We Don't Actually Know a Single Thing, Unless we Ask the Women in the Pictures.
Griper,
Also, a Person Can not Manipulate Reality with the Use of Lighting, but Only the Perception of that Reality. What is Truly Real Remains what ever it is.
Even Art, though, is a Shadow of what is Real. That is What is Real to the Photographer and What is Real to the One Viewing the Picture, yet We should Continue to Remember that what is Truly Real to the Object in the Picture can only be Speculated about.
The Mention of the "Grey Scale" by Rational Nation Reminds Us that No Matter how Simplified, Everything is Still Measured in Degrees and Nothing is Really Black and White, not Even Black and White Pictures.
ok, lista.
i had my say on the matter and there is nothing more that i can say about it.
Well, I guess I'm Talking about Life, but you're just Talking about Art. Ok. Whatever.
It's just that, Griper, you Keep Talking about the Ends not Justifying the Means and in this Case the End is the Art, but you are not Willing to Talk about the Means.
I'm not Saying that ALL Photography of this Nature Degrades Woman, but What I am Saying is that Such does Occur and when it does, this is a Case of the Ends not Justifying the Means.
I just Finished Doing a Post on the Subject of "Black and White". If you're Interested, Check it Out, but in this Post, I am Talking about "Black and White Thinking", not Black and White Photography.
Black and White Thinking; The Definition is Gray.
In Order to Avoid Hypocrisy between what I have Said in my Post and what I have Said Beneath this one, I Guess I Should Correct my Statement, "Nothing is Really Black and White, not Even Black and White Pictures.", for it Should Read "Nothing is Entirely Black and White, not Even Black and White Pictures."
i did talk of the means. lista. you're just not understanding the means as it is used.
Vague, as Usual. I Assume that you Mean the Means of Adjusting the Lighting and Such, yet Part of the Means Also Involves the Use of an Object (or Actually a Person) in either a Kind, or Degrading Way Towards Woman.
You are so Dunes, Griper. I Almost don't have the Patience to Deal with you any more. Anyone who Knows me or has Visited my Blog Knows that I am Generally Polite, but you have always Brought Out the Worse in me.
if you see either of those pics as demeaning to women that is your perogative and opinion, lista
You are not Really Listening to me, Griper, for I am not Talking about the Photographs, but about a Possible Relationship between the Women and their Photographer. I am Only Mentioning a Possibility. It is not Really an Opinion, because I do not Know rather or not that Possibility is an Actual Reality and I am not about to Insist that it is. I am Only Acknowledging one Possible Reality, which is a Relationship of Disrespect Between the "Object" and her Photographer.
I am more than willing to Acknowledge that there are other more Pleasant Possibilities, including anything that you Might Suggest, yet you are not Willing to Acknowledge the Possibility that I have Presented because you had Decided Quite some Time Ago that you would not Ever Acknowledge anything I Say as Valid. I'm Used to the Fact that you've Made that Decision and you are Reacting just as Expected.
and there you go again making assumptions that can't be supported, lista.
1. the possibility of disrespect is in any and every type of relationship but just because that possibility exists does not make it deserving of being discussed unless there is probable cause that the possibility is a reality.
2. and since we are talking about statistical evidence then i'll even go farther and say that in any relationship if that relationship is long enough it is an inevitability that at some time or another disrespect will be shown.
3. from a philosophical level a reason is still needed to declare it as an act of disrespect in order that the reason may be discussed and you gave no reason to discuss it.
so no, lista, you are wrong. i do acknowledge the possibility. you just haven't given me any reason to consider it as worthy of discussing.
That was not an Assumption, Griper. That was a Statement of a Possibility and if it is Only a Possibility and not an Assumption, than that is an Acknowledgment that I Might be Wrong.
The Degrading of Women in the Form of Photography does Occur, Griper. I'm sorry if the Subject of your Post is not Pornography, yet the Woman in the First of the Above Photos is not Exactly Completely Clothed. I'm Sorry if you Feel that I have Changed the Subject. I will be Glad to Drop the Subject if you do.
"in any relationship, if that relationship is long enough, it is an inevitability that at some time or another disrespect will be shown."
That Statement is True because we are all Human, yet the Way to Deal with that in a Healthy Manner is Though Apologies, Followed by Forgiveness.
The Original Point that I was Making, though, is that I may See Something Different in the Eyes of the Two Women than you do. So I Guess I was Originally Talking about the Pictures.
Your Avoidance of the Subject, though, Reminded me of the Hypocrisy of the Means not Justifying the Ends and that is when we Veered off Subject.
lista,
all possibilities are assumptions unless evidence is shown that possibility to be a fact. that is the nature of them.
that is the purpose of the experimental stage of science, to ascertain whether or not the possibility is a probability of fact.
-----
you say that the girl in the first pic is not fully clothed. and what piece of clothing is she missing that would declare her as being fully clothed?
You want me to Tell you what Piece of Clothing the Woman in the First Picture is Lacking and I hope you will Forgive me, Griper, but that is a Really Stupid Question. You are so Motivated to Discredit what I say, that you will Often Turn to Technicalities.
To Adequately Answer your Question, we would have to Debate the Definition of the Phrase "Fully Clothed". You can Shape Any Argument to Fit your Purposes by Redefining Words, Griper, and I am Through Debating the Definition of Words with you.
I Doubt if there is a Single Person Out there that doesn't Know exactly what I Mean when I said that that Woman is not Fully Clothed. By Pretending to not also Know yourself, you are Insulting my Intelligence.
I Guess I Could Rephrase and say that she is not Fully Covered and if that is not Precise Enough for you, then I’ll Say that the Private Areas of her Body are not Fully Covered and No, I am not Going to Argue the Definition of the Word Private and No, I am not Going to Apologize for Saying Things in this Paragraph Based on "Assumptions" of where you Might Go Next with your Attempt to Discredit what I’m Saying. I am through Apologizing to you for Making Assumptions, Griper, and I have no Intention what so ever of Discontinuing the Practice because your Suggestion that I should is not Realistic.
Oh, and if you are going to Claim that you Never Asked me to Apologize, then I’ll simply Say that I am Saying this as a Reminder to Myself to Not Ever Apologize for Making Assumptions.
When we Evaluate Our World, Griper, we Evaluate the Possibilities. When it Comes to being Cautious, it is not Practical to Gather all of the Facts before Behaving Cautiously. Evidence should be Collected before Taking a Risk, but not before being Cautious and this is the Reason why not all of the Possibilities that we Consider will Necessarily be Supported by Proof.
What I’m Saying is not Unlike what you Said on my Blog in Relation to Making Prejudgments. Here are your Words…
"prejudgment is a self-survival mechanism within us. it is a means we have to alert us to some type of danger at any given time. it is a necessary tool we use when we do not have all the facts available for us to make a sound judgment at any given time."
The Same Principle as you have Stated about Prejudgments is also True of the Process of Evaluating the Possibilities.
I’ve Even had Experiences with Manipulators, Griper, and there was even a Time in which Your Subtle Suggestion that I should not Make Assumptions was Used in Manipulation in Order to Persuade me to Trust, rather than being Cautious, so Don't Go Telling me to not Make Assumptions. I Discredited that Suggestion a Long Time Ago and have no Intention of Living Up to such a Suggestion.
ok, lista, whatever you say.
One Last Comment and then I'll Wait for you to Talk.
If, therefore, all of the Possibilities that are Considered are Considered Assumptions, then it is not Realistic to Suggest that Assumptions should be Proved and the Suggestion that a Person should not Assume what can not be Proved is also not Realistic. If such Suggestions are Actually Followed, there would be no Way for a Person to Protect themselves from that which could Cause them Pain.
Not Only that, but if a Person did Follow such a Suggestion and was Hurt Because of it, the One who Made the Suggestion would be Responsible. Such Hurt would NOT be the Result of Expecting and Making Assumptions, as the Manipulator I Spoke of Suggested to me, but of Taking the Advice in NOT Expecting, Assuming or Being Cautious in any Way, but Instead Trusting and Giving the Benefit of a Doubt, when such should not have been Given.
"and there you go again making assumptions that can't be supported."
Yes, Griper, and I have no Intentions of discontinuing the Practice.
We Can Quit Talking if you would Like to, Griper, before I end Up Explaining more Completely to your Crowd, not Only how I Feel about Pornography, but about Manipulation as well.
Oh, One Last Thing...
Unrealistic Suggestions are no Different that Unrealistic Expectations. Just as you Said Once that you Understand the Power of Suggestion. Suggestions are Like Expectations, Griper, because you are Suggesting what a Person should be Expecting of Themselves and to Suggest High Expectations and then say that you have no Expectations is a Deception, Plain and Simply.
If you are not Careful, Griper, you may even Display Evidence of Deceptive Manipulation yourself.
Also, If you want us Back on Subject, Griper, you are the One Who is Going to have to Change the Subject Back, instead of just Questioning Everything I Say, so that I have to Explain myself, rather than Talking about the Post.
Post a Comment