I have a number of photographs that I like that I don't post on here because I think that they need to be big to be seen. Dependent on texture, and therefore resolution, for the feeling I wanted to capture in them. But you could argue that I don't have a strong sense of composition if my images don't stand up if they are merely 1000 pixels wide. I don't know. If you look at thumbnails of Klimts versus thumbnails of van goghs, the latter are better in thumbnails because of their simple, bold compositions. Klimt's paitings have a lot of fine detail that needs to be reproduced at some reasonable size to be seen.
I like to mess around with Photomatix and I'll use it with images that don't really need it, purely from the dynamic range standpoint. I like the sort of ethereal or surrealistic effect you can get, and make an image look like a Klimt forestscape, or maybe something out of Tolkien.








Frightening?
--
[THOU SHALT NOT STEAL!]
--
'We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.'
~ Oscar Wilde
--
"If you gaze long enough into the abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you"- Nietzsche
--
§ [link] §
--
[THOU SHALT NOT STEAL!]
--
[THOU SHALT NOT STEAL!]
--
The Surreal Arts
The exquisitecorpse
CollaborativeCorpse
i suppose i am
--
--
--
--
90% of teens today would die if Myspace had a system failure and was completely destroyed. If you are one of the 10% that would be laughing, copy and paste this to your signature.
Previous Page12Next Page