Sorry Tim:

Hi Claw,

I was thinking of moving this debate away from further intruding on Tim's tile. However, since you're done, I'll be very brief then depart, too.

Firstly, thank you very much for the examples, information and arguments. Yes, I would agree with much you say. Axiomatically, a good photo of a dog is better than a bad one. Nevertheless, so long as I can see a dog clearly, I do not really care about the quality of the image. That painting, for me, is not a patch (!) on Tim's photograph, above - because it is not a real dog. I am not looking for human insights into the character of a dog; I simply wish to see the dog(s) themselves and decide on their characters for myself - artist leave the field of view, please. I do not know if Tim's picture is a great photograph or merely a very good on - it shows real dogs and that is all I care about. 

However, my final point is this:

Photography and literature are arts; arts are for people and since I value dogs above people, arts are, ipso facto, far less important than dogs in my view.

Cheers, p.

Thanks again, Tim.

>T> So, I shot those two St. Bernards with that compositional balance in mind. Both leads go off the board

Better than the usual tangled mess which two seem to become.

To be honest, if I see dogs in a photograph, any artistic and technical aspects of said photographs seem very trivial - I'm just delighted you took the image.

p.

Hi Tim,

Indeed... one of the secrets of great photography it seems is taking 999 shots then being in the right place at the right time for No. 1,000. But you knew it was a great shot and you took it. Well done.

p.

Hi Tim,

Again, I'm not good with blurred pix. However, your St Bernards more than compensate. Now, although I'd prefer to have the real things, your pix are an excellent tribute - well done.

p.

awww, the dogs are so cute

Thank you very much Patrice. I appreciate your visits. I have one more I want to put up in a little bit.

Diane,
I use an older digital camera. Select the menu option that allows for the most open shutter per picture (usually night pictures...my menu has the quarter moon as avatar selection). 

angelic was taken during the day at Poets House to see Ren's book. Karen is actually bringing a wine glass up to eventually drink from it. The sharp lightning bolt-like trail that's eminating from her left hand is actually the glass' reflection in motion.

laughter was crafted the same way, except that we were at the Blue Note Restaurant to see Ottmar Liebert perform; and since we were sitting near the stage before the lights dimmed, I could capture the sharp lighting contrast of dark background and sharp highlights. This one was experimental. I love leaving the shutter open and seeing what movement yields for a picture. Like a poor-man's time elapse.


Namaste,
~Tim

Tim,

These are very nice. I was wondering how you achieve the movement effect in angelic, and the one called laughter? 

Diane