ICM to Painting (Page 2): If you can't replicate it, it isn't photography ? REALLY? I must have misunderstood that because one thing about ART is that it's unique. One thing about...

JD750 Loc: SoCal

oldtigger wrote:

it may be art but if you can't replicate it, it isn't photography.
You may well luck into a great rendition of "boating on the Seine" today but
the probability of creating a similar "field of sunflowers" tomorrow is about zilch.

If you can't replicate it, it isn't photography ? REALLY?

I must have misunderstood that because one thing about ART is that it's unique. One thing about
photography is it captures a unique moment. There may never be another moment like that.
One can think of countless examples.

But you are saying that is not photography? I don't think that is what you really meant to say.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Billyspad wrote:

ICM is waving your camera about with the shutter open to get a blurred picture you can exhibit on FYC convincing yourself and others along the way its artistic. Yep you guessed it right. There is no real plan or idea of what you are going to end up with. Its called Lucky Art. But some get pleasure from it.

I don't think it is automatically crap. I have see some creative uses of camera movement (or was that serendipity?) which I presume comes under the aegis of the acronym ICM. I think the results depend on the vision of the creator.

Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

JD750 wrote:

I don't think it is automatically crap. I have see some creative uses of camera movement (or was that serendipity?) which I presume comes under the aegis of the acronym ICM. I think the results depend on the vision of the creator.

JD crap is your word I used the term Lucky Art which is much more respectfully insulting and FYC friendly. I feel I must remind you young Dave (magnetoman) is English so like myself can be easily hurt by critique of his artistic endeavors. Tears and tantrums are not unknown. If he hits the bottle again and starts gulping down large quantities of Prozac I fear it will be your fault. So maybe crap was not the right term but worked at visionary poo may fit the bill?

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Billyspad wrote:

JD crap is your word I used the term Lucky Art which is much more respectfully insulting and FYC friendly. I feel I must remind you young Dave (magnetoman) is English so like myself can be easily hurt by critique of his artistic endeavors. Tears and tantrums are not unknown. If he hits the bottle again and starts gulping down large quantities of Prozac I fear it will be your fault. So maybe crap was not the right term but worked at visionary poo may fit the bill?

I directed no critique at Mr matgnetoman as I was generalizing but your point is well taken and I offer an apology to Mr Magnetoman and anyone offended by my crappy language. But I'm a Yank so you get that. However I shall endavour to avoid slang language and to be be more sensitive to the gentle feelings of the English in the future.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

Billyspad wrote:

10 out of 10 for the sense of humor Dave. The way you get others to take this seriously creases me my friend. Trust all is well with you and its not too cold.

So you don't see this as a worthwhile route for someone to experiment in digitally painted art? You forget, not everyone is as talented as yourself. Even Degas is thought to have used photography as a base for his dancers in his later career.
Or is it just that I've tried to produce an 'expressionist' look? I did that because, as I explained earlier, I think the ICM method can produce something similar, but what if I simply used a bog-standard photo (don't go there Billy!) as the base for painting over, would that be acceptable to you? I'm sure I wasn't the only kid that enjoyed 'painting-by-numbers'? Don't forget, I went on to attain GSE Art! Not much else, admittedly, but I'm quite good at cryptic crosswords.
Thanks for your thoughts Billy, we'll just have to disagree on this one. Weather's improving, as represented expressively in my art, which is based on a pic taken this week.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

oldtigger wrote:

it may be art but if you can't replicate it, it isn't photography.
You may well luck into a great rendition of "boating on the Seine" today but
the probability of creating a similar "field of sunflowers" tomorrow is about zilch.

FYC does include Art as a discussion subject ot, so I think we're OK there, even as a novice.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

JD750 wrote:

I directed no critique at Mr matgnetoman as I was generalizing but your point is well taken and I offer an apology to Mr Magnetoman and anyone offended by my crappy language. But I'm a Yank so you get that. However I shall endavour to avoid slang language and to be be more sensitive to the gentle feelings of the English in the future.

Don't hold back on my account JD, I assure you no offence has been taken, Billy is over-sensitive. Was -sensitive the word I was looking for??

Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

magnetoman wrote:

So you don't see this as a worthwhile route for so... (show quote)

Dave I have no talent my friend whatsoever. I'm a snapper that plays and nothing more. I NEVER describe what I do as art and certainly do not see a shot taken whilst swing a Nikon around ones head as art. The impressionist painters recorded light as they saw it the camera very poorly records what is there in front of the lens. Add to that changes made by in camera software so if your trying to reproduce a Degas or a Monet your doomed to failure. However that being said if you enjoy it that is all that matters. I get some pleasure out of looking at what you produce and vastly more pleasure out of listening to the comments that wish to add credence to this strange pursuit by encouraging you or stating they are rushing off to practice the ol' hoopla loopla camera swing routine.
So carry on my friend and allow me to enjoy it in a different way to some. I probably get much more out of it than the chin stroking serious bods who hang out in this region.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

Billyspad wrote:

Dave I have no talent my friend whatsoever. I'm a ... (show quote)

It's good that you get some enjoyment from our efforts Billy, whatever your approach to achieving it, but you misquote me, I am not trying to reproduce a Degas or Monet. I may not be producing something you feel is art, but the point is I'm finding a route to produce what I saw, it doesn't have to be exactly as the camera sees it, whether with movement or on a tripod, but the image I started with is my guide and, in that, I find the movement helpful. Whether it ever leads me to produce a digital painting from scratch remains to be seen, but with the help I get here, who knows, I might surprise myself! My thanks for your English input, it spurs me ever onward.

minniev Loc: MIssissippi

Billyspad wrote:

ICM is waving your camera about with the shutter open to get a blurred picture you can exhibit on FYC convincing yourself and others along the way its artistic. Yep you guessed it right. There is no real plan or idea of what you are going to end up with. Its called Lucky Art. But some get pleasure from it.

One of those who get pleasure from it is Michael Orton. He has also acquired fame and fortune from it. Google "Orton Effect" or simply look under the filters in your favorite software and you'll find plenty of references, as folks try to find ways to emulate what he does, both with still photos and ICM. Here's a link to some of his work, which is interesting to me because he has a traditional still photo of the same scene beside his ICM version. I am more interested in his painterly blur effect than the ICM, but he's been successful with both, and influenced other nature photographers over the years in both film and digital approaches. http://www.michaelortonphotography.com/icm.html

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

magnetoman wrote:

Regulars will know I like ICM, even if it does get frustrating. I've been thinking for a while that I would like to try converting one to an impressionist style of painting, so here's the first attempt together with the original. Your opinions, critique and impressions welcomed. I won't sway you with my own opinion as yet.

I am partial to this technique. I usually don't try it on people; and I think it is bold of you to try it. The result is that you did achieve a result that looks like an impressionist painting. I like the processed version better than the original. You might not be able to recreate the exact look you achieved here; but that is not a negative for me.
Erich

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

minniev wrote:

One of those who get pleasure from it is Michael O... (show quote)

You won't be surprised to hear I was looking at his site yesterday Min. He seems to have acquired a degree of predictability that I'm not assured of with my results! I do have some similar shots to those he shows, but they were earlier and accidental. I was thinking of including them in Erichs Abstract thread, but decided they were too advanced for us FYCers to appreciate.
What I'm after at the moment is rather different and could be based on a standard shot but, as I tried to explain to Billy, the movement seems to help my route to how I want things. Found a copy of the digital painting book you recommended, many thanks for that.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

ebrunner wrote:

I am partial to this technique. I usually don't try it on people; and I think it is bold of you to try it. The result is that you did achieve a result that looks like an impressionist painting. I like the processed version better than the original. You might not be able to recreate the exact look you achieved here; but that is not a negative for me.
Erich

Thanks for the encouragement Erich. Most seem to have withstood the shock quite well!
Not sure whether recreating the effect is going to be a problem, I don't think so at present but may be required to change my mind!

NJFrank Loc: New Jersey

This is not my cup of tea. However I do like the PP you did on this photo. I am referring to the colors. I am still trying to take decent photos on a regular of bases. So this type of shooting is way above my pay grade. But hey you don't need me to tell you to go for it.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

NJFrank wrote:

This is not my cup of tea. However I do like the PP you did on this photo. I am referring to the colors. I am still trying to take decent photos on a regular of bases. So this type of shooting is way above my pay grade. But hey you don't need me to tell you to go for it.

Well there's those that will tell you this is one way of avoiding the need for a decent photo. Not true of course! Thanks for your comments, I like your broad-minded view.