Pushed the Onions to Another Dimension (Page 2): Always interested in your comments Bob. Thanks for stopping by. :sm24:...

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

artBob wrote:

I loved your onions, true photographic Art. This? Not so much. It is superficial paint, fake painting. Real painting is much more concerned about the subtleties (emotional and mental) of strokes, and better integration of all areas.

Still, I appreciate your stepping out.

Always interested in your comments Bob. Thanks for stopping by.

Mackol87 Loc: Ft. Lauderdale

I think that you have hit on techniques that you can apply to most any subject. Good work!

Cany143 Loc: SE Utah

I sort of liked the original you posted earlier, Jim, but this version I definitely like. Of course, just to 'like' something is relatively meaningless when discussing imagery, just as it's meaningless to call something art simply because a photographically generated image has been digitally manipulated away from the presumed norms.

That's not to say you shouldn't or couldn't consider what you've created/presented as Art. If that's what it is for you, then that's what it is for me. I think Digitally Manipulated Image better describes this class of photography, though. It's both neutral and less presumptive.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

This image is so totally different from the first post that they can't be compared. The painting changes the whole feel. I really like what you did with the onions but the background is a little too 'in your face' for me and detracts from the onions which are your subject. If they were mine I would keep them both but hang the painting--JMO

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

Cany, I like that, "Digitally Manipulated Image"description. I will use it when I referencing this type of work in the future.
BTW I haven't commented on many of your shots because I would just keep repeating myself. All of your landscape shots are outstanding. I just went back and showed my wife a dozen or so from your collection. They're just great, and for anyone else reading my comment take a moment if you're not familiar with Cany143's work and see some of his wonderful scenery/landscape shots taken in Cany's neck of the woods, beautiful.👏

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

Curmudgeon wrote:

This image is so totally different from the first post that they can't be compared. The painting changes the whole feel. I really like what you did with the onions but the background is a little too 'in your face' for me and detracts from the onions which are your subject. If they were mine I would keep them both but hang the painting--JMO

I thought if the onions were anymore pronounced you might start smelling them.🤭
Thanks so much for stopping by and commenting.

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

Mackol87 wrote:

I think that you have hit on techniques that you can apply to most any subject. Good work!

Thanks so much.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Nice work, Jim.
--Bob

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

I enjoyed this version, particularly the less in-your-face brush strokes on the onions. I can see value in the suggestion that the background may be a little overpowering. Most of all, I've very much enjoyed reading everyone's thoughtful input related to the "what is art" comment in your opening.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

I do highly manipulated photographs myself, but I don't think that is necessary for a photograph to be art. Photographs straight out of the camera can certainly be art.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

If there was such a thing as a photographer that didn't appreciate or understand visual interest, the chances are he/she wouldn't be much of a photographer. This edit has visual interest in spades. My guess is it was the pursuit of visual interest that guided your edit. Don't let any unappreciative person have you doubting your own creative processes. And if it means anything to you I would say you succeeded admirably.

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

rmalarz wrote:

Nice work, Jim.
--Bob

Thanks Bob

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

R.G. wrote:

If there was such a thing as a photographer that didn't appreciate or understand visual interest, the chances are he/she wouldn't be much of a photographer. This edit has visual interest in spades. My guess is it was the pursuit of visual interest that guided your edit. Don't let any unappreciative person have you doubting your own creative processes. And if it means anything to you I would say you succeeded admirably.

Thanks so much for your comments R.G. it does mean a lot to me. I wanted to create something out of a common object that would draw favorable interest. That it did seeing all the comments coming forward.

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

Linda From Maine wrote:

I enjoyed this version, particularly the less in-your-face brush strokes on the onions. I can see value in the suggestion that the background may be a little overpowering. Most of all, I've very much enjoyed reading everyone's thoughtful input related to the "what is art" comment in your opening.

I too enjoyed all the "what is art" comments. Fun!

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Please tell me with honesty that this not a photo of one of the classic painters. This photo is far too beautiful for mere photography with "pushed" post-processing. Obviously, it is a cloaked expression of colored/white love and is a protest against anti-miscegenation laws.

Jim-Pops, Simplicity of props and having a visual analysis of the end goal is what all photographers should learn/cultivate. I have quit watching Topaz hour-long webinars in which the presenter sort of wanders to the end of the hour vs saying at the offset... "here is my goal and end result and here step-wise is how I achieved it." If you, Jim-Pops, gave a seminar for Topaz, then I would watch the simple subjects grow into this superb painting.