Are we now seeking too much perfection nowdays ? (Page 11): I have the SW2700PT and it is a very good monitor. I bought it for about $500 at Best Buy. I used my Best Buy birthday...

Nickaroo

Brucer wrote:

Yes, I would say you were very fortunate, and that... (show quote)

I have the SW2700PT and it is a very good monitor. I bought it for about $500 at Best Buy. I used my Best Buy birthday points and received an additional 10% off the sale price. But, I really do think that you can still get a deal on it at B&H. I have a iMac desktop with 32 gigs of Ram and it works great. You need to probably upgrade your computer though. Do that then get the monitor and your set.

Vlux

Snark is not nice.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Vlux wrote:

Snark is not nice.

Who are you talking to? We can't know unless you use "quote reply".

markjay

(I can't stand cutting the top inch or three off of someone's head for a portrait.
But that's just my taste.)

One of the most beautiful portraits ever made - back in 1898 - by Gertrude Kasebier. One of the most classical photographers, in ever major museum in the world.

Head cropped.

http://www.artnet.com/artists/gertrude-kasebier/portrait-miss-n-gW23BjkGxPResiZs4Ow2GQ2

GerryER Loc: Virginia USA

markjay wrote:

(I can't stand cutting the top inch or three off of someone's head for a portrait.
But that's just my taste.)

One of the most beautiful portraits ever made - back in 1898 - by Gertrude Kasebier. One of the most classical photographers, in ever major museum in the world.

Head cropped.

http://www.artnet.com/artists/gertrude-kasebier/portrait-miss-n-gW23BjkGxPResiZs4Ow2GQ2

I wouldn't call that "head cropped." It looks as though her hair went to the edge of the print and the frame "cropped" her hair. In any case, I think markjay was being facetious, I hope.

markjay

GerryER wrote:

I wouldn't call that "head cropped." It looks as though her hair went to the edge of the print and the frame "cropped" her hair. In any case, I think markjay was being facetious, I hope.

Actually - her head is not cropped but her hair is. It is one of the first examples of cropping an image in a final portrait in photograqphy.

That is the actual photo on a white background. It is not framed in that picture. You can find many copies of it and they are all the same. Check: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evelyn_Nesbit

It is not only a famous photo, Miss N was very famous. The photo was printed in the first issue of the magazine Camera Work by Stieglitz, and she was the subject of a famous duel between 2 rich New Yorkers who were in love with her. Stanford White - probably the most famous architect in the US at the turn of the century was killed in the duel held on the roof of Madison Square Garden.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

markjay wrote:

(I can't stand cutting the top inch or three off of someone's head for a portrait.
But that's just my taste.)

One of the most beautiful portraits ever made - back in 1898 - by Gertrude Kasebier. One of the most classical photographers, in ever major museum in the world.

Head cropped.

http://www.artnet.com/artists/gertrude-kasebier/portrait-miss-n-gW23BjkGxPResiZs4Ow2GQ2

Looks to me like she just had her hair styled very high. It does not detract from her face and is minimal. I still would not accept that, I'd re-take the photo.

Vlux

billnikon wrote:

If we did not change in tastes, attitudes, and growth Andy Warhol would just be another out of work artist.

Warhol said that "art is what you can get away with." And proved it.

markjay

PhotogHobbyist wrote:

Looks to me like she just had her hair styled very high. It does not detract from her face and is minimal. I still would not accept that, I'd re-take the photo.

Everyone is different. You might have re-taken the photo, but this was not an accident. It was intentional. And Kasebier is one of the most important women photographers of the last 100 years. So you may not like it, but Kasebier knew what she was doing, ands she was way ahead of her time. Google her or this photo and you will find a thousand references and see that this image is in a large number of museums. if she had re-taken the photo, it might not be now in any museums.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

markjay wrote:

Everyone is different. You might have re-taken the photo, but this was not an accident. It was intentional. And Kasebier is one of the most important women photographers of the last 100 years. So you may not like it, but Kasebier knew what she was doing, ands she was way ahead of her time. Google her or this photo and you will find a thousand references and see that this image is in a large number of museums. if she had re-taken the photo, it might not be now in any museums.

Or, as the saying goes, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." Still not my cup of tea.

markjay

No one says art has to be beautiful.

I think it is more important to be interesting - not just beautiful.

GerryER Loc: Virginia USA

I doubt that photograph was intended as "art," but more of an accurate representation of the subject, which that photo was, mood and all.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

GerryER wrote:

I doubt that photograph was intended as "art," but more of an accurate representation of the subject, which that photo was, mood and all.

An accurate representation of a subject can certainly be art.

lositton Loc: Pensacola, FL

CHG_CANON wrote:

Photography is easy when you don’t know how, but very difficult when you do.