02.12.2011 | by Dracovina | | Comments (15)
Silent Hill Part II
View it as an art project. These photos I have edited a bit and look on purpose partial "not real".
Speaking of "right" and "wrong": Who defines which photo corresponds to one of the two properties? Beauty, fascination and art is in the eye of the beholder, is not it? Therefore can an image be not correct?
Of course, there are some basic technical rules, such as the golden ratio, but in my opinion, a photo or an image is only really cool if there is something that impressed me. There is no matter how it was developed with … the main thing it does the job, attracts attention and the viewer can enjoy.
Reaches the image or photo that status, then it is really the work of an artist.
How do you define the beauty of a picture or a photograph? You just look after what you like or do you respect the technical implementation? I must admit so honestly, that I sometimes also look at the technology behind an image, and wonder how it was implemented … but this is an occupational disease I think ;)
Related to "Silent Hill Part II":
Dracovina
05. Dezember 2011, 19:30 Uhr
Ja, so ähnlich geht es mir auch ;)
Mh... Fotografie und "Fotografie", ab wann kann man es so nennen? Ich finde, einige, die es als solches bezeichnen, ruinieren fast diese Kunst. Aber im Endeffekt liegt es eben doch im Auge des Betrachters... zum Glück^^