Calm

owlwink

Again, any thoughts???

Picture 1


Picture 2


“Pig Head”

Sitting in the forest we view the calming figure of a “PIG HEADED” women, perched pondering vagrantly. Her derelict expressions of movement are secured somewhat, by her bestial head. Abjection plays a large role in these photos as we view a fragmented piece of a corpse “the apex of abjection” merging with the clean body of a store mannequin ( this itself, in this case is the prostethic). The life in the surrounding nature binds with the mannequins human like posture. Meanwhile the “grotesque” head of the pig is assimilated in the process, as even though it challenges perceptions, it doesn‘t quite leap into the realm of sexual ambiguity. This positioning is captured to further suggest the fine line that exists between drowning in our identities that appear to be perpetually fragmenting and staying afloat in asexual assimilation.

magicbastarder

looks like a mannequin wearing a pig's head to me.

owlwink

magicbastarder wrote: »

looks like a mannequin wearing a pig's head to me.

A great observation, thank you

AnimalRights

You need to stop taking pictures with the main subject bang on in the middle, these are def better than the cross dressing bloke anyways.

owlwink

AnimalRights wrote: »

You need to stop taking pictures with the main subject bang on in the middle, these are def better than the cross dressing bloke anyways.

I shall take that onboard :D:D thanks

deRanged

owlwink wrote: »

Again, any thoughts???
calming figure ... bestial head ... “grotesque” head of the pig

I'm not sure these follow on from each other.

Abjection plays a large role in these photos as we view a fragmented piece of a corpse

but we're viewing all of the corpse aren't we - not just a piece.

I reckon if you hauled the head out of your freezer, got the dummy out of the garage, went back, dismantled the pieces and scattered them all around and took a wider view of the bits you'd make an interesting shot. Or, if you transplanted the existing installation to a bus stop in the middle of town that would be something to see. As it is it looks like an art project for the sake of the project.

melekalikimaka

dude... lay off the acid

decimal

You should try some post processing, it makes it look a lot more interesting, eg..

I didn't even read the text that you placed with it as I got bored half way through.

Shiny

What did you do to that decimal ?

MataЯ

Rubbish.

Sorry.

decimal

Shiny wrote: »

What did you do to that decimal ?

levels, curves
Duplicate layer, remove everything except red.
Add noise, motion blur, set blending options to overlay.

I think that was it, didn't pay too much attention to what I was doing

kgiller

MataЯ wrote: »

Rubbish.

Sorry.

I agree

owlwink

decimal wrote: »

You should try some post processing, it makes it look a lot more interesting, eg..

I didn't even read the text that you placed with it as I got bored half way through.

Will do man thanks :D:D

Was going to do that anyways... Again this is not the finished project.

Star Lord

owlwink wrote: »

Will do man thanks :D:D

Was going to do that anyways... Again this is not the finished project.

You need to decide more what you want to portray in your photos, and let people decide for themselves what they see in the photo, rather than attaching an explanation that reeks of pretension, and seems to be tacked on in a fashion that suggests you were given buzz words or key phrases and told to do something that implied them.

smash

I have to say your pics make me a bit uneasy.... I can see that there was effort put into the location and props but I just don't really get them, and also the end result doesn't do any justice to the effort you put in... sorry.

owlwink

DamoElDiablo wrote: »

You need to decide more what you want to portray in your photos, and let people decide for themselves what they see in the photo, rather than attaching an explanation that reeks of pretension, and seems to be tacked on in a fashion that suggests you were given buzz words or key phrases and told to do something that implied them.

Man I just threw that in, just random stuff that I was writing for the laugh. Again just because I put it up doesn't mean that it is set in stone. Just thought I'd write what I was thinking because I tend to find that some people need to be spoon fed. I didnt realise you wanted to eat alone :D:D

Dragan

DamoElDiablo wrote: »

You need to decide more what you want to portray in your photos, and let people decide for themselves what they see in the photo, rather than attaching an explanation that reeks of pretension, and seems to be tacked on in a fashion that suggests you were given buzz words or key phrases and told to do something that implied them.

Pretty much what i was going to say.

It's also pointless to attach an explanation like the one you did to an unfinished piece.

Personally i don't get what the picture is trying to convey.....largely because the script forced my mind along a path rather than let me make my own conclusions.

MataЯ

owlwink wrote: »

some people need to be spoon fed.

To be frank, the explanation you spoon fed to us was pure codswallop. That's the first thing that popped into my head. I'm not even sure what it really means.

Right, if it was a painting... or a drawing, and a well done one at that, I would appreciate it as a work of art. I might even take the time to figure out what exactly the artist meant by putting the pigs head on the mannequin. (Although I doubt I'd come to a conclusion.) I may even think "wow, I wish I had the skills to paint like that".

That's what I think when looking at real art. Like Gottfried Helnweins work. He is an amazing artist, a true master, and he paints some very abstract pictures, but he doesn't need codswallop captions. He has a title to point your thought in the right direction. If it's one of his untitled ones, well, you're f*cked! BUt you can still appreciate it as art. It's not all about thought. Art (generally) has to appeal to the senses... mainly sight, and imagination if that can be called a sense. The fact that he has created a work of art from scratch, drawn it, chosen the colours, adds a real sense of awe and wow, and you know that it was properly created. It adds life to it, even if the subject matter is a dead child... And you question "what the **** was he thinking, and what does it mean???"

But the fact that this is just a plain photograph makes the pigs head and mannequin thing just look silly, and that fecking caption! Some art buffs who wear scarfs and berets in the scorching summer heat may drool with delight while reading stuff like that, but most people (as you can see right here) won't give it any time.

This also applies to your other genderf*ck thread.

But I like the burning of the cane pics.

Is this part of a college course?

By the way, don't be offended as all this is only my opinion, and who am I to you? Nobody.

Calina

owlwink wrote: »

Man I just threw that in, just random stuff that I was writing for the laugh. Again just because I put it up doesn't mean that it is set in stone. Just thought I'd write what I was thinking because I tend to find that some people need to be spoon fed. I didnt realise you wanted to eat alone :D:D

Do you have any idea at all how condescending this is?

I get the impression that in some respects you're trying too hard to be the photographic equivalent of Damien Hirst or Tracy Emin or something. It's not working.

There is nothing of any major note about these photographs; they don't provide the reactions your random stuff for the laugh provides for. They provide for a WTF reaction. The fact that it's not even finished is something you should highlight at the beginning of your blurb and try and give some sort of an indication of what you're trying to achieve. Whatever it is, I don't think you're getting it.

The post processing leaves me cold although there's some scope to improve it and it would be better than the source photograph, mucho.

owlwink

MataЯ wrote: »

I'm not even sure what it really means.

How can you criticise if you don't even understand what it means????

MataЯ

I think it means "utter nonsense". It kind of has that feeling to it.

Same as "tripe".

owlwink

MataЯ wrote: »

I think it means "utter nonsense". It kind of has that feeling to it.

Same as "tripe".

"think"

mehfesto2

Yeah, man.
I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but when you admitted to essenentially, making the script up as you went along "for a laugh" -and by the looks of things, after the shoot too-, it just shows how little thought actually went into this project. And it's not even an original concept in itself, either.

If us regular joes can poke holes in your theory, the arty types will eat you alive. Art for the sake of art, methinks.

kgiller

Looks familiar alright...