bottle house, detail

    Newer Older

    Rhyolite, Nevada

    Genista, christheobscure, and 5 other people added this photo to their favorites.

    View 9 more comments

    1. Lenny Montana 108 months ago | reply

      the depth of field is just a bit swift ...

      pity you couldn't have got more in and held contrast a little longer.

      So...

      Have to vote as "deleteme" (from Delete me! group)

    2. bastillekid [deleted] 108 months ago | reply

      i would have taken it with a wider lens, this looks like it comes from a manual to illustrate depth of field concepts. Lighting is pertty standard and the pattern doens't catch.

      voted as "deleteme" (from Delete me! group)

    3. Linus Gelber 108 months ago | reply

      Great image opportunity, but the focus lies too close to the edge. I don't get the sense of depth I'd want from this picture.

      I'm twisting my head around at the monitor now. Perhaps this would be better as a vertical, but I don't think it would survive here either way.

      Voted as "deleteme" (from Delete me! group)

    4. dotpolka 108 months ago | reply

      I took this at dawn on a murky winter day. We came from Death Valley and just stopped briefly in this ghost town in the middle of nowhere. No chance to come back on a sunny day, or I would have done it. Given the circumstances, I am actually pretty happy with how this turned out.

      This is the one and only shot I took of this wall, because this was the last photo on our last film - so no chance to play around. But again - I like the result, or I would not have submitted it.

      Sorry to interrupt, please proceed.

    5. lawatt 108 months ago | reply

      cool colors, but I either want a longer DOF, or more detail/light/emphasis on the ones in front that are in focus

      voted as "deleteme" (from Delete me! group)

    6. Drift Words 108 months ago | reply

      This is pleasing, up until the point where the DOF ends. Half a dozen more in focus and it would not have got a "deleteme" in Delete Me!

    7. shellipsm 108 months ago | reply

      I want more detail ALL the way down the wall - the bottles are cool indeed, but I'm almost heartbroken at the lack of focus half way down the picture.

      Try a crop or a re-shoot with more bottles in focus, and re-post at a later date, and i'll probably vote save me.

      but for now, sorry - it's a deleteme

    8. dooda 108 months ago | reply

      I'm just following the latest craze that is deleteme

      deleteme

    9. drl. 108 months ago | reply

      nice idea, but the focus fades out where the light fades out--unfortunate confluence of events.

      voted as "deleteme" (from Delete me! group)

    10. NosniboR80 108 months ago | reply

      Personally, I like how the focus fades away from us from the beginning. Nice shot! Even though it looks like a newspaper photographers shot.

      Saveme

    11. iDanSimpson 108 months ago | reply

      this would work well as a dyptych, if you had another photo with a wider shot of the whole thing, to give us more context.

      now, it's a touch boring.

      deleteme

    12. dotpolka 108 months ago | reply

      I'll be gone for a couple of hours. The person who dares to add "deleteme11" to this earns the right to be smacked on the head with a kosher sausage.

    13. ziz 108 months ago | reply

      i dont have a problem with the dof points that people spoke about, its a valid chouce, i dont think its any more boring than life, i.e. not boring, i doo however wish there was something more to the surface than a simple straight wall or there was some light shining through the bottles in focus, a slight curve, a window, something to make me think this wasnt just an exercise in learning how your camera works.

      -voted as "deleteme" (from Delete me! group)

    14. dotpolka 108 months ago | reply

      I wish the two cobalt blue bottles were in focus, but I would not want to lose the blur in the distance altogether. A little more light certainly would not have hurt, too. So, I basically agree with lawatt again. Other than that, I stand by the picture as it is, even though it does not seem to strike people as particularly exciting.

      iDan, I think a diptych would not have made it here, either, and rightfully so. If a picture is too weak to stand up on its own, it is too weak, period.

      Thank you all for your comments. Now I'll get drunk and build a house from the empty bottles, and then I'll try to do a better job on that one.

    15. c-reel.com 101 months ago | reply

      J'adore les culs ! J'ai fais presque la mm il y a un an dans une bocadilla à Barcelone avec des minis bouteilles !!! Super

    16. U_Rhemis 60 months ago | reply

      For anyone who's interested this photo's was used and written about in a 2008 'journal of visual culture' article by Susan Murray. Cool to see the photo in full colour (the article I have's printed in black and white). You say this was taken on film as opposed to digital?

    17. dotpolka 60 months ago | reply

      Thank you! I would love to see the article. I think the author never contacted me about the inclusion of my photo.

      Yes, I took this when I was still using film. It became too costly.

    18. dotpolka 60 months ago | reply

      "Digital Images, Photo-Sharing, and Our Shifting Notions of Everyday Aesthetics
      Susan Murray

      Media, Culture, and Communication, New York University, 239 Greene Street, 7th floor, New York, NY 10003, USA, susan.murray@nyu.edu

      In this article, the author argues that the social use of digital photography, as represented on Flickr, signals a shift in the engagement with the everyday image, as it has become less about the special or rarefied moments of domestic living and more about an immediate, rather fleeting, display and collection of one's discovery and framing of the small and mundane. In this way, photography is no longer just the embalmer of time that André Bazin once spoke of, but rather a more alive, immediate, and often transitory practice/form. In addition, the everyday image becomes something that even the amateur can create and comment on with relative authority and ease, which works to break down the traditional bifurcation of amateur versus professional categories in image-making.

      Key Words: aesthetics • amateur • digital images • everyday • new media • photography • photo-sharing"

      Sounds interesting. How ironic that this is not a digital photograph.

    19. U_Rhemis 60 months ago | reply

      You're welcome. :) And, yes quite ironic, haha. I'm using the article for an assignment atm. It's quite interesting. It discusses your photo in terms of the fascination with collections and coparisons. Worth a read.

    20. dotpolka 60 months ago | reply

      Well, so far I have only read the abstract and that is not a sufficient basis for discussion, but I think I disagree with the author's thesis that "(the everyday image) has become less about the special or rarefied moments of domestic living and more about an immediate, rather fleeting, display and collection of one's discovery and framing of the small and mundane". Sheesh, has she looked at "everyone's pictures"? It is all babies and kittens and weddings and parties, especially since flickr got bought by yahoo and more and more typical yahoo customers are using it.

      On the other hand, there are lot of ambitious amateur photographers on flickr, and many of them, like me, were always interested in "the small and the mundane" and they were never your typical takers of domestic snapshots to begin with. There is one thing I noticed, though, when I switched to digital, and this is somewhat in keeping with the gist of the article: I felt really liberated and I found myself taking images of things I would not have photographed before, just because I could, with the cost factor gone. And I was finally able to take multiple shots of the same motif, something only pros or dedicated hobbyists could do before digital. You can find a lot of typical shots from my early, "experimental" digital phase in this set:: www.flickr.com/photos/dotpolka/sets/141971/

      To sum it up, I think there are people who use their digital camera family snapshots and the like, and then there are people who use photography as a means of artistic expression (in the broadest sense), but I doubt that many takers of family snapshots cross over into the "artistic" camp just because they own a digital camera.

    keyboard shortcuts: previous photo next photo L view in light box F favorite < scroll film strip left > scroll film strip right ? show all shortcuts