Wonderful wild life photographs

[AnonSpoilsport]

Accidentally stumbled across the photography of Nick Brandt - http://www.nickbrandt.com/portfolio.cfm?nK=7617&am...

Probably the most beautiful and atmospheric wildlife photographs I've ever seen.

[Simpo Two]

Great compositions, and he's found a 'look' that works well. A bit of colour here and there would be nice though.

[AnonSpoilsport]

Simpo Two said:

Great compositions, and he's found a 'look' that works well. A bit of colour here and there would be nice though.

For me, having experimented with duotones etc. years back the monochrome with the subtle tones and blending works so well that, for once, I think I'd prefer them without colour tbh.

[Simpo Two]

I wouldn't call it subtle; that tone mapping and black skies scream PSP Clarify or PS Channel Mixer and several other tricks thrown in!

[AnonSpoilsport]

Simpo Two said:

I wouldn't call it subtle; that tone mapping and black skies scream PSP Clarify or PS Channel Mixer and several other tricks thrown in!

We aren't going to agree on this are we? I mentioned the subtle tones (the colour schemes) not that the approach was subtle and not obviously IT assisted. At the end of the day, like music, I couldn't care less how it was done but value what the final effort looks like. I like them.

[14-7]

I like some of them but after a while of looking through I did think they were a bit gloomy.

[2slo]

Cleverly done and I can appreciate the effort that's gone into the work but just not to my taste, especially the lack of colour.

[K12beano]

I am not sure it's that clever even?

There is one with a baby elephant, there's a very clumsy blurring of the male elephants around it. The black and white treatment has very little sparkle to make it attractive and there are fairly blunt methods used to add "mood".

I think a seven-year-old could probably do better......

[AnonSpoilsport]

K12beano said:

I am not sure it's that clever even?

There is one with a baby elephant, there's a very clumsy blurring of the male elephants around it. The black and white treatment has very little sparkle to make it attractive and there are fairly blunt methods used to add "mood".

I think a seven-year-old could probably do better......

Do you know, I found the photos - appreciated by others on that site - went to the photographer's site, saw more and thought others might appreciate them so posted here in good spirit.

Wish I hadn't bothered now - almost feel obliged to apologise for tarnishing posters' eyes and inflicting the awfulness upon you.

Well, except for the fact that he's clearly a lot more successful and highly regarded than the amateur critics like you, unless you can demonstrate otherwise. I presume you're older than 7 so do post some of your even better attempts.

[GetCarter]

/\ Don't let it get to you !

Personally speaking, I think there are some absolutely stunning photos.... that have mostly been ruined by over processing.

Shame really. Compositions are almost faultless - why screw with them? I'd LOVE to have taken some of those.

Good luck to the guy though. I bet he makes a mint.

[AnonSpoilsport]

GetCarter said:

/\ Don't let it get to you !

Personally speaking, I think there are some absolutely stunning photos.... that have mostly been ruined by over processing.

Shame really. Compositions are almost faultless - why screw with them? I'd LOVE to have taken some of those.

Good luck to the guy though. I bet he makes a mint.

Cheers. I know what you (and they, tbf) mean about the processing but still like the effect on several, like the one of the lioness.

Ironic that I like the effect I suppose as I used to be a professional photographer but old school - 4" x 5" sheet film, dark slides etc. (even lumping 35Kg+ of Horseman monorail camera, filmbacks, stock, meter, heavy tripod etc. up mountains in the middle of winter, madness) and only ever dabbled briefly with computer processing, even then just to balance lighting when the weather had been unhelpful or to get rid of litter or similar.

[GetCarter]

AnonSpoilsport said:

Horseman monorail camera

That really IS old school! Proper 'tog kit. I only go as far back and as large as medium format... and even then I got rid of it as I couldn't be arsed to carry all the 'stuff'.

[tog]

I quite like them - nature photography as fine art not documentary. The prints sell for huge sums (up to £45k) so he's doing something right certainly.

There's some interesting stuff in the Press section of his website - including comments about technique. All shot on a Pentax 6x7, mainly T-Max 100 (some of the earlier ones are infra-red I'd say, Konica IR was available in 120 format) and then scanned into Photoshop for printing.

http://www.nickbrandt.com/UserImages/11/11129/file...

[AnonSpoilsport]

GetCarter said:

AnonSpoilsport said:

Horseman monorail camera

That really IS old school! Proper 'tog kit. I only go as far back and as large as medium format... and even then I got rid of it as I couldn't be arsed to carry all the 'stuff'.

Yes, old school but also pretty modern. It was one of these

http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/cameras/film-...

and as well as every movement you could think of from both standards it had a digital depth of field computer that calculated how much of the image would be in focus and suggested what aperture to use for the reach/effect you wanted. It was fantastic in the studio. I could spend hours, really, just playing with the focus on one set up. Best camera I ever had.

It was a bit hard work out doors though! You had to carry it in dismantled form. Find a spot/picture opportunity, unpack it, mount it to the tripod (v. heavy duty), put the standards in place, fit the bellows, lens standard and film back etc. before even starting to work on the shot. I remember somedays walking back with 90lb odd gear on my back just longing to get back to the car/home! It used single sheet film and 6cm x 6cm, 6cm x 7cm, 6cm x 9cm and 6cm x 12cm roll film in various backs. Very versatile.

I also had at various times Wista and Gandolfi and a Linhof Super Technica (with the quick view finder and rangefinder) portable view cameras that were a lot easier to travel with but still needed some persistance to use.

My snapshot camera at the time was Fuji 6x9cm rangefinder that took cracking photos.

[...Mole...]

Stunning work from a photographer I have been a fan of for a while.
They really wouldn't have the same impact/atmosphere if they were in colour or less "gloomy".

[Simpo Two]

AnonSpoilsport said:

Ironic that I like the effect I suppose as I used to be a professional photographer but old school - 4" x 5" sheet film, dark slides etc. (even lumping 35Kg+ of Horseman monorail camera, filmbacks, stock, meter, heavy tripod etc. up mountains in the middle of winter, madness) and only ever dabbled briefly with computer processing, even then just to balance lighting when the weather had been unhelpful or to get rid of litter or similar.

I see now that a major part of the fact you like them so much (to the exclusion of alternative opinions) is because you are aware of the difficulties involved in making them. I wasn't, therefore judge them solely as images.

You must accept that photography of all things is highly subjective and what one person likes, another may not. I do like them - but found after a while that they all looked rather the same.

[AnonSpoilsport]

Simpo Two said:

I see now that a major part of the fact you like them so much (to the exclusion of alternative opinions) is because you are aware of the difficulties involved in making them. I wasn't, therefore judge them solely as images.

You must accept - or perhaps you don't - that photography is highly subjective and what one person likes, another may not. I do like them - but found after a while that they all looked rather the same. QED.

No, I'm so dumb and narrow minded that I'd never considered anyone might have an alternative opinion to me. So self-centred that no other opinion counts. That's clearly the issue.

Or, it might be a bit like this. Someone takes the trouble to post a link to photographs, art, music or whatever that they think others might like, in the hope (generously I'd suspect) that those who would like it/them wouldn't miss out.

I look and don't like said art. The difference being I'd pass on and wouldn't feel it appropriate, certainly generous in spirit, to then respond by saying that I didn't like 'it', pointing out the flaws and suggesting 7 year olds could do better, etc. Personally I wouldn't bother or feel good doing that.

But of course, respect your right to the contrary view...

[Simpo Two]

You should choose your arguments more wisely.

[Elderly]

AnonSpoilsport said:

Well, except for the fact that he's clearly a lot more successful and highly regarded than the amateur critics like you, unless you can demonstrate otherwise. I presume you're older than 7 so do post some of your even better attempts.

First of all; thanks for bringing these to our attention.

I looked and I wasn't going to comment on them (how would you have felt
if nobody had responded in any way at all?).

I really envy his patience and I admire his gift of composition
but I don't like his attempt to elevate what are in general wonderful
moments caught, into 'art'.

But I am surprised that you (as an ex-professional) have taken posters' criticism
of somebody else's work so sensitively.
How did/would you feel after "lumping 35Kg+ of Horseman monorail camera, filmbacks, stock, meter, heavy tripod etc. up mountains in the middle of winter" if somebody then negatively critcised your work?
It's not *your* work they are criticising in this thread and compared to the extreme effort you have put into getting your images in the past, posting a link should not have been that onerous for you.

I certainly do not agree with your assertion quoted above about the qualification required to offer criticism.

There are many very succesful 'artists' who are crap.
There are many highly regarded (by who?) 'artists' who are crap.
There are many good critics and most of them cannot execute
the art they are criticising nearly as well as the exponent
but their crticism can remain valid.

Edited by Elderly on Friday 1st March 17:58

[AnonSpoilsport]

Elderly said:

AnonSpoilsport said:

Well, except for the fact that he's clearly a lot more successful and highly regarded than the amateur critics like you, unless you can demonstrate otherwise. I presume you're older than 7 so do post some of your even better attempts.

First of all; thanks for bringing these to our attention.

I looked and I wasn't going to comment on them (how would you have felt
if nobody had responded in any way at all?).

I really envy his patience and I admire his gift of composition
but I don't like his attempt to elevate what are in general wonderful
moments caught, into 'art'.

But I am surprised that you (as an ex-professional) have taken posters' criticism
of somebody else's work so sensitively.
How did/would you feel after "lumping 35Kg+ of Horseman monorail camera, filmbacks, stock, meter, heavy tripod etc. up mountains in the middle of winter" if somebody then negatively critcised your work?
It's not *your* work they are criticising in this thread and compared to the extreme effort you have put into getting your images in the past, posting a link should not have been that onerous for you.

I certainly do not agree with your assertion quoted above about the qualification required to offer criticism.

There are many very succesful 'artists' who are crap.
There are many highly regarded (by who?) 'artists' who are crap.
There are many good critics and most of them cannot execute
the art they are criticising nearly as well as the exponent
but their crticism can remain valid.

Edited by Elderly on Friday 1st March 17:58

I didn't actually take it that sensitively actually, just that Simpo seems the sort who, meeting charity collectors in his local high street and not wanting to proffer coins, would feel obliged to tell the chugger how much the charity sucks.

I was always fully ready to accept criticism of my own work, constructive/suggestive of changes a client might want or not, given I was flogging it and asking for their patronage. This was a bit different in intention so I don't fully agree that I should too easily accept any subsequent slagging without arguing back.

I do accept your point about criticisms being valid from non-practitioners etc. and wasn't really trying to say that only equally successful artists were free to comment, but, to be fair, this was a riposte to someone who claimed a 7 year old could do better, so no wonder gloves were dropped.

Edited by AnonSpoilsport on Saturday 2nd March 00:11