It didn't quite fit together, NMV, and I was especially annoyed by the fact that the pack was stuck in my head: the preview was really confusing, it seemed like something three-legged and incomprehensible. Sorry, but it feels like a random shot, like a shutter test. Not Degas, in short.
Continuing to sift through and clean out the archives
Valentin Zakharov, well, I'm not chasing Degas Although, take a closer look at Degas in your spare time This isn't a random shot, by the way. I was just taking random shots of the ballerinas getting ready to go out, the conditions were quite challenging. I didn't want anyone to see me and start posing or chase me with a broom Thanks
Speaking of Edgar Degas... this painting is in no way connected to that name, God forbid.
So, the work of this impressionist is quite ambiguous, like that of many others. It's difficult for us to understand what's truly complex and difficult. If you look at his well-known works "Blue Dancers" and "View of the Stage from a Box," and if you didn't know they were by DEGA!!! I don't think you would have admired them the first time. There's a lot of ambiguity there, regarding "the tutu hit the head").
We're used to everything being perfectly correct and clear about what's what and why. The impressionists have a somewhat different approach and view of things.
It wasn't Degas—the joke was a circus joke: "Have you seen his act? Is it true they say he balances just under the dome and still manages to play the violin?"—Yes. Not Oistrakh. This isn't about Degas—my job is to write what comes to mind; yours—to decide what to do with it or not. The NMV didn't catch on, it didn't work out, no way.
Valentin Zakharov, Valentin, so you started talking about Degas
Not Degas, in short.
I understand you remember him and his works a little, but rather vaguely. Look it up and refresh your memory of his work, you'll understand what I mean. I understood the joke, but its meaning in this case is not quite right.
The joke about comparing seascapes to Aivazovsky is already a joke. I should have simply written, "Not a masterpiece, in short." I know this from experience—sorting through archives isn't an easy task; besides its own value, the work is also loaded with the value of past years, memories that are precious to you.
Valentin Zakharov, you're being disingenuous, Valentin. I didn't even hint at any comparison or allusion to Degas. You mentioned him in your first comment, and only then did you mention jokes and all that other stuff. Didn't you just think of Degas? Right off the bat, it means the association was made! Well, then you started putting everything in its place Works, did you look at the ones I named?
Yeah, and also Lawn Seeded and Shoe Repair, thanks for the Degas, Blue Dancers were impressive... You have to create such a deliberately cropped, accentuated image, without citing the limitations of the equipment
I like it. And at the request of the working people, if there aren't enough recommendations, can we leave it alone? What's wrong doesn't mean it's bad...
Fisherman (Igor), I simply admire the artist's skill and courage to construct an image contrary to the basic rules... A photographer is always limited by the pictorial frame of his camera and seeks a more successful compositional solution, but to cut the picture like this, having the opportunity to fit everyone into the frame, is powerful. I'm talking about the dancer below
fisherman (Igor), I'm not talking about your photo, I'm talking about Degas, and just want to talk, sorry, I would have cropped the photo from above too. View crop
Victor Baikovsky (Next), well, whether you cut it or not, the essence remains the same, although I don't see much point in this version of trimming and the discussion flared up after the first comment by Valentin, who first pointed out
that the pack hit his head
and was the first to point out the direction, towards Degas, although, frankly speaking, I didn't expect such a quick associativity, so I suggested refreshing my memory of this artist, so that there would be no questions about "the pack hit his head" and the like, that way you can now rip Degas to shreds...
fisherman (Igor), to be honest, the preview on my laptop with a high-contrast matrix looked even more vulgar than the preview Valentin described and cropped for brevity, to unload the image.
In any case, a HUGE THANK YOU to everyone for the dialogue that took place, because sometimes I get sick of comments like "amazing," "superb," "words fail me," and "incomparable," which are replete with comments from "some" authors (we won't name names :wink) on works, which are sometimes simply vulgar in nature and aren't really works per se, as they say, just a matter of technique, nothing more...
fisherman (Igor), the thing is that the favorite tab of the new photo center has become the discussion page, dialogue, complex comments - this is what remains from the previous photo club, which was different from other photo sites.
Victor Baikovsky (Next), Those who understand (who have grown up) have left (are leaving), and those of their level (from other countries) are not "coming." Rivers, not who, but their number, for separate "masterpieces" still evoke laughter in the soul of the amateur. The number of daily submissions is falling. The criteria for "authenticity" of photos are partially leveled, because "the lame man takes an example from the self-confident blind man"... Stick. Bush. Footprint. Alone. Longing... What is needed is internal self-esteem by everyone, healthy criticism, analysis from those who understand (currently, only 2-3 people allow themselves this, and then they look at them askance). Less empty talk, more work that is not designed for "reciprocity." We need guidelines; everyone needs to improve the skills of Club Members. That's what I think.
I really love ballet dancers. The best place for filming, in my opinion. Egor Voynov, as far as I know, has officially received exclusive filming rights at our Bolshoi.
So, the work of this impressionist is quite ambiguous, like that of many others. It's difficult for us to understand what's truly complex and difficult.
If you look at his well-known works "Blue Dancers" and "View of the Stage from a Box," and if you didn't know they were by DEGA!!! I don't think you would have admired them the first time.
There's a lot of ambiguity there, regarding "the tutu hit the head").
We're used to everything being perfectly correct and clear about what's what and why. The impressionists have a somewhat different approach and view of things.
This isn't about Degas—my job is to write what comes to mind; yours—to decide what to do with it or not. The NMV didn't catch on, it didn't work out, no way.
Marina Glebova (troika),
on works, which are sometimes simply vulgar in nature and aren't really works per se, as they say, just a matter of technique, nothing more...
Rivers, not who, but their number, for separate "masterpieces" still evoke laughter in the soul of the amateur.
The number of daily submissions is falling. The criteria for "authenticity" of photos are partially leveled, because "the lame man takes an example from the self-confident blind man"... Stick. Bush. Footprint. Alone. Longing...
What is needed is internal self-esteem by everyone, healthy criticism, analysis from those who understand (currently, only 2-3 people allow themselves this, and then they look at them askance).
Less empty talk, more work that is not designed for "reciprocity." We need guidelines; everyone needs to improve the skills of Club Members.
That's what I think.
I really love ballet dancers. The best place for filming, in my opinion.
Egor Voynov, as far as I know, has officially received exclusive filming rights at our Bolshoi.