Super!!! Through the roof!!! Dear friend, share your experience of taking such a highly artistic photo!! Please!!! I'm all in anticipation!!! Absolutely fucking awesome!!!!
aaa, the caption under the photo clearly states: "Just a portrait and nothing more." So, from that perspective, a portrait is still a portrait, no matter where you look. And from the perspective of a highly artistic photo... An ordinary sparrow, what did they expect from it, an eagle? Sishabunevich, thank you very much.
Malakhov, as far as I can tell, excuse me for butting in, but a professional critic doesn't use internet slang like "awful" in his comments, but would at least write in normal Russian: "no good at all", "unprofessional", or, at worst, "complete nonsense".
Malakhov, as far as I'm concerned—forgive me for butting in—but a professional critic doesn't use internet slang like "awful" in comments, but would at least write in normal Russian: "no good," "unprofessional," or, at worst, "complete nonsense."
Evgenka, you got the point, right? The form in which the idea is expressed isn't important. Does slang offend you? Ask the critic not to do it again.
Malakhov, as far as I'm concerned—forgive me for butting in—but a professional critic wouldn't use internet slang like "awful" in their comments. They'd at least write in proper Russian: "no good," "unprofessional," or, at worst, "complete nonsense." Evgenka, you got the gist, right? The form in which the idea is expressed isn't important. Does slang offend you? Ask the critic not to do it again.
Malakhov, to be honest, it does. I'm all for purity of speech, but that's my opinion. As for the essence, of course, everything has long been clear, but I like this photo. It may be subjective, of course, but the sparrow, even though it's meaningless, is cute.
Malakhov, as far as I'm concerned—forgive me for butting in—a professional critic wouldn't use internet slang like "awful" in their comments, but would at least write in proper Russian: "no good," "unprofessional," or, at worst, "complete nonsense." Evgenka, you got the point, right? The form in which the idea is expressed isn't important. Does slang offend you? Ask the critic to stop doing it again. Malakhov, to be honest, it does. I'm all for purity of speech, but that's just my opinion. Regarding the essence, naturally, it's all clear for a long time, but I like this photo. It may be subjective, of course, but the sparrow, even if it's meaningless, is cute.
Evgenka, there's a website like this, half-dead, though - http://www.naturelight.ru/. You know? People gather there specifically for photos of all sorts of animals, without discussing any compositions.
Malakhov, as far as I'm concerned—forgive me for butting in—a professional critic wouldn't use internet slang like "awful" in their comments. They'd at least write in proper Russian: "no good," "unprofessional," or, at worst, "complete nonsense." Evgenka, you got the gist, right? The form in which the idea is expressed isn't important. Does slang offend you? Ask the critic to stop doing it again. Malakhov, to be honest, it does. I'm all for purity of speech, but that's just my opinion. As for the essence, of course, everything has long been clear, but I like this photograph. It may be subjective, of course, but the sparrow, even though it's meaningless, is cute. Evgenka, there's a website like this, half-dead, though - http://www.naturelight.ru/. Do you know? People gather there specifically for photos of all sorts of animals, without discussing any compositions))
Malakhov, the composition can be argued a little) The rule of thirds in the portrait is observed, the sparrow's eyes are on the top horizontal line, the figure is on the vertical)) But that's just a subjective opinion))
The composition is debatable) The rule of thirds is observed in the portrait, the sparrow's eyes are on the top horizontal line, the figure is on the vertical line)) But that's just a subjective opinion))[/quote] Evgenka, These advantages are offset by one significant disadvantage - you've pressed the sparrow's beak to the edge of the frame, and the gaze requires space + it's cramped + the lighting isn't very good. IMHO
Malakhov, I'm afraid this man, who is at least as good, is so cool that his IMHO is as categorical as Newton's law.
Al Morunov, if you have such fears, then why are you asking questions? In that case, accept my opinion of this photo as the truth. Or should I give you another report? Should I ask your permission to discuss the photo?
ZERO, yes, I've become timid I'm afraid of drunk drivers, aggressive freaks, the Kondratieff crisis, anonymous people who can't read between the lines...
ZERO, yes, I've become timid. I'm afraid of drunk drivers, aggressive freaks, the Kondratieff crisis, anonymous people who can't read between the lines...
Al Morunov, go see a doctor before it's too late, it's treatable (timidity).
ZERO, you're boring me. Accept my opinion as truth; I don't believe without proof. Yeah, where's the opinion? Who's the author? Neither.
Or maybe I should give you another report? Ask your permission to discuss the photo? - Better keep quiet - that's a more original way to appear competent. Go see a doctor before it's too late; it's treatable (timidity) - you clearly have a wealth of experience. Can you give me the doctor's phone number?
I'm done.
Al Morunov, your diagnosis is much worse than I expected. Stay home, they'll come for you sooner or later.
Sishabunevich, thank you very much.
Evgenka, These advantages are offset by one significant disadvantage - you've pressed the sparrow's beak to the edge of the frame, and the gaze requires space + it's cramped + the lighting isn't very good. IMHO
I don't believe without proof. Yeah, where's the opinion? Who's the author? Neither.
- Better keep quiet - it's a more original way to appear competent.
- You clearly have a wealth of experience. Can you tell me the doctor's phone number?
I'm done.