11-23-11 – Triptych Portraits

Ok, thanks U-Man. I went back and read the Theme thread & the first part of this one. To clarify, this should be one LIVING subject, rather than inanimates or scenes?

Yep. Difficulty = Subject must be alive.

I won’t quibble the “alive subject must be in each fame” thing. The soccer player with Sambas isn’t in each frame (and the ball could actually be considered the subject) but the overall triptych fits the spirit of the theme.

Ok – if you don’t see me by Thursday morning – sling those I posted out there lol.

It says access http://www.blueridgerentals.com/result_2.asp?table=Rental&id=358 but we’ll see. And thank you so much.

It’s a +/-50 minute ride home from college. If I don’t see you by 10 Eastern, I’ll OBO. Not planning on getting up too early on Thursday. It’s my wife’s first day off in a while; wink, wink nudge nudge.

You’re awesome. :D. I don’t see it being an issue unless there’s a storm and the internet is satellite.

You go and get on yer giblet gravy! 😳 😆

If we loosen the “parts of a subject” to “same subject” I’m okay with that but I will be slightly miffed because I lost an opportunity to shoot something that would have fit under the looser definition of the theme and is now dead.

Which is why it is better to not alter the theme too much when it’s a week before the contest… 🙂

But whatever you decide, I still have to shoot and I have other ideas.

I posted some ladybug pics on G+. ravnostic made a comment that he wants to see them as a triptych this week. I had not planned on doing that because this theme specifies ‘three parts of the subject”. If I used the ladybug pics I already have I would simply be arranging three different poses or settings of the same whole subject. IMO, it comes close to the spirit of the theme but doesn’t quite make it. A similar question arises with QueenBee’s banana shots over on Facebook. Looking past the ‘alive or not’ question, they are not really different parts of the whole.

So, am I getting too hung up on details? If I arranged three of these into some sort of triptych would it be OK in your opinions? I have plenty of live subjects around and all weekend to shoot them so don’t hold back if you think I should do something else. I am really using my own situation to try and define how closely this will be called.

As usual, I don’t want to have Elsinore be the bad cop, pull somebody’s pics and piss them off. I am OK going with a broad interpretation of the theme to inspire creativity. But the game should be played within some sort of boundaries.

http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/lb_0647.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/LB_0382.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/LB_0372.jpg

I was wondering all the same things. Even kashari’s link showed three photos of the same person in different shots. I think the interpretation is going to be really broad since some people don’t come up here and are going to google the definition and get a lot of varied answers.

Those ladybug shots are awesome.

I love QueenBee (she’s the one who got me here) but fruit isn’t alive.

Oops, I didn’t even pay attention to the images in that link, I was just wanting to see how to do the canvas/border process.

Picture worth a thousand words examples –

Should we allow this? – http://www.flickr.com/photos/eddmun/454335362/lightbox/

No (not diverse enough)

Or try to aim at this and delete the three pose entries? –
http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_therumor/6193109777/lightbox/

Yes

But then again…what about THIS? http://www.flickr.com/photos/17665703@N03/6141189546/lightbox/

Yes (diversity)

I’m all for a loose interpretation, but that first one just isn’t enough… reminds me of the Playboy Interview photos.

Some of my attempts (plants, dogs) are not like your second example, but others are closer (an accordion player at the public market).

But that’s just me.

OK, I am going to take the bull by the horns here and just post my three entries for next week, and submit them as an up or down are they in theme.

1: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ennuipoet/6365693787/in/photostream

2: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ennuipoet/6365689239/in/photostream

3: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ennuipoet/6365680823/in/photostream

I am pretty confident in 1 and 2 but 3 may be outside of the idea of the theme. These may not be the final arrangement before the thread goes live, I will most likely re-shop them. If they are out I want some time to go and shoot replacements.

Picture worth a thousand words examples –

Should we allow this? – http://www.flickr.com/photos/eddmun/454335362/lightbox/

No (not diverse enough)

Or try to aim at this and delete the three pose entries? –
http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_therumor/6193109777/lightbox/

Yes

But then again…what about THIS? http://www.flickr.com/photos/17665703@N03/6141189546/lightbox/

Yes (diversity)

I’m all for a loose interpretation, but that first one just isn’t enough… reminds me of the Playboy Interview photos.

Some of my attempts (plants, dogs) are not like your second example, but others are closer (an accordion player at the public market).

But that’s just me.

My thoughts exactly, but then again if we start quibbling of what’s enough for diversity and what’s not, it’s all going to get muddled. This might just turn into another event where the voters will show us what’s best – I have a feeling the more diverse pictures will get a boost in votes, anyways.

Ok I’m so confused now. My understanding had been that each triptych was to be whole or parts of the same subject, and said subject had to be alive. Are they to be separate parts of the whole? Some parts don’t actually have to be alive?

😆 Me too! In U-Man’s examples, I’d say 1 is out, 2 good & 3 ends up showing different parts I guess as the flower opened.

I took some horse pictures a little while ago with this theme in mind and have been wondering if a partial torso shot, which includes the face, along with a close-up of his eye would work, since the eye and a little bit of his face, is in both images.