Question about DSS #14 - Still Life

[jeffmeyers]

I just want to make sure I got this right before I starting thinking about what I'm gonna shoot. Here's the summary:
Still Life (Exclusive Straight Out of the Camera Challenge)
Once again, it's time to hone those base photography skills. The subject itself is pretty wide open. This does not require any special equipment - light can be studio, natural, flash, a set of desk lamps, whatever, just make sure the light fits the mood of the subject. Filters on camera may be used, any setting in camera may be used, but absolutley, positively NO post-processing. No cropping, curves, contrast, nothing (that's the straight out of the camera part!). Have fun!
Normally "still life" means a non-living subject, right? Inanimate objects and all that. Not a portrait of a doggie or kitty or human bean, right?

Typical definition of "still life": "Representation of inanimate objects, such as flowers or fruit, in painting or photography."

Just making sure.

[pyroPrints.com]

I just want to make sure I got this right before I starting thinking about what I'm gonna shoot. Here's the summary:Still Life (Exclusive Straight Out of the Camera Challenge)
Once again, it's time to hone those base photography skills. The subject itself is pretty wide open. This does not require any special equipment - light can be studio, natural, flash, a set of desk lamps, whatever, just make sure the light fits the mood of the subject. Filters on camera may be used, any setting in camera may be used, but absolutley, positively NO post-processing. No cropping, curves, contrast, nothing (that's the straight out of the camera part!). Have fun! Normally "still life" means a non-living subject, right? Inanimate objects and all that. Not a portrait of a doggie or kitty or human bean, right?

Typical definition of "still life": "Representation of inanimate objects, such as flowers or fruit, in painting or photography."

Just making sure.

The subject itself is pretty wide open

[Llywellyn]

And the lead-in right before the summary: "The topic ready for your interpretation..." :wink I think one interpretation could definitely be "inanimate objects only," but I'm certain there are other interpretations (I for one think all photography is a still capture of life :thumb).

That's part of why I love these challenges. It's great seeing the different ideas and interpretations everyone comes up with! :D<o:p></o:p>

[jeffmeyers]

Let's say I had a framed image on the wall of a dog (or a child) that was captured in the studio.

If I pointed to it and said to a client, "How do you like this still life," they would either think I was nuts or, OR, perhaps the image, although having a living being for the subject, had the visual "quality" of a still life. I could see that working. But it would take a very special, carefully contrived photograph of a person in order to evoke "still life" and not "portrait" from the viewer. Right?

Maybe I'm all messed up on this. Could be. It's happened before.

[Greensquared]

Let's say I had a framed image on the wall of a dog (or a child) that was captured in the studio.

If I pointed to it and said to a client, "How do you like this still life," they would either think I was nuts or, OR, perhaps the image, although having a living being for the subject, had the visual "quality" of a still life. I could see that working. But it would take a very special, carefully contrived photograph of a person in order to evoke "still life" and not "portrait" from the viewer. Right?

Maybe I'm all messed up on this. Could be. It's happened before.

I must say that I had rewritten the intro to this round several times. It started with a theme of Fine Art Still Life, then went to Classic Still Life, so you can see what I originalliy had in mind. But then, I realized that was restricting the content too much and maybe someone would have an amazingly different take if I just left it wide open. But yes, you are correct that anything other than the classic interpretation had better still be stronger on this theme than on something else, such as "Portait".

Does that help?

[Roaddog 52]

I'm with you Jeff a little confused, but I think it is like Kerry pointed out, Open to Interpretation.


The First line in the Wiki is, "Still life photography is the depiction of an inanimate subject matter, most typically a small grouping of objects that are either man made or "natural."

It will be interesting as usual to see what everyone comes up with, it seems wide open.

Phil

[PaulThomasMcKee]

Thanks Emily, It's nice to know that if I happen to capture an errant bug in my still life that it won't be disqualified because of it. :D

[jeffmeyers]

Thanks Emily, It's nice to know that if I happen to capture an errant bug in my still life that it won't be disqualified because of it. :D

What? You got roaches regularly walking through your studio? And I thought you just had a lot of dust on your sensor! :dunno

[jeffmeyers]

I must say that I had rewritten the intro to this round several times. It started with a theme of Fine Art Still Life, then went to Classic Still Life, so you can see what I originalliy had in mind. But then, I realized that was restricting the content too much and maybe someone would have an amazingly different take if I just left it wide open. But yes, you are correct that anything other than the classic interpretation had better still be stronger on this theme than on something else, such as "Portait".

Does that help?

Yeah, that's helpful. I guess I pretty much answered my own question when I started musing on how a living subject MIGHT make for an interesting "still life" IF the image was very carefully contrived so as not to look like a typical portrait, macro shot of a bug, or sumpin else.

Thanks!

[divamum]

I'm glad you asked the question, Jeff, because I was thinking the very same thing on my drive to work this afternoon!

[HoofClix]

Thanks Emily, It's nice to know that if I happen to capture an errant bug in my still life that it won't be disqualified because of it. :D

I don't know, Paul. I've been detecting a lot of evidence of microorganisms in your work of late. Better be really careful this time to really clean up those bowls and fruits.

[anonymouscuban]

I also have a question... prolly a newbish one.

How do you know if the image was post processed?

Is it by the "modified" or "updated" date in the EXIF data? The reason I ask is that I shoot in RAW, and I think the "modified" date is updated when I export the image to JPEG in Light Room. Maybe I'm wrong. :scratch

[Tango]

if it were me...i would shot in jpeg and raw, only enter the jpeg so there is not timestamp questionings...

[anonymouscuban]

Good suggestion Aaron. I agree that it would eliminate any hassle later. Besides, no need for the RAW since I can't PP the image. Now I just have to remember to switch my camera settings before I shoot for this. :wink

[Tango]

Good suggestion Aaron. I agree that it would eliminate any hassle later. Besides, no need for the RAW since I can't PP the image. Now I just have to remember to switch my camera settings before I shoot for this. :wink

do shoot raw! you can do post on a image that is going into your portfolio!!!

[PaulThomasMcKee]

if it were me...i would shot in jpeg and raw, only enter the jpeg so there is not timestamp questionings...
That's my plan too. That way I can submit the jpeg sooc to the challenge and play with the raw file later if I feel so inclined. My camera allows post shutter click image manipulation while still "in camera" (cropping, toning, etc.), but it changes the date modified timestamp so I won't be using any of those features - I'll just shutter click and upload so that the date taken and date modified match.

[anonymouscuban]

Of course... RAW is the only way I shoot... sometimes I even shoot in the raw, naked that is! :D

[PaulThomasMcKee]

I don't know, Paul. I've been detecting a lot of evidence of microorganisms in your work of late. Better be really careful this time to really clean up those bowls and fruits.
:rofl :rofl

[richtersl]

Of course... RAW is the only way I shoot... sometimes I even shoot in the raw, naked that is! :D

:uhoh :lol3

[pyroPrints.com]

Of course... RAW is the only way I shoot... sometimes I even shoot in the raw, naked that is! :D

just make sure you're not shooting any reflective objects :rofl

[KCBearcat]

Of course... RAW is the only way I shoot... sometimes I even shoot in the raw, naked that is! :D

Ya know, there are several people that I NEVER want to see them do that or say they did that... :huh:puke

[Art Scott]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooo no............(voice of elderly MR. Bill)........[NOW MY THOUGHTS}.......this is terrible......you see the Buddhist believe that all things are living animate things....all things have a soul......so should that definition be changed to NON sentient objects......seriously....even rocks, and such are living animate objects they does grow......................

[anonymouscuban]

Ya know, there are several people that I NEVER want to see them do that or say they did that... :huh:puke

LOL... I couldn't agree with you more on that one. There a reason clothes were invented.

[michswiss]

That's my plan too. That way I can submit the jpeg sooc to the challenge and play with the raw file later if I feel so inclined. My camera allows post shutter click image manipulation while still "in camera" (cropping, toning, etc.), but it changes the date modified timestamp so I won't be using any of those features - I'll just shutter click and upload so that the date taken and date modified match.

I'm thinking this could be fun and I've got a weekend to waste coming up. But, to the point above. Can I make in-camera updates such as cropping, toning, etc and still have it be accepted?

[Greensquared]

I'm thinking this could be fun and I've got a weekend to waste coming up. But, to the point above. Can I make in-camera updates such as cropping, toning, etc and still have it be accepted?

Filters on camera may be used, any setting in camera may be used, but absolutley, positively NO post-processing. No cropping, curves, contrast, nothing (that's the straight out of the camera part!).

[Greensquared]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooo no............(voice of elderly MR. Bill)........[NOW MY THOUGHTS}.......this is terrible......you see the Buddhist believe that all things are living animate things....all things have a soul......so should that definition be changed to NON sentient objects......seriously....even rocks, and such are living animate objects they does grow......................

Well then, you should have no problem coming up with an entry then, eh? All photos are "still life" for you, right?

[divamum]

Filters on camera may be used, any setting in camera may be used, but absolutley, positively NO post-processing. No cropping, curves, contrast, nothing (that's the straight out of the camera part!).

I was thinking about this this morning since we seem to be getting into a "precise definitions" phase at the moment, so that everybody understands precisely what is meant: what if, for the purposes of this and any future SOOC challenges, "SOOC" were formally defined as "no subsequent adjustments to the image after the shutter is pressed" (we'll assume this refers to HUMAN adjustments, since the camera will make its own jpg decisions). Are there any cameras that mean you MUST shoot raw, so that definition couldn't work?

I remember we went round and round this in Dusk/Dawn, hence the musings.

And no, I have no aspirations to become a lawyer OR a civil servant, thank you very much :rofl

[richtersl]

For the previous SOOC challenge I just pretended I was using a film camera. :dunno

Shoot JPEG and bracket your exposures. That's about all you should need to do. :wink

[Greensquared]

SOOC is about getting to know your camera well and all of it's functions, not relying on PP to fix images "after the fact", yeah? So, basically, anything you do in the camera is fine.

[divamum]

For the previous SOOC challenge I just pretended I was using a film camera. :dunno

Shoot JPEG and bracket your exposures. That's about all you should need to do. :wink

Yeppers - I was thinking that too. But (like I say, I was lying in bed this morning thinking about this... pathetic or what?! :rolleyes:giggle) I figured that some might argue that you could always crop, dodge, burn and otherwise post process film. Therefore, I was trying to think of the absolutely most unambiguous wording I could think of. Of course, bottom line is the only definition which counts is Emily's - it's her party, and as guests we play by her rules! :thumb

[Greensquared]

Yeppers - I was thinking that too. But (like I say, I was lying in bed this morning thinking about this... pathetic or what?! :rolleyes:giggle) I figured that some might argue that you could always crop, dodge, burn and otherwise post process film. Therefore, I was trying to think of the absolutely most unambiguous wording I could think of. Of course, bottom line is the only definition which counts is Emily's - it's her party, and as guests we play by her rules! :thumb

Nah, it's your party...someone just has to chaperone. :D

[richtersl]

Yeppers - I was thinking that too. But (like I say, I was lying in bed this morning thinking about this... pathetic or what?! :rolleyes:giggle) I figured that some might argue that you could always crop, dodge, burn and otherwise post process film. Therefore, I was trying to think of the absolutely most unambiguous wording I could think of. Of course, bottom line is the only definition which counts is Emily's - it's her party, and as guests we play by her rules! :thumb

OK -- so let me rephrase that: :rofl

Pretend you're using a film camera;
Shoot JPEG and bracket your exposures; and
Pretend you don't have a dark room.

[divamum]

OK -- so let me rephrase that: :rofl
Pretend you're using a film camera;
Shoot JPEG and bracket your exposures; and
Pretend you don't have a dark room.

"The party of the first part (hitherto known as "photographer") must handle Exhibit A (hitherto known as "camera") in the following manner..........." :rofl:rofl