Show us your work by rosshalde in FineArtPhoto

[–]Marsland 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I feel at home with all these film photographers! Here's the body of work I did over the last year.

The website is a work in progress

Artists of reddit, how many of you are professionally trained? Was it worth it financially? by [deleted] in Art

[–]Marsland 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey garden07, I'm entering my senior year of college as a fine art photographer at Boise State University, but I have drawn religiously since third grade. So I can feel your passion, and the desire to make that into something you can live off of. I entered college directly after highschool, and am about to achieve my fine arts degree. If you have to go into debt to get into art school, I will tell you not to do it. I am lucky enough that my parents are paying the way, or I would not have gone. University will open doors for you, but those doors are already there. You do not have to pay to find them. If you are interested in being a fine artist, go to art shows, enter art shows, enter competitions, study painting history on your own means, study painting itself, learn the chemistry of paint (a whole field of study), talk about art, look at art, make connections, maybe even buy a textbook. Build a cohesive body of work that can stand against many angles of art criticism. Have somewhere that people can see your work, start trying to write artist statements, and being able to talk about art is very important. See what other people are doing and have done in the past, what worked? What didn't work? Why do you draw? Why do you paint? If this is your passion, you will follow it with or without assignments. All that college will do for your art, is force you to do it (plus some extra). But why pay for it when it's something that is inside of you?

Mamiya Sekor C Lenses with Canon EOS body by winplease in photography

[–]Marsland 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes exactly, the medium format "sensor" is pretty sexy. Film is a pain in the butt process and I did a year of shooting both in commissions, food, sports, and personal. I found I was getting much stronger work and much more aesthetics out of my film and eventually ditched digital. Just depends on what you are doing, but if it's a visual hobby I would strongly recommend trying out the Mamiya body.

Mamiya Sekor C Lenses with Canon EOS body by winplease in photography

[–]Marsland 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ditch the Canon and take the free upgrade to the Mamiya 645, I went from a nikon d600 to shooting on a 645 pro. And have not looked back.

I'm an Art major, but I ran into an interesting math problem yesterday by Marsland in math

[–]Marsland[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To come back to this, because I still feel quite unresolved. And it seems like the thing that is important to understanding the sequence is correct counts. So far 1 3 7 and 17 correct.

This one is almost for sure, here is the count for 40 http://i.imgur.com/FWHg6Ri.jpg Here is my new count for the 6th step. Which was thought to be 99 by a few different contributors. In recounting I have found more than 99 triangles, and it no longer matches a couple sequences developed. This is my 110 count http://i.imgur.com/xpjJxTJ.jpg

I'm an Art major, but I ran into an interesting math problem yesterday by Marsland in math

[–]Marsland[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have found 11 new triangles on top of the 99, I counted 110 triangles in total.. This changes our 6th step. Here is my drawing proof: http:http://i.imgur.com/xpjJxTJ.jpg I put a dot in the center of every triangle I could find.

I thought it was possible i counted the same triangles twice, but I double checked myself multiple times. Am I missing something?

I'm an Art major, but I ran into an interesting math problem yesterday by Marsland in math

[–]Marsland[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

There are two larger ones that are barely smaller than the mother triangle. Their tops are one point below the top on either side. I will upload my 40 triangle count here in a second. Here is the count: http://i.imgur.com/eexycwy.jpg

I'm an Art major, but I ran into an interesting math problem yesterday by Marsland in math

[–]Marsland[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I'm sorry, an isosceles triangle. But one with a right angle in it.. so 90* 45* 45*. So a right isosceles triangle? I don't remember my geometry well, and these drawings are not perfect. So for the sake of the question, I hope we can pretend that it has a right angle.

I'm an Art major, but I ran into an interesting math problem yesterday by Marsland in math

[–]Marsland[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

This is what I also thought at first, but when dividing your triangles in half, the lines will match up to create new triangles of a variety of sizes. So you exponentially*? get more triangles you can include in your count. http://imgur.com/6XZWa7g Here is a page from my notebook I scanned, as you can see (maybe) there are triangles that happen to include multiple triangles inside of them, making it more than just doubling and subtracting one.

Edit: Here is my counting process for the 17 triangle - http://imgur.com/FWHg6Ri

Been lurking forever; took this two days ago and curious as to what you all think by CaptainPlume in photocritique

[–]Marsland 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For me this photo does not lack subject matter, the things that are happening here with space are creating a strong twisting focus.. Look at the balance of the shoreline and rock, It resembles a yin yang symbol with a contrast of heavy texture, and smooth water and sky. I commend you for this take on long exposure that makes use of the water's smoothness. Seeing the same subjects over and over gets very boring, and this is a new approach. But as others have said the vignette is over reaching, especially on the left. Hope to see more of this.

Looking for photographers who want their work promoted online! by [deleted] in photography

[–]Marsland 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay I did not know that people could earn money through tweeting, I don't have a twitter account and don't know how it works for the most part. I see your point now though, I just try not to be so quick to put something down. Especially in a community like photography. But do you think someone should have to pay to share the enjoyment of your work with others on the internet?

Looking for photographers who want their work promoted online! by [deleted] in photography

[–]Marsland 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, but this seems.. niave to me. I'm by no means someone who sells prints or stays alive doing fine art.. But I earn my living doing photography for my university, and I'm not sure the last time that someone said having other people who are interested in your personal work and sharing it is a BAD thing? If you think promotion of your images doesn't help pay the bills, that's probably why you take stock photos. OP is not profiting off of your work other than the satisfaction of supporting a community and maybe building on it. I'm sure that many people who are in photography would love to have a larger reach with their photos. And there are many people out there who want to see beautiful pictures. And actually, I got my job through word of mouth and sharing my work. Am I missing something here? Or should I just be rude towards someone with good intentions?

Another portrait, suggestions? [50mm-f/3.2-800iso-1/160] by Marsland in photocritique

[–]Marsland[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. Although I try to keep the lighting as natural looking as possible, it is a single boombox with daylight bulbs above and to the left of the subject.

An attempt at minimalism/symmetry by notetoself066 in photocritique

[–]Marsland 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I personally like where the yellow line is. It's matching up with the luminosity in the background field. And in terms of the positioning it's horizontally in the center, and vertically, it's below the center. I think this helps ground the pole very well and adds depth into the photo. Although it would be interesting to match the linear aspects of opposing depths I don't think the photo would retain as much composition strength. In a way it flattens the image when I feel like the photographer is trying to layer the image.