Actually, I don't know who should be credited as Creator. The LoC says that F.W. Taylor claimed a copyright, but I doubt
he is the photographer of this picture.
Weak oppose - It has high EV, but the photograph itself (composition, pose, DOF) isn't very compelling to me. I realize that the art of portraiture hadn't been well developed in 1897, but it wasn't a completely new concept. Here are some examples of compelling portrait photographs from the same year:
1,
2,
3. I realize this is a very subjective opinion, so I'm marking it as 'weak'.
Kaldari (
talk)
19:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Kaldari: Personally, I find this portrait much more natural than the usual rigid pose. That also may be due to Tolstoy's personality. It is also notable that this is not taken in a studio with controlled light, but in the open with a natural light and environment, and that's quite rare for that period. I find it odd that you think this is a reason for opposing. Just my 2 Rs.
Yann (
talk)
18:44, 13 May 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Yann: It does look natural, but almost snapshot natural. For someone like Tolstoy I feel like he should have a bit more gravitas in a portrait. I know this is completely subjective, so I'm willing to strike my vote if you think it isn't a valid objection.
Kaldari (
talk)
20:31, 13 May 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Kaldari: Well Tolstoy was so much out of phase with his time that it is difficult to say if this was a "natural pose". He was critical of almost everything the society valued. To me, he looks a bit tense. I can imagine that he felt compelled to be photographed without being completely at ease. I hope I am clear. Obviously I would prefer that you support, but that's your choice. ;o)
Yann (
talk)
22:25, 13 May 2015 (UTC)reply
I think if the lighting were better or the DOF more shallow it would make Tolstoy stand out more (and look more dramatic). As it is, the picture looks a bit flat, and the dark band across the bottom doesn't help matters. It's a good photo (and an excellent restoration), but I'm not sure it's one of our best images.
Kaldari (
talk)
01:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)reply
Actually, I don't know who should be credited as Creator. The LoC says that F.W. Taylor claimed a copyright, but I doubt
he is the photographer of this picture.
Weak oppose - It has high EV, but the photograph itself (composition, pose, DOF) isn't very compelling to me. I realize that the art of portraiture hadn't been well developed in 1897, but it wasn't a completely new concept. Here are some examples of compelling portrait photographs from the same year:
1,
2,
3. I realize this is a very subjective opinion, so I'm marking it as 'weak'.
Kaldari (
talk)
19:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Kaldari: Personally, I find this portrait much more natural than the usual rigid pose. That also may be due to Tolstoy's personality. It is also notable that this is not taken in a studio with controlled light, but in the open with a natural light and environment, and that's quite rare for that period. I find it odd that you think this is a reason for opposing. Just my 2 Rs.
Yann (
talk)
18:44, 13 May 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Yann: It does look natural, but almost snapshot natural. For someone like Tolstoy I feel like he should have a bit more gravitas in a portrait. I know this is completely subjective, so I'm willing to strike my vote if you think it isn't a valid objection.
Kaldari (
talk)
20:31, 13 May 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Kaldari: Well Tolstoy was so much out of phase with his time that it is difficult to say if this was a "natural pose". He was critical of almost everything the society valued. To me, he looks a bit tense. I can imagine that he felt compelled to be photographed without being completely at ease. I hope I am clear. Obviously I would prefer that you support, but that's your choice. ;o)
Yann (
talk)
22:25, 13 May 2015 (UTC)reply
I think if the lighting were better or the DOF more shallow it would make Tolstoy stand out more (and look more dramatic). As it is, the picture looks a bit flat, and the dark band across the bottom doesn't help matters. It's a good photo (and an excellent restoration), but I'm not sure it's one of our best images.
Kaldari (
talk)
01:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)reply