Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/09/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] re: portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work)
From: photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Philip Forrest)
Date: Sun Sep 30 15:32:25 2007
References: <4268A9826B9DBE4D938B902A6BC8030839450F@exchange8.asc.local> <AEF8DF28-9647-4F7E-80A7-DE332EDFE145@cox.net>

Aside from being a great photo, Kyle did market it well.  The bare shoulders 
& 
low-cut strapless dress supposedly on Liz gave the ability to shoot at an 
angle which allowed the viewer to look at this as an implied nude.  It's a 
great way to make you look at the photo.  The deep brown eyes look right at 
the viewer in either a very alive connected way or perhaps a very 
disconnected, dead way.  The skirt coming out of the mouth is not quite 
risque but the fact that a portrait was made with a mouth wide open makes 
this very different.  
Again, it's a good photo and Kyle did what people usually want their 
photographs to do.  Stir up a bit of imagination and cause people to look at 
it over an over.
Good job KC.

PhilFo



On Sunday 30 September 2007 18:08, Steve Barbour wrote:
> On Sep 30, 2007, at 2:13 PM, Kyle Cassidy wrote:
> > Art is often the child of confused parents and finding out its
> > lineage can, in my mind, be ruinous to the final product. Sometimes
> > the juxtaposition of influences, random thoughts, bits of this and
> > that, come from various places to create a sum greater than the
> > whole of it's parts, sometimes not. For years, as a child, I was
> > drawn to Wyeth's "Christina's World" -- I stared at a copy of it on
> > a book cover for years, I had a print on my wall, wondering what
> > she could possibly be doing in that field ... it was baffling and
> > filled with possibilities ... when I was a freshman in college
> > someone told me what it was -- the truth, the real deal, that
> > Christina was a real person and she was indeed in that field for a
> > very real reason and ... the magic was ruined -- the truth wasn't
> > nearly as interesting as my imagination.
> >
> > as for the portrait of liz
> >
> >>> http://www.kylecassidy.com/lj/2007/liz-dress1.jpg
> >
> > if you google "medium" and "ectoplasm" and hit "images" all secrets
> > will become apparent -- maybe the image will get funny, maybe it'll
> > be ruined ... maybe it'll seem deeper, and you'll think we're
> > esoteric, or clever, or maybe you just won't care what my friends
> > and i do on lazy sunday afternoons when all the netflix have been
> > sent back and the laundry has been done.
> >
> > But as for Liz, who just turned 34, I'm sure she'll be happy to
> > hear she could pass for 23 :-)
>
> indeed correct Kyle, more than correct...since she as photographed
> looks roughly 14-16 yo...
>
> by choice I guess...
>
> (I looked at her web site, so I knew she was 33yo.
>
> So why did you and she make her look 20 years younger...and put her
> into that setting...?
>
> Why indeed?
>
> The answer can indeed be found in google...more likely in the words
>
> ambiguity, titillation, exploitation, opportunism...
>
>
> Steve
>
> > kc
> >
> >> Oh its a very young girl now lets play that card!!
> >> This gal is 23 if she's a day and could easily have three kids and
> >> be well
> >> on her way to being a grandmother.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

In reply to: Message from kcassidy at asc.upenn.edu (Kyle Cassidy) ([Leica] re: portrait of elizabeth (secrets revealed))
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] re: portrait of elizabeth (mostly safe for work))