To see more of Elena Shumilova's photographs check out her Flickr and 500px sites.
"Just a mom with camera" title feels like someone captured real moments(well we can argue staged moments are also real moments)
Well these shots are amazing and i feel it inspire every photographer out there. Highly professional work with post processing, props, lens selection which suggests the title and marketing is well kind of attractive but not true to itslef.
Who cares wonderful pics.
These photos are amazing. As the father of a 4-year old boy i can even smell the peace, sweet, soft moment out of these pictures. Beautiful. i am not a pro but i still wish that someday i can capture the touching moments of my life just like she did. One picture is enough.
every single one of these pics is simply amazing
Nice ones all
Pic #8 used in marketing campaign here:http://www.baseone.co.uk/our-portfolio/brand-engagement/vodafone-inseparable
Is the story valid?
Anyway, nice Photoshop skills and filter usage.
For those saying these will be "great memories" for the kids, you have to remember they are being directed to pose for pics... this isn't their life in action.
"For those saying these will be "great memories" for the kids, you have to remember they are being directed to pose for pics... this isn't their life in action."
My father would direct us when taking family photos; I don't remember the details just that he did. Doesn't mean they aren't great memories.
For many people, being directed for family photos usually goes like this:
'Okay, everybody hold still ... and get ready to smile ... one, two, three!'
Following this are a blinding flash, a sore face from holding a smile too long, and an increasing resentment of being asked to 'pose'.
Photos like the ones in this article are magical, and if the direction is well done, it gives joy to the process.
Wonderful collection Love them all, Especially the last one (its all ahead of us)
These are Wonderful Images.
vv what he said.
Beautiful photos. Much better than most of the Sony Awards finalists.
I think they are great photos.I like the dreamy look that is given to the photographs.My only nit-pick is the boy near the straw stack,a piece of straw goes across the top of his hairline and that makes it a distraction.Otherwise fantastic work.
nice photos. Good composition.
The photos are really stunning. Actually too stunning. They all show professional digital post processing. Taking this photos for her is absolutely possible. But learning this grade of editing takes years. Every experienced photoshop user can see the pro level touch on these photos.
Furthermore, there is only one very short interview with her which is highly doubtful. She didn't respond to on ANY of the comments and questions under the photos. No info on her web page either.
This just stinks. The stroy of "a mother taking dreamy pictures of her children in a russian farm" is perfect to bloom in internet. We all victimize that it works very good. I believe that the real person -her husband?- behind this amazing photos, just found a perfect method to go viral and be famous. Honestly, how many of us would hesitate to do something similar?
I am not badmouthing these wonderful photos. Even if the whole story is a farce that doesn't change the fact that they are fantastic.
Shakespear Identity, continued....
It really hurts, that woman mastered things that "take years", right? :) Yet it is very feasible.She does not respond to all the noise? Then, maybe, she knows what to do with her time. /And that might give us a raw idea why she didn't need those years.
beautifully done.You're always gonna have cranks and malcontents.Plain and simple. Beautiful, touching..Some might say corny..whatever… like it or not, it's not everyone who can pull these kinds of pictures off..well done!!! AND THANK YOU
Incredibly beautiful photography. Her children will always be able to return to the most wonderful memories.
Very nice pictures. Comments here though makes a newbie like me sad. Seems photography nowadays has a lot of technical nitpicking and some form of politics. Can't we just enjoy the picture, message and the moment captured?
Kinda fun imagining what's in the kids mind during these shots.
She delivers, no doubt about this. Gorgeous photography!
Not sure I understand the arguments in this thread about these photos. Fact is, some will like them, some will not. What's that got to do with hate?Personally, I think they are very skillful, professional looking images, but at the same time they are probably the corniest, and most contrived collection of images I have ever seen. I hate nothing nor no one here, I am just giving an honest opinion based on over 50 years of doing, studying and teaching photography as an art form.Take my comments as you will...accept them or reject them. But take them at face value, as they are honest feelings that I have about these images.
Thank you Jay. Great post. The word hate is almost abused in society. Posting "I don't care for her style" is not hating! People have become overly sensitive. It is okay to not like something. I told a fellow music lover that I think Caravan by Duke Ellington is a better song than Hey Jude by The Beatles. Five minutes later he was back to "so why do you hate The Beatles?". Good grief. I am older and have seen plenty of real hate in my lifetime. Not having the same reaction to these photos (or any others posted on the DPR forum) as everyone else out here is not hate. What gives anyone the right to paint another forum member in the corner with snarky posts like "anyone who doesn't like these photos is either jealous or stupid"? Long ago I learned to respect the opinions of others. It is perfectly fine and natural to disagree about art, politics and religion. There is room for all sides.
Elina Shumilova, professional photographer, masquerading as a talented amateur seems to impress some. After just 18 months, this supposed amateur mastered a complex $5000 camera and various lighting equipment and lenses plus the photo editing program it would take to get these results. She also miraculously managed, in this time, to visit many different bucolic scenes and locations and process these plus somehow look after her small brood of young children and apparently a host of farm animals. I would have been just as impressed if she, or whoever is the actual talent behind this, was honest about how she actually accomplished this. Simple genius is not enough. It takes money and lots of people behind you, to get such results. Pretending to be a simple mother snapping pictures in the Russian wilderness is a bit much. Its also dishonest.
So, if you're wrong, that makes her even more amazing, doesn't it?
"whoever is the actual talent behind this" -- right, it's Shakespear of photography: 20 people are hiding behind one name only to bewilder us. Seriously, she is an architect - such kind of education helps a lot with understanding space and light and perception -- things much more important then just gear. And it's not stone age around: tons of literature are available on optics, imaging-related discrete math, editing technics -- not so hard to fathom it all, even to get used to it in 18 months. It's like getting new job: you know where you can succeed and you go for it.And it's not artist herself that "impress some", it's her artistic work, her pictures - so lovely, so kind, reminding us of our childhood or our own kid, telling on subconscious level (that's what art is about, after all).So what if she haven't disclosed details we actually didn't need? Whoever Shakespear was, it's still good reading.
And by the way, nice approach to background on definitly *portrait* photographs.
Remember Snow White?Well, she managed to convince seven dwarfs to work the mine under her management, got into the Stock Exchange, and now she lives in Wonderland. Nobody seems to complain about it.As far as the first article about this Russian photographer went. It NEVER said that she was a poor farmer, and I believe that she is allowed to use the editor software she thinks necessary to enhance her work, as many of us do.
Whatever, her pictures still look like cheesy postcards...
-- I bet they were intended to look like postcards, in a sense. Very nice style, resembles illustrations to some fairy-tale books, animation movies / 'Urchin in the Fog' maybe?/. I wish I had one such card from my childhood.. Mom used to color BW family photos with chalk/pastel as she liked (faces included) and nobody objected. Even at studios portraits were often shot with artificial backgrounds: drapes, painted boards. Elena chose to use as backgound part of actual image - which I consider portrait type - only softened, defocused. Why not? It looks charming and nicely supports main objects - kid and pet. No wonder many viewers here like theese pics and just ignore tech means /camera, editor, etc/.
What surprizes me is what critics aim at: expensive gear > heavy editing > unclear pro/amature status (and farm ownership?) > personality of photographer (and honesty?) > then her identity itself... Like gear and gossip are always more interesting then someone else's excellent work?
ALL postcards are cheesy.
Simply stunning !!
Very nice photos. Good composition.
Viewing these photos before reading the comments, I saw them as beautifully evocative not only of rural Russia (its kinder aspects, to be sure) but of the Russian tradition of fairy tale illustration. The shots with the sled and dog, and the cat and scoop shovel, for instance, are worthy of enamel miniatures. Shumilova is continuing a Russian tradition using photography as her medium and I'm sorry for those who can only see her work in terms of technical production.
Is there a link showing the original photos that are not retouched by PP? It'd be interesting to compare the original and the processed pictures.
Beautiful shots.I wish I could shoot like this! :(
не знаю как вам, а мне понравилось, и что, что фотошоп, на этот раз надо смотреть на картинку, а не искать артефакты в пикселях. Надо задуматься как художник хотел донести историю до нас и как успешно она это сделала.
А мы тут просто проходимцы и зеваки, за словом в карман не лезим.
Nice shots and lighting. But very heavily photoshopped. Lots of vignetting, fogging and blurring added. The two shots on her Flickr page towards the end shows two completely different shots with dust particles floating in the air…if you look closely the dust specks are in the same position in both. I have no problem with using Photoshop, it's a necessary evil with digital cameras these days…however I find it rather dishonest when the photographer downplays the use of it and pretends it is "natural".
I am interested to know every shot "cheat sheet" and used format (35mm, 1.5x, 1.6x or even 2x crop) etc) so what are f/ and shutter speed and ISO. Knowing those few things tell everything else how photo was done.
Photoshop and other similar programs expand the palette of those with the vision and skill to leverage the tech. There is nothing realistic about any photograph. They are all partial and imperfect representations of reality. The real question is, what is art?
I agree…art is a very personal and individual interpretation for every individual. As I mentioned I have no objections to using photoshop or any media in achieving the results one is after. But many of you here seem to overlook the fact that she is portraying a false illusion of a mother who just picked up a camera for the first time, and we are to believe that these images are "natural" as described in her blog. As if!
Well it's not just kid shots... shot 1 by way of example, is a shot of a little kid poking his fingers into his dog's mouth...a handsome well cared for dog big enough to have the kid for lunch. But instead of being annoyed, the dog is just loving and being completely patient with every moment of it.... picturing love in action is always a great thing...
Wonderful. That is all.
Usually, kid shots, can't get off the page fast enough. But these are wonderful. Go figure!
I have never been able to understand jealousy. Jealousy is the main reason I stopped exhibiting my paintings in galleried shows. Instead I sell my paintings and giclee prints directly to my clients without galleries or agents. I sell a lot less in quantity as a result, but the actual sale direct is far more satisfying for me.
The best endorsement of my work is for a collector to put cash in my hand and tell me how happy they are to own a work by me. I leave all the pettiness behind, all the squabbling and mean mouthing. I just paint and shoot for me! If someone likes my work and buys it, that’s all I need to know, all the rest is just noise.
Elena Shumilova’s work IMHO is at a genius level and it inspires me to do better at my own photography. The fact that I have been at this photography thing for more than forty five years, and Elena about two, is of no consequence to me, the fact is, I can learn from her as I can from anyone who produces such fine work.
I do not agree with what I think you are suggesting in terms of criticism equating to jealousy.
But I do enjoy what you say about what can be the hassles of selling work and agree that getting pieces into collectors' hands is very satisfying. I also agree that you (and I) can learn a lot from those relatively new to photography; such is much of what makes art interesting, to remind oneself that it is not so much all the technical stuff, internalized over the years, but fresh perspective and perception that is requisite to producing satisfying work.
Yes of course, any criticism only stems from jealousy or lack of understanding from petty and limited minds, all should obviously bow before your genius, there is no way your work can be anything else than perfect, that's a reasonable hypothesis...
This may come as shocking news but it is possible to not care for something and not be jealous.
@ mcshan. I'm certainly not jealous of Andy Wahole. @ carabas. I strive for perfection with every work I produce and always fail, so I am inspired by those who produce work that motivates me to try yet again. Give this a try yourself instead of wasting your time with sarcasm.
Aeros. First you babble about jealousy and now you back away from it. Read the posts following yours and learn something about yourself.
I very much appreciate DP Review new direction of pointing out really good photography that's out there. Some of the work, like the Wyoming time photography is not something we would really do, but all of it expands our view of what we as photographers can do. I am deeply turned off by those who are spending their time picking at details instead of looking for positives in the work to comment on. You remind me of the wife who goes into the garage after the husband and children have been cleaning all day, and then picks at a couple of things they didn't do, instead of complimenting the job they did do.
Funny, pic No.2 is more expensive - $149.00 - than others ($139.00 "with world-wide shipping and payment in different currencies available"). Bigger dog more expensive to feed? Or to rent?
I'm not going to either criticize or complain about those who are, but: wow, there is a reason that the one with the little kid with hands on the (relatively) huge dog is the lead photo for every story. That's a great photo that really makes you do a double-take.
It's not relatively huge dog. It is a HUGE dog. Caucasian Shepherds are notoriously large.
To Black Box:The dog is not Caucasian Shepherd. The breed is Central Asian Shepherd - Alabai. Alabai is "cat in dog's clothing" - very kind. Alabai temperament is very different from Caucasian Shepherd.
I actually thought about it but it's got a TAIL - something Asians shouldn't have. But if you're sure, okay, I apologize for my mistake. Please read Central Asian Shepherds are notoriously large.
I am not expert neither. :) I read about dog's breed from Elena's interview, that is what she said. I thought that breed is a Moscow Watchdog. Our family also had large dog - Newfoundland breed. He was only 2 months older than our younger son. He was great babysitter and friend for our kids.
Here is link to Google translation of interview with Elena Shumilovahttp://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fchel.kp.ru%2Fdaily%2F26184%2F3073305%2F&act=url
scroll down to see page
Wow, tough crowd here... at least some of you. I don't really get the haters here. They're a little bit "greeting card" for me. Still, they're very obviously well done and there's something about them that I have to admire. They're both technically very well done. So many photos I see are impeccably done on a technical level, but somehow don't really show much in the way of the unique vision of the person taking them... in the way that these most certainly do.
Also, what's with the idea that this woman can't possibly live on a farm in Russia and also have a very expensive camera? That's just silly! Russia has lots of poor but also some very wealthy folks, right? We don't really know anything about the photographers background so to make some statement about how she must be some kind of hoax is pretty extreme.... I wound't make these kind of assumptions if this woman was from Ethiopia... Even that country has some wealthy people and some of them undoubtably buy photo equipment.
Regarding your second paragraph, she is, in fact, an architect. And the farm might well be less livelihood, more lifestyle. Neither my first fact nor my second speculation is negative - makes little difference to me, is irrelevant in the assessment of her work. And my opinion of her work, in large part, mirrors yours.
Aaron, dpreview always had been full of pricks and haters, no big surprise here.
Critics in the use of Photoshop (or other pp sw) must all be jpeg shooters, 'cause last time I checked RAW files have to be converted and adjusted through a post-processing workflow. JPEGs go through an automated conversion process in-camera.
If the photog is not going to adjust the RAW file after opening it in software(i.e., file open>file save as) they'd actually get better results shooting straight jpegs, cause unedited RAW files look flat.
This is the most intelligent comment on PP I have ever read
Look at Brooke Shaden. I love what she does - her work is absolutely brilliant. But I know that what she does is not just photography - she is an amazing artist with vision and post-processing technique, and she is recognized for this. It would be dishonest to look at her work and say that she is a wonderful photographer though, because her images transcend photography to the point that we can't tell what kind of photographer she is.
There is no hating here - I just think it is deceptive to simply call her a photographer, when she is clearly a digital artist (and a brilliant one at that).
It just won't load for me.
What a beautiful life...
and the I think of bail outs and my day is ruined again...
I envision you watching a series of rainbows forming and reforming above a bucolic landscape. Suddenly, your mind turns to corporate bail outs and unfair taxation. The pastoral then turns black, flowers wilt and die, majestic oak trees fall and burst into flame.
And I'm like Stellaaaaaaa!! Stellaaaaa!!http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/dA2nJw2vCT8/hqdefault.jpg
GOSH, Brando is fat! :-))
AV Janus, you should stop accepting those bailouts if it makes your banker's soul so sad. :-((
do not know why some people angry about. these are beautiful pictures and beautifully made and composed. what is amazing of pictures is capture of drama and excellent lighting. many can do photoshop but cannot capture feelings if composition and situation is dull.
editing is made correctly and not overcooked. setting is beautiful. lighting is excellent. subject is excellent. these are pictures worth selling in galleries.
so please make me understand why there is hate here?
forget to mention she did excellent work putting soft atmosphere in pictures. excellent use of warm tones and colors. I like mono also. Russian mother did a lot of work to produce such art and filled with love and dedication.
I hope some armchair experts learn something from mother.
Hi jennyrae, Simple answer to your question: there is no hate. Like anything else some will like the photos and some won't. I am concerned when simply not liking a set of photos is labeled as "hate" or the posters being deemed "angry". Tastes vary and not caring for the shooters style is okay. I really haven't read a bunch of personal attacks against the shooter Elena S but I see the words "hate" and "bashing" throughout the thread. Stating that her style is not one's cup of tea is neither. Things would be boring if we all loved vanilla ice-cream.
By the way, this post is made in a friendly conversational way. It has been a lively and enjoyable thread.
understand what you mean by preference @mcshan. but I read comments not because they not prefer style but more of discredit photographer. there is difference with not liking style and discredit photographer. easy say like "I no like her style of pictures". that is very clear. but when say pictures are fake or no farmer cannot afford camera equipment or farm do not exist in Russia, that is very heavy accusation and rude.
The only real hate here comes from photographers whose personal pages are filled to the brim with smiling pregnant women and wrinkly newborns. Go figure.
Which photographer @blackbox?
Lisa... something-or-other (see below) springs to mind. Professional photographer specializing in babies and pregnant women. Her hate can make a shoreman blush.
Photography should move an emotion, and these images do, if you like you do, if you don't you don't. But the negative comments I don't get, those of you who continue to nock these images put you're work up, lets see what you can do, I am sure you can't, thats why you knock. Every photographer has a style, and she has developed her style.
If you can't do, just shut up.
[should you have any desire to, please read my more fleshed out commentary below - I am, I believe, fair to all sides of the dialog]
Yet again, a call for silencing criticism unless superior or comparable work is produced by the critical voice. Do I need remind you that some salient points in any discussion of art can come from the perspective of those who make no claims of being superior practitioners themselves? As someone who conducts critiques as part of my profession, this dismissiveness (though I can sympathize with its roots of frustration, a feeling of need to defend those deemed creative) I observe as an undisciplined reflex, often accompanied by a suspension of responsibility to address the actual points made. Do many negatively critical of work in these contexts fall into rhetorical hyperbole, ocassionally become ill-tempered? Yes. But that is no excuse for cat calls like "jealous, talentless hack", "hater", and the like. It becomes a chorus of the ugly thinking itself remedying ugliness.
[by the way, should you feel the need to assess my work before you deem my commentary legitimate, please do so, despite the fact that any information you might gleen would be irrevalent]
Hi dan, If I don't care for a song Duke Ellington wrote do I have to write my own? If I don't like the writing of Truman Capote am I expected to write my own books? Your first sentence of your post was great and really said it all but after that you took it off in another direction. Opinions and tastes will vary. In art it is okay to disagree. To me that is what defines art.
All good wishes.
You may not need to be a michelin chef to recognize overcooked steak, but on this site in particular there is a definite correlation between empty galleries and low-quality comments.
If this site had an "ignore everyone who has an empty gallery" option, the quality of the article comments in particular would be massively improved.
Hi, I don't see an empty gallery relationship to the posted comments. As many consider the DPR to be a gear forum a great deal of the galleries (majority?) have photos that were posted to show camera and lens properties rather than art. Even the DPR's own photo galleries are simply test shots. The DPR forum is not an I Shot It competition.
the vast majority of fine art critics could not make a living as practitioners but that doesn't undermine their aesthetic senses and scholastic achievements. I'm not aware of anything of note by Kenneth Clark as a painter but few would argue that he had great sensibility.
Critics of contemporary photography have no effecton pricing. Those who buy it as investment dependon branded galleries & dealers for advice-direction.
Criticism back & forth between hobbyists is...a hobby.
Not that price is the issue, but you are incorrect. While, yes, galleries may have great influence on pricing (in fact, at times, dictate pricing), galleries are part of a larger system that legitimizes work within the art world. Theorists, art historians, critics, curators, etc. are all part of the building of a selling or non-selling artist - galleries definitely do take note. And, yes, there do exist a number of the latter type artist who choose not to sell or sell in very limited numbers, instead opting to make money through museum and university lectures, and/or teaching, and/or...whatever. Of course there are many within the art world (many tiers) who do sell and may or may not do any of the other things. It just depends.
And perhaps I am not understanding you, but art criticism is a viable profession.
I've been following her on Flickr for awhile now. She's one of my favorite photographers. Sure there's plenty of post processing, but it's so tastefully and well done. Anyone that dismisses it as "just Photoshop" reveals they have no post processing knowledge or skill. Plenty of people have photoshop, very few produce photos this beautiful. Glad to see her getting some recognition.
People whining about 'post' and Photoshop perhaps never used a darkroom.
And never reheated holiday leftovers the next morning.
i think we should have the ability to "mute" other users... or at least add a dislike button... and once a certain number of dislikes is reached, the post is deemed not worthy of community
i know it promotes mob mentality but seriously... some posters are just plain hateful, critique is one thing, but disdain is another, you know who you are
Would not work. For example others could use it to dislike positive remarks as well. It works both ways.
Same logic can be applied for like as well.I am not a fan of like button without dislike one.
Hi MrJabbee, I don't think any voice should be silenced. If a post is over the line (example: "I hope this photographer dies of cancer") we can report it and let dpr/moderators decide. Beyond that I don't want to shut anyone down.
MrJabbee, I remember there was a pretty famous guy who had very similar ideas... What was his name... Joseph Ste... Sta... nah, slipped from my head.
The little boy holding bunny in the 10th pic looks like a fake background, used at Sears. But it is not, this is areal place and time. The liitle boy is not looking off camera to drunk uncle Ned. He is hold the rabbit for real. He is at home and has some connection with the little bunny. These are all pictures of all of the contrived images that be have seen in portrait photography. Only these images are real. A little like Alice really going down the rabbit hole.Nice stuff with warm and honest feelings.
If you look at the metadata you will notice that the hay shot with him in it was only taken 3 minutes before. The times are 21.49 and 21.46.
Therein lies the problem with reviewing images on this site. Too many of the users can't just take the image at face value to decide whether they like it or not, it has to be subjected to forensic analysis of the metadata, etc.
Stu 5, why are you jealous if somebody can have two keepers taken within 3 minutes?
Same boy, bunny, clothing, surroundings, I don't see a reason to mention EXIF here ...
falconeyes you are missing the point. km25 said about the background looking like it had been added or for that matter the boy to the background. Within a 3 minute period there is a totally different background. It just further supports his feeling about the background. I thought the same thing within a second of seeing the photo. It could even be green screen.
Hate the photoshop here?
yep, I agree...there's some great photos on http://www.boredpanda.com/tippi-of-africa-real-life-mowgli-girl/ , especially with the way the photographer has worked with the light. Well worth a look.
Amazing! Never heard of this story
you are welcome.
Nice images ,I normally don't find this type image appealing .. But these have something about them , they are enjoyable and honest & fun and the Black box cat needs to take a dose of shut the F up .. Pretentious bag of wind , remind me of the pricks I knew in art school with if your not making political or challenging images why you bothering .. Which is total crap .. As long as there is heart an soul in an image .. That is all that matters the rest , will take care if it self. ..
You sure it was art school you attended? Not Freightliner Driving Academy?