Ancient Wings

Walter de la Internet · Sep 8, 2014

Ferns first appeared in the fossil record 360 million years ago, but exploded in reach and number about 145 million years ago. There are now 12,000 known species, of which over 10,000 are living. They reproduce via spores and have neither seeds nor flowers, and differ from mosses by being vascular (i.e. having water-conducting vessels).

This fern is one I encountered in the Doi Suthep National Park, just outside Chiang Mai, in northern Thailand. Its wing-like structure is no doubt optimized for reproduction by spreading its spores in the wind. The curve of the head of the stem resembles the head of a bird.

In the northern Southeast Asian region through to the Himalayan foothills, the immature fronds of various types of ferns are often fried and eaten. Trees are often considered sacred and used in rituals honoring pre-Buddhist gods from animist belief systems, and the earliest historical discoveries in the region featured heavily birds atop these ancient votive artifacts. The regional connection between humans, birds, flight and trees is therefore culturally and religiously charged as well as ancient.

For some images of early votive tree artifacts I took a few years ago, check out this gallery from Sichuan province, China showing pieces unearthed from the Shu culture, a pre-Chinese culture of Sichuan with sophisticated bronzeworking technology unmatched in history that flourished between 2050-1250 BCE in what was then a lush basin of tropical jungles ringed with wild mountains. These early examples of tree worship or ritual use are the earliest I have found in the region (I am currently writing a history of the region centered on Yunnan Province, which borders Sichuan, Tibet, Burma, Laos and Vietnam).

(Alternate title: Mossverse VII: S*** Just Got Vascular)

kgwhite · Sep 8, 2014

Spectacular light and minimal composition. This one makes a strong connection with me. Well done.

Shadowfixer · Sep 8, 2014

I like it. I just wished the background was completely black.

shutterbud · Sep 8, 2014

Very nice; controlled, artistic without being contrived and a pleasing softness. I get a sense of intimacy here, as if we are being shown a private world.

4x5 Guy · Sep 8, 2014

Walter de la Internet said:
Ferns first appeared in the fossil record 360 million years ago, but exploded in reach and number about 145 million years ago. There are now 12,000 known species, of which over 10,000 are living. They reproduce via spores and have neither seeds nor flowers, and differ from mosses by being vascular (i.e. having water-conducting vessels).

Why are you telling me this?

Walter de la Internet said:
This fern is one I encountered in the Doi Suthep National Park, just outside Chiang Mai, in northern Thailand. Its wing-like structure is no doubt optimized for reproduction by spreading its spores in the wind. The curve of the head of the stem resembles the head of a bird.

Why are you telling me what I'm supposed to see in your snapshot? Isn't it supposed to be strong enough to stand on it's own?

This could have been a good photograph. But it is ruined by the two vertically oriented out of focus distractions. Those who can't see this really have a long way to go in maturing their photographic aesthetics.

Walter de la Internet said:
In the northern Southeast Asian region through to the Himalayan foothills, the immature fronds of various types of ferns are often fried and eaten. Trees are often considered sacred and used in rituals honoring pre-Buddhist gods from animist belief systems, and the earliest historical discoveries in the region featured heavily birds atop these ancient votive artifacts. The regional connection between humans, birds, flight and trees is therefore culturally and religiously charged as well as ancient.

Why are you telling me this?

Walter de la Internet said:
For some images of early votive tree artifacts I took a few years ago, check out this gallery from Sichuan province, China showing pieces unearthed from the Shu culture, a pre-Chinese culture of Sichuan with sophisticated bronzeworking technology unmatched in history that flourished between 2050-1250 BCE in what was then a lush basin of tropical jungles ringed with wild mountains. These early examples of tree worship or ritual use are the earliest I have found in the region (I am currently writing a history of the region centered on Yunnan Province, which borders Sichuan, Tibet, Burma, Laos and Vietnam).

Why are you telling me this?

shutterbud · Sep 8, 2014

4x5 Guy said:
Walter de la Internet said:

.

Click to expand...

This.....is ruined by the two vertically oriented out of focus distractions. Those who can't see this really have a long way to go in maturing their photographic aesthetics.

"Johnny no-photos", The Photographic God who never actually has posted any images is pontificating on maturity. It is priceless!

You make good sport Johnny! Of yourself. I actually chuckled when I saw your post and shook my head at your continued schoolboy games. I though "What c**p will he spout now?"

Thank you for keeping us all amused. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some photos to process. You know those things you never take?

Steve Throndson · Sep 8, 2014

Walter,

This is a good 'un. Sharp enough. Simple, effective composition. The fern really does look as if it's about to take flight. The light streaks in the background are important, I think. For those of us who like to read meaning into images, it is a symbolic element. If it were completely black, it would be just a simple specimen shot with backlighting, and there are enough of those already.

And that's my 2¢.

Steve

4x5 Guy · Sep 8, 2014

shutterbud said:
4x5 Guy said:

Walter de la Internet said:

.

Click to expand...

This.....is ruined by the two vertically oriented out of focus distractions. Those who can't see this really have a long way to go in maturing their photographic aesthetics.

Click to expand...

"Johnny no-photos", The Photographic God who never actually has posted any images is pontificating on maturity. It is priceless!

You make good sport Johnny! Of yourself. I actually chuckled when I saw your post and shook my head at your continued schoolboy games. I though "What c**p will he spout now?"

Thank you for keeping us all amused. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some photos to process. You know those things you never take?

You are very childish and immature. It reflects in your work. Good luck.

4x5 Guy · Sep 8, 2014

Steve Throndson said:
Walter,

This is a good 'un. Sharp enough. Simple, effective composition. The fern really does look as if it's about to take flight. The light streaks in the background are important, I think. For those of us who like to read meaning into images, it is a symbolic element. If it were completely black, it would be just a simple specimen shot with backlighting, and there are enough of those already.

And that's my 2¢.

Steve

I couldn't disagree with you more.

What symbolism are you referring to?

A black background with good lighting on the fern (it needs some improvement as it is) would make it an excellent photograph. "Enough of those already?" Where? Please prove your contention. There are enough bad photographs such as this one.

"Those of us who like to read meaning into images"? Huh. It's a plant. It has it's own inherent beauty if done correctly. Are you trying to find God in this image?

You should spend lots of time looking at the works of the masters. If you spend time searching the internet, you can learn and grow and improve your photographic aesthetics. Good luck.

Steve Throndson · Sep 8, 2014

4x5 Guy said:
You should spend lots of time looking at the works of the masters. If you spend time searching the internet, you can learn and grow and improve your photographic aesthetics. Good luck.

Thank you for the advice.

Regarding symbolism in photographs. It's my belief that photography is a language that relies on symbols to communicate ideas and emotions. Large areas of dark are symbolic, as are shafts of light. Lines, shapes, tones, textures - all symbols. Without symbols, what's left? Technique? If it's just about technique, then it's not an art - but a craft. Well, perhaps that's true.

Steve

PS: It must have been very satisfying to have Ansel Adams approve your work. I have never had such an honour. I would love to see the image. If it's a good one, and one that you believe in, then no amount of vindictive critique here will reduce its value.

bosjohn21 · Sep 8, 2014

Walter de la Internet said:
Ferns first appeared in the fossil record 360 million years ago, but exploded in reach and number about 145 million years ago. There are now 12,000 known species, of which over 10,000 are living. They reproduce via spores and have neither seeds nor flowers, and differ from mosses by being vascular (i.e. having water-conducting vessels).

This fern is one I encountered in the Doi Suthep National Park, just outside Chiang Mai, in northern Thailand. Its wing-like structure is no doubt optimized for reproduction by spreading its spores in the wind. The curve of the head of the stem resembles the head of a bird.

In the northern Southeast Asian region through to the Himalayan foothills, the immature fronds of various types of ferns are often fried and eaten. Trees are often considered sacred and used in rituals honoring pre-Buddhist gods from animist belief systems, and the earliest historical discoveries in the region featured heavily birds atop these ancient votive artifacts. The regional connection between humans, birds, flight and trees is therefore culturally and religiously charged as well as ancient.

For some images of early votive tree artifacts I took a few years ago, check out this gallery from Sichuan province, China showing pieces unearthed from the Shu culture, a pre-Chinese culture of Sichuan with sophisticated bronzeworking technology unmatched in history that flourished between 2050-1250 BCE in what was then a lush basin of tropical jungles ringed with wild mountains. These early examples of tree worship or ritual use are the earliest I have found in the region (I am currently writing a history of the region centered on Yunnan Province, which borders Sichuan, Tibet, Burma, Laos and Vietnam).

(Alternate title: Mossverse VII: S*** Just Got Vascular)

of your fern pics I like this one quite a bit. I am not sure what I think of the out of focus tree trunk? but I like it anyway.

--
John aka bosjohn21

bosjohn21 · Sep 8, 2014

Steve Throndson said:
4x5 Guy said:

You should spend lots of time looking at the works of the masters. If you spend time searching the internet, you can learn and grow and improve your photographic aesthetics. Good luck.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the advice.

Regarding symbolism in photographs. It's my belief that photography is a language that relies on symbols to communicate ideas and emotions. Large areas of dark are symbolic, as are shafts of light. Lines, shapes, tones, textures - all symbols. Without symbols, what's left? Technique? If it's just about technique, then it's not an art - but a craft. Well, perhaps that's true.

Steve

PS: It must have been very satisfying to have Ansel Adams approve your work. I have never had such an honour. I would love to see the image. If it's a good one, and one that you believe in, then no amount of vindictive critique here will reduce its value.

finally some one who I think understands what I mean when I speak of the language of imagery. er I think

Dr Paul · Sep 9, 2014

When it comes to OOF elements in the background it seems that opinions vary quite a bit. Are they distracting, or enhancing? They definitely change the image. I tend to appreciate them, and find them part of the image that creates juxtaposition. walter often is bothered by OOF elements on the sides and foregrounds, and at the same time integrates such elements well in his photographs. I suspect it is a vague, abstract, and subtle area of image interpretation that is prone to evoke vastly different reactions. That's a good thing.

I like this image, the sense of suspension and with the OOF elements there is depth to consider.

Herman Rorshach and those after him learned and have shared a great deal of about the power of ambiguous stimuli and affective reactions.

shutterbud · Sep 9, 2014

Many images whish are hailed as photographic art are, I feel, glib. With everything 'just so', time and time again, I find myself frustrated by the obsession some photographers have for an artificial formulaic neatness. As one flips or clicks one sees the same compositions time and again, with nothing alowed to interfere. They don't take much unpacking and are often extremely shalllow. I like my photographs to look like photographs of the real world, not staged events which lay everything on a plate to spoonfeed first-year art students.

bosjohn21 · Sep 9, 2014

4x5 Guy said:
Steve Throndson said:

Walter,

This is a good 'un. Sharp enough. Simple, effective composition. The fern really does look as if it's about to take flight. The light streaks in the background are important, I think. For those of us who like to read meaning into images, it is a symbolic element. If it were completely black, it would be just a simple specimen shot with backlighting, and there are enough of those already.

And that's my 2¢.

Steve

Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree with you more.

What symbolism are you referring to?

A black background with good lighting on the fern (it needs some improvement as it is) would make it an excellent photograph. "Enough of those already?" Where? Please prove your contention. There are enough bad photographs such as this one.

"Those of us who like to read meaning into images"? Huh. It's a plant. It has it's own inherent beauty if done correctly. Are you trying to find God in this image?

You should spend lots of time looking at the works of the masters. If you spend time searching the internet, you can learn and grow and improve your photographic aesthetics. Good luck.

Walter de la Internet · Sep 10, 2014

kgwhite said:
Spectacular light and minimal composition. This one makes a strong connection with me. Well done.

Glad you liked it. It's something I caught during rain while scanning from my shelter, so it naturally had a more interesting light about it. That said, there was quite a lot of processing to knock it back this far toward a pure background while maintaining a clear subject!

Walter de la Internet · Sep 10, 2014

Shadowfixer said:
I like it. I just wished the background was completely black.

A valid perspective, I considered this but the truth is it was too finicky to achieve technically and I felt the additional elements maintained a sense of context.

Walter de la Internet · Sep 10, 2014

shutterbud said:
Very nice; controlled, artistic without being contrived and a pleasing softness. I get a sense of intimacy here, as if we are being shown a private world.

Thanks - glad you enjoyed it. Your turn of phrase is excellent

Walter de la Internet · Sep 10, 2014

Dr Paul said:
When it comes to OOF elements in the background it seems that opinions vary quite a bit. Are they distracting, or enhancing? They definitely change the image. I tend to appreciate them, and find them part of the image that creates juxtaposition. walter often is bothered by OOF elements on the sides and foregrounds, and at the same time integrates such elements well in his photographs. I suspect it is a vague, abstract, and subtle area of image interpretation that is prone to evoke vastly different reactions. That's a good thing.

I like this image, the sense of suspension and with the OOF elements there is depth to consider.

Herman Rorshach and those after him learned and have shared a great deal of about the power of ambiguous stimuli and affective reactions.

Thanks for mentioning that guy, his Wikipedia page is very interesting and I hadn't heard of him before.

I wrote a poem a few years ago which contained the line: in ambiguity lies elation!

For wont of a better opportunity to share it, here it is:

ARE YOU AN ARTIST?
June 2011

They asked: “are you an artist?”
The question quite sublime.
For truth be told, in recent months,
It’s not the first of times.

The first was in Los Angeles
A pre-opening event
He who questioned me sure was,
Thus knew quite what it meant.

So thrown aback I did reply
With an honest heartfelt question
“Why life is art, isn’t it?”
A smile, then nought was mentioned.

And come again, the question did,
Before I left that nation.
But identify I have not yet:
In ambiguity lies elation.

Then half a world away today
In leftist lands anew
An art college in Kerala
Invited, I took my cue.

Walking about I could not see
The show that was promoted
Behind door one a library
The second looked quite verboten.

Some students came and talked to me
While each of us did smoke
My country declared, they then decided
To get to know this bloke...

They asked: “are you an artist?”
The question quite sublime.
For truth be told, in recent months,
It’s not the first of times.

Walter de la Internet · Sep 10, 2014

shutterbud said:
Many images whish are hailed as photographic art are, I feel, glib. With everything 'just so', time and time again, I find myself frustrated by the obsession some photographers have for an artificial formulaic neatness. As one flips or clicks one sees the same compositions time and again, with nothing alowed to interfere. They don't take much unpacking and are often extremely shalllow. I like my photographs to look like photographs of the real world, not staged events which lay everything on a plate to spoonfeed first-year art students.

There is certainly a point at which eyes can glaze over looking at supposedly excellent photographs, one after the other, on even a brief 'seen-there viewed-that' cognitive tour of photographic history, much like the oil paintings in museums effect one observes traveling in Europe, or the "all templed out" catchphrase of backpackers in Southeast Asia.

That said, I'm not sure if 'glib' is a word I'd use to dismiss work perceived as formulaic - mostly because there are generally so many elements I'm unaware of. Who and where was the artist, what was their situation, their equipment, their goal, their thinking, their target print size and/or reproduction process, their presentation (series, text combo, single print, etc.) their market, their society's social mores, etc. Sometimes subtle differences in formula can be brilliant. Sometimes a lucky catch might take hours of waiting (birder or papparazi style), etc. Composition and technical merit are only two ways in which photographs can excel. Then there's the angles of metaphor, sarcasm, academic pontification, etc.

However, I agree with your point that it can be a mistake to purely follow compositional rules and technical processes, unless your goal is documentation and an aesthetic safe ground. Unfortunately this makes up a particularly large body of photographic work both now and historically, and that's not likely to change, since it's primarily a documentary medium. Some people (including myself) enjoy that anyway, but we can all get to a point where our eyes glaze over

The real question is: what interests you, the individual mind? Creating? Consuming? Interpreting? All images, or 'a subset'? Why? The why of the world is very much the reason for art: it's the unsolvable riddle of subconscious. Some people prefer literature, film or football, just as some enjoy such age-old photographic subjects as sunsets, portraits of children, local monuments, animals and still life. This probably has and probably will always be the case, and there's nothing wrong with any of those. I say, let everyone enjoy their chosen paths! But of course, I applaud you for being brazen enough to look toward genre dismissing photography and originality

Share what you find!

Ancient Wings

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts