Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


(Im)perfect = Photogenic

conrad

Hello, welcome to my portfolio! Please feel free to have a look around and comment on anything you see!
...Read More
Profile

(Im)perfect = Photogenic

23 Apr 2012 4:37PM   Views : 4290 Unique : 265

I find it interesting that both perfection and imperfection seem to make someone or something photogenic. I won't make this a long, philosophic piece about the subject, but I've come to the conclusion that we like looking at photos of perfect-looking people, but that and old, worn face makes for an attractive photo as well.

And the same goes for objects - like buildings, for instance.

The perfect graphic lines of the clean design of a modern building are attractive to photographers, but old, tatty, run-down or even completely ruined buildings seem to be at least as attractive.

Why is it that both these extremes attract, and that anything in the middle seems less interesting?

I have no idea.

But I rather liked this burnt and ruined home that I came across recently, and it made me think. (Nicer version in the Gallery .)

ruinedhouse2-7326-up.jpg

Tags: Building Photogenic Imperfections Ruined Burnt

Comments


User_Removed 13 39 6 Scotland
23 Apr 2012 9:04PM
So true and mush as I spend a great deal of time producing conceptual imagery of hi tech and future worlds I just luv old ruined buildings and decay especially devoid of any life. We are such a fickle race.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

conrad 11 10.9k 116
23 Apr 2012 9:36PM
I suppose it's the extremes that appeal to us. Anything that's middle of the road or just average doesn't seem to attract.
drfireball 4 11 1 United Kingdom
25 Apr 2012 5:22PM
Urbex (climbing into derelict places - tresspassing - to take photos) seems really popular right now and I have been attracted to it - although have never done it. Particularly appealing is placing beauty next to dereliction for juxtaposition purposes - I have certainly done that. I guess decay is part of the human condition but at the same time it is difficult not to get swept along with cuurent trends. Perffect example of which may end up being the "baby in a bucket" photog that sells so well at present. However as with all trends will the customers still like such photos in a few years - esp if on their walls?

Seems to me there is also the usual amount of sexism involved in that old men have character - for the same to work in women the photos often need to be of "old crone" types ideally taken on holiday in exotic locations (therefore separating one's own experience).

But as you say too easy to philosophise Smile

Love the picture above

DrF
conrad 11 10.9k 116
25 Apr 2012 5:26PM
Urbex, eh. I did't know it had a name, I just knew people did it. Smile You learn every day...

I agree about the old men, it's true about the exotic locations, etc. Popular photos of old Western European men seem rare, in comparison.
Patricia Fenn 12 614 56 United Kingdom
30 Apr 2012 7:24AM
I think it's not what we see in an image, it's what we perceive lies behind what we see that attracts us.
ie: The perfect woman, The aged face of an extremely full and interesting life, The building of an amazingly successful architect, The dilapidated walls that could/should talk.
Perhaps the mundane, the stuff that doesn't really attract us at the moment, is the stuff on the journey from one end of the interesting scale, to the other... like most of us I guess.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.