--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 <no_reply@...> wrote: > > I think the fig newtons are a metal cannister probably used to store fig > newtons or cookies (or anything for that matter). The top one appears to be > the lid.
Brilliant, yes, this makes sense. Other than the perspective of being too big to be actual cookies and they wouldn't move in a block like that, it all appears probable to create that photo since I watched it a number of times and in frame by frame slow mo. I love to see how things are created and although there were some gaps in the editing that could have been taken advantage of to insert something else it was very cool and got some of us going. > > Of course, I'm sure everyone noticed the one obvious "crossover" in the > bottom two squares. > > It's amazing what creative minds come up with...and what non-creative minds > have to say about it in an attempt to malign...talk about too much time on > one's hands! It is not so much the time on one's hands that is the culprit, it is often the 'shoot the messenger' mentality. But it seems to work both ways so everyone gets their come-uppins around here sooner or later. Getting a run for one's money isn't necessarily bad but maliciousness is, in my book (what is that book anyway?). > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" <awoelflebater@> wrote: > > > > > > The most suspect element in the photo are the Fig Newtons. They are, I > > believe, a cardboard cutout of a picture of Fig Newtons. Check out the top > > one, there is an extra layer of Newton, check out the perspective, they are > > too big compared to the tool box and orange just behind them. He fudged but > > not by using photoshop in my opinion. But it is a fun exercise to figure it > > out and an interesting concept. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > it's his nature > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: turquoiseb <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> > > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 6:41 AM > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: For those who think that their > > > > > perspective on things is always correct > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It isn't. For example, you probably think that the photo > > > > > > > below is a photo montage, created from several different > > > > > > > individual photos. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://petapixel.com/2013/06/20/this-mind-bending-colorful-photo-mosaic-is-actually-a-single-photograph/ > > > > > > > > > > > > That's right, this is one incredible boring one photo > > > > > > looking like 4 by colouring in photoshop. Some people > > > > > > just have too much time on their hands... > > > > > > > > > > And some people are so arrogant they make assertions > > > > > based on ignorance. There is NO Photoshop work in the > > > > > final photo, as you would have been able to see if > > > > > you had looked closely at the staged things being > > > > > photographed. All of the coloring comes from the > > > > > staging itself. > > > > > > > > It certainly looks like he "painted" the left part of the > > > > table blue in photoshop but I could be wrong ofcourse, > > > > though I doubt it. > > > > > > It would have been *obvious* to you that this is exactly > > > what he did, if you hadn't been so arrogant as to have > > > never examined the "Before" photo of the arrangement > > > of the items. But noooooo...you had to be an elitist. > > > Your loss... > > > > > > > It doesn't make the photo a bit more interesting if he did > > > > in real world, it's still a boring picture. > > > > ... > > > > Anyway, I'm happy that he finds the picture of these boring > > > > objects fascinating. In his and Curtis's world this is no > > > > doubt ART :-) > > > > > > I never said it was art, merely that it fucks with the > > > mind and one's preconceptions. Clearly it DID just that > > > with you. > > > > > > As for the quality or lack thereof of photographs, I > > > should remind people that the criticism is coming from > > > the guy who claims to be a "professional photographer" > > > but has always been afraid to post even a *single* > > > link to one of his photographs here. > > > > > > Afraid of criticism, or afraid of revealing his real > > > name? Either is pretty pathetic. > > > > > >
