holy disc film Batman
How can ‘the experience of pure non-objectivity’ be evoked by anything other than a black square?
By removing the painting altogether.
Hide it in the state archive basement? Destroy it? What’s the prefered way to remove it?
This is a little weird - I wonder what’s causing this? The whole thing about Instagram has always been that it encourages, even forces you to mutilate your photos. A whole Geocities aesthetic, where you’re liberated because it doesn’t have to look professional. Even if you choose not to apply one of the ‘make it shittier’ filters, it forces you to crop from something you didn’t compose for. I guess they think they’re big enough now that they can be all hoity toity.
Yeah, does feel like they’re diluting what they’re known for. I don’t really get it.
Well, no, because you can take square pictures in the app and compose accordingly. And the iPhone, at least, has a square option in its camera app too. It’s only if you’re doing it after the event that’s an issue.
Disc film… the worst! 126 forevar!!!
Any way one may choose. If the purpose is ‘pure non-objectivity’ in a painting, then no painting at all is the purest form of non-objectivity.
My own painting is the embodiment of this ethos in that I never painted it.
Polaroids and photo booths make a pretty good case for the square image as a snapshot, something personal or intimate. A glimpse. I can see why they work for Instagram users.
The rectangle gives us scope and serves as a window into a larger world. The rectangle tells stories.
Instagram could add a feature where you have to shake your phone vigorously to make the image gradually appear.
1:2.35 is very uncommon in still photography.
Try 8x10, 4x5, 3x2. Even 4x3. In portrait or landscape, as the subject dictates.
Beyond how it works for your image, I don’t think any particular ratio or shape is particularly important.
Typically, square is thought of as bad though. You’ll find that square is generally avoided in almost all media - photos, books, paintings, sculpture,… 3:2 or 4:3 are much more common.
What? No love for 16:9 or 16:10 Golden Ratio approximates?
A square is just another type of rectangle. I don’t think ratios matter much, maybe we find some ratios more appealing because they better fit our frame of vision or have some historical or cultural context.
Rules in art and composition are there to protect novices from themselves. Once you understand the rules, they can be broken with great effect.
Photography 101: Do Not Center Your Images
Anderson’s frames are only centered horizontally. Also, they still conform to the rule of thirds/golden ratios guidelines.
Some square filmes (6x6 medium format comes to mind) have long been favorites of commercial and fashion photographers. I’ve read some calling it a versatile choice for cropping to other formats for magazine pages, overlaying ad copy and so on. If nothing else, it fixed the portrait/landscape issue.