It's also when I'm surfing and I see paired-for-life Gannets (Takapu) flying just over my head that I get a little lonely.
looking at these i can`t help but wonder if you have ever tried your hand at video, or if you plan on it-- seems a match made in heaven to me.
Superba cromatica!tare frumoase..
These pictures are so stunningly beautiful that I wished I owned them or that you'd give them to me.
Ce culori! Foarte frumoase!
Beautiful, I don't know how you manage to capture the colours like this.
I feel these images as a deep music, rising, then falling almost to silence, yet still there.Unable to respond with a matching beauty, I nevertheless offer this, from W.B. Yeats’s play “Calvary”:First musician:Lonely the sea-bird lies at her rest,Blown like a dawn-blenched parcel of sprayUpon the wind, or follows her preyUnder a great wave’s hollowing crest.Second musician:God has not appeared to the birds.Third musician:The ger-eagle has chosen his partIn blue deep of the upper airWhere one-eyed day can meet his stare;He is content with his savage heart.Second musician:God has not appeared to the birds.First musician:But where have last year’s cygnets gone?The lake is empty; why do they flingWhite wing out beside white wing?What can a swan need but a swan?Second musician:God has not appeared to the birds.
But your photos are so... whole, I think, yes, that's the feeling - isn't it a reflection of how effortless-ly the bird and the air and the fields connect and stay whole?
something like the loneliness of the long distance runner?http://www.amazon.com/Loneliness-Long-Distance-Runner-Contemporary-Fiction/dp/0452269083(don't fret so! or stamp your feet again. I do intend to write in detail about some of your posts soon. some are really singular)
It's always so interesting roxana that your pictures move people to respond and compels them to figure out *why* they're moved by them.for my part, I agree with anon (which was me anyway).Faith, like a bird, sees its 'trackless way' unattended by the intellect--the Allamahope you are well.b.
I searched for pictures of these birds but I couldn't find many on the net. if you have some, do send them, please, merc.
pensum, thank you for being here. you know, I have always wondered about that, too. I haven't had any chance to, until now. but my guess is that I am not good at it, because I have virtually no spatial intelligence, no sense for orientation. the type of tests where you get some cubes that you have to rotate or something, I score very poorly. I imagine you need that for moving images, don't you?
imi pare bine ca-ti plac, edith...
that's so nice of you to say so, Sorlil... they just come out like this, the colours I mean ... I don't know.
but no, James, you give me such beauty, always. I can't get enough of these lines:But where have last year’s cygnets gone?The lake is empty; why do they flingWhite wing out beside white wing?What can a swan need but a swan?Second musician:God has not appeared to the birds.
oh, Manuela, I don't know if I have ever felt like this, whole. but if my pictures give that impression, then there is still hope, as you say :-)thank you for holding it for me. that moved me so much.
I don't know this book, Zuma, but if if happen to stumble upon it, I will remember.[and how come you think I am the feet-stamping-type? :-) oh but I know, because I complained about your last comments which were saying something very deep about 'nice colours'? :-P][but no, seriously, I can be patient too, I hope I can :-) I know how busy you must be]
hello, bis it a good or a bad thing that my pictures 'compel' people to figure out the 'why'? don't we always try to figure that out? because why and how we react to a certain painting or poem or image tells a lot about who we really are, no?[I am reluctant to say that of course, I knew you were that anonymous, because the last couple of times you seemed irritated by my assumptions. so I will pretend I didn't figure that out :-)]
p.s. I hadn't expected so many comments here, thank you all, I am quite overwhelmed.
I don't know, Roxana. It's good, I guess, if you think knowing is important or if it helps clear things up. No, I don't think we always do..sometimes we want to keep something mysterious tucked away, not name it or even try and explain it or analyse it. Reason not the need...Who we *really* are? Who on earth can do that?! Wouldn't it depend on another 'who', another's gaze?What would it mean to say why I liked some music or a particular poem or turn of phrase? Probably very little. No? But I knew you would say you knew...but I'll pretend I didn't.hi :-)b.
I think there is a first moment of 'awe', of pure emotion, when we react spontaneously to it. but then there is a second step where the intellect comes in and takes part in the aesthetic experience. 'understanding' is a part of that. however it is interesting that the newest aesthetics of reception (I don't know, Rezeptionsaesethetik in german) tend to focus much more than before on this initial moment of pure emotionality, non-mediated by reason. go back to the ethymological roots of the word, aisthesis, perception, sensation.some people are more inclined to dwell in this emotional response, others to pass so quickly to the cognitive part that they seem to neglect this first reaction. it is after all a question of temperament, I think...I don't say that we are able to uncover all the 'why's, of course not, if there weren't any msytery left, unaccounted for, we wouldn't be talking about art, no? but of course this depends on another, on another's gaze, and in this case this 'another' is the work of art we react to (and perhaps we are transformed by). maybe very little in some cases, but very much in other. hi, b :-)
personally Roxana i think video or film deal more with time and duration than spatial dimensions. after all in the end the composition remains two-dimensional. the mechanics of a camera remain the same, so you already have most of the technical skills you need. i feel the additional temporal dimension would allow you to delve deeper into the feelings of longing, distance and emotional complexity which your photos so often reflect. i really would love to see what you do with a video camera, especially in regards to the landscapes and impending storms you have such a strong eye for. that said, the wealth of comments here show that you have a gift with still photos and still much to offer in this format. thanks for enriching us all.
ps. Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner was made into a rather remarkable film starring Michael Redgrave, i suspect the opening of this clip might be what Zuma was referring to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5RE1D_Jdks
pensum, if you are right, then I should give it a try, now you have sparkled my curiosity. that is, if a video camera can be handled with very little technical skill, because I am not great at that. with my camera (I have a Nikon n75 now, but I started with a manual one) I work almost intuitively, the basics, aperture, time and this is pretty much all that I can do.maybe I should buy the D90 instead of the D300, as somebody here recommended, it is said to be (almost) as good as the D300 and it can make film too. but I read in the reviews that the video doesn't work as well as the photography part. so I guess I would be needing a proper camera for that. anyway, thank you for your words and encouragement. and for mentioning the film, I think it will be easier to find the film than the book.
In NZ gannets are called Takapu in Maori. I mention them on LIAS because they mate for life,http://loveisasymbol.blogspot.com/search?q=takapu