Still Life .... is any movement allowed ?

[bobt]

I've just been pondering a number of potential "Still Life" subjects for a forthcoming competition. I want something more interesting that a bowl of fruit.

Some of these involve a certain amount of smoke or fumes. For example, a candle which has just been extinguished and the residual plume of smoke is still rising from the wick (might look good against a black background).

The question is ..... does this qualify as "Still Life" ??? Or does the movement inherent in the smoke disqualify it? Any views on this?

[ameerat42]

Hm! Good point.
Perhaps you should start by calling me ORTHODOX...
OK, I'll tell you why - and this is NOT an answer to your Q*.

Traditionally, Still Life meant [representations of] things that were once living, or that harboured
living things: fruit (the bowl was just a convenience:D), seashells, flowers,...

*This is:
Now, the meaning is much wider, so... (and there was the dratted bowl, don't forget) since the components
of a candle were once associated with living things...

(Too much smoke:rolleyes:)

[bobt]

Hm! Good point.
Perhaps you should start by calling me ORTHODOX...
OK, I'll tell you why - and this is NOT an answer to your Q*.



Sounds like a smoke screen to me !! :lol:


(actually ... if it was a wooden bowl, that was once living!) :rolleyes:

[landyvlad]

It matters more how the judges understand a "still life". Can you contact the competition organisers for clarification / definition?

Alternatively take a picture of council road workers....

[bobt]

It matters more how the judges understand a "still life". Can you contact the competition organisers for clarification / definition?

Alternatively take a picture of council road workers....

Yeah .... in recent times most clubs go with the "it's your interpretation" philosophy. I tend to agree actually, having been involved in that debate numerous times. Even judges are a right pain - some narrower than Donald Trump's mind (and I use the term loosely), and some who accept anything at all!

Might be better off with the council workers .... or politicians ... or ...... so many choices! :D

[Mark L]

Yeah .... in recent times most clubs go with the "it's your interpretation" philosophy. I tend to agree actually, having been involved in that debate numerous times.

Unfortunately it still comes down to what the judges judge as still life.
Some may consider what you propose as not still life, but if it has still subjects and ............
You should be used to entering photos in those comps that a are a bit different Bob. You don't have to win, so get the smoke going.

[bobt]

Unfortunately it still comes down to what the judges judge as still life.
Some may consider what you propose as not still life, but if it has still subjects and ............
You should be used to entering photos in those comps that a are a bit different Bob. You don't have to win, so get the smoke going.

Ain't it the truth! Judges are one of the reasons I don't bother with prints any more. They are so erratic it becomes a bit of a lottery - I call it Complotto.

Don't have to win???? I know some who would consider that heresy! Winning is everything to some ..... personally I couldn't give a rats, so you're right - I should just enter what turns me on rather than the judge.

This is a new club (for me) and they only have one Open for the whole year - the rest are Set Subjects. Haven't struck that before.