# Timing is Everything!



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 17, 2012)

.


----------



## Overread (Feb 17, 2012)

Nice timing!


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 17, 2012)

looks like 7 seconds late to me.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

I really like it.. but it seems unbalanced somehow! (larger version available for viewing anywhere?


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Feb 17, 2012)

Clone out that sweep second hand and its a clever winner fior sure...


----------



## e.rose (Feb 17, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Clone out that sweep second hand and its a clever winner fior sure...



Just curious... why do you think he needs to clone out the second hand for it to be good?


----------



## mishele (Feb 17, 2012)

I feel stressed like I'm almost late to something!!! lol Me likie!!!
Emotion for the WIN!!


----------



## xyphoto (Feb 17, 2012)

Timing IS everything: you missed it by 3 seconds.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Feb 17, 2012)

e.rose said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > Clone out that sweep second hand and its a clever winner fior sure...
> ...



I don't think I said it wasn't good....


----------



## e.rose (Feb 17, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > GeorgieGirl said:
> ...



  Okay... allow me to rephrase...

Why do you think he needs to clone it out for it to be a "winner"?


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Feb 17, 2012)

e.rose said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...



Welll...since you put it that way....:mrgreen:

I think simple and clean and minimalist...so akin to an age old sundial...

The sweep hand interferes with the mirror image of the clock hands to the smilar corresponding shadow...(like a sundial)

That's just me....


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 17, 2012)

I knew everyone would have opinions on the second hand. 
I feel it's inconsequential, but see how others could argue towards various other positions.

Sorry Charlie, this is size I posted. Please don't embroil me into the latest TPF fad brewhaha about what is an adequate viewing size. :roll:

What seems unbalanced to you?


----------



## e.rose (Feb 17, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > GeorgieGirl said:
> ...







GeorgieGirl said:


> I think simple and clean and minimalist...so akin to an age old sundial...
> 
> The sweep hand interferes with the mirror image of the clock hands to the smilar corresponding shadow...(like a sundial)
> 
> That's just me....



Haha, that's cool.  I was just curious. :sillysmi:

I didn't have an opinion about it either way, so I was just wondering what it was you were seeing and thinking. :sillysmi:


----------



## mishele (Feb 17, 2012)

The second hand makes the shot for me!! It gives the shot a sense of urgency. I like it as is!!
Drama=second hand!!


----------



## e.rose (Feb 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Sorry Charlie, this is size I posted. Please don't embroil me into the latest TPF fad brewhaha about what is an adequate viewing size. :roll:



If every post starts to come down to that... I'm leaving.

Sh!t's getting ridiculous.


----------



## mishele (Feb 17, 2012)

LOL Size does matter, E.rose!!


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> I knew everyone would have opinions on the second hand.
> I feel it's inconsequential, but see how others could argue towards various other positions.
> 
> Sorry Charlie, this is size I posted. Please don't embroil me into the latest TPF fad brewhaha about what is an adequate viewing size. :roll:
> ...



Nothing to do with any "Fad".. just wanted to see the detail better than this size shows! That was all!

Top heavy...... Less white than grey / black.. and the clock is much "heavier" than anything in the white. 

I have looked at this a dozen times.. for a minute or two per session... I love the lines.. the contrast... it just doesn't feel right to me!

 I got to looking at it again.. and now I see a ski slope with "Time"  rolling down it! (hey I am in Colorado!)... and find that sort of  symbolic! Feeling old today, I guess!


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

e.rose said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry Charlie, this is size I posted. Please don't embroil me into the latest TPF fad brewhaha about what is an adequate viewing size. :roll:
> ...



I must of missed that thread.. I have no idea what you guys are even talking about!   I just wanted to see it larger for greater detail.. because I can see detail... and a lot of it. Just wanted to see more! 

I don't do any F'n Fads!  

EDIT: And yes.. it pisses me off that either you or Bitter would throw that SH1t at me!  I won't bother asking next time...


----------



## pgriz (Feb 17, 2012)

Good eye, great timing.  And the second hand makes it "real" for me - otherwise it's a little too perfect.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

e.rose said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry Charlie, this is size I posted. Please don't embroil me into the latest TPF fad brewhaha about what is an adequate viewing size. :roll:
> ...



What in the hell ARE you talking about? Can you point me at a thread or something?


----------



## mishele (Feb 17, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > Bitter Jeweler said:
> ...


This maybe...
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/digital-discussion-q/273701-two-things-i-just-dont-get.html


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

mishele said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...



Thanks Mishele!

I did see that.. and I feel like the current forum size limitations are silly as hell.. since they don't actually host the file. But the current size limit is adequate for basic C&C! 

There are some shots that the smaller size here (while adequate for C&C) does NOT do justice too! Imagine what Invisible's work is like full size...  you just get a small taste of that here. Same for Mishele's flowers....  and a lot of the other work here. Adequate for C&C .. yes.. but will it nourish the mind and soul? Unlikely!

I do not care for it when someone post thumbnails.. and I see that as a  valid gripe, because how the hell can you C&C something your can  barely see!


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Feb 17, 2012)

....see size matters....I knew that all along....apparently so does Mishele....

The Bigger the Better!!!!


----------



## Derrel (Feb 17, 2012)

Nice shot Bitter! This one is truly worth a second look.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> ....see size matters....I knew that all along....apparently so does Mishele....
> 
> The Bigger the Better!!!!



The current size is like eating at McDonalds.. yea.. it will fill you up, but it tastes like Crap! I prefer steak and lobster.. if you get my meaning!


----------



## mishele (Feb 17, 2012)

It's what you do w/ the size....lol Big or small this shot is a win!!


----------



## Josh66 (Feb 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> I knew everyone would have opinions on the second hand.
> I feel it's inconsequential[...]


I agree.

Cool clock.  It's like my watch, but on a wall.


----------



## mishele (Feb 17, 2012)

O|||||||O said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > I knew everyone would have opinions on the second hand.
> ...



Wow....Josh that was mind blowing!! lol:hug::


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Feb 17, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > ....see size matters....I knew that all along....apparently so does Mishele....
> ...



Red Lobster...you like Red Lobtser beter than McDonalds.....I'm not sure about this...but according to the Clock on the Wall its  almost ten....and its my bed time....

Nite all!

:hugs:


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

GeorgieGirl said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > GeorgieGirl said:
> ...



No NO NO... Red Lobster is like Mcdonalds for Seafood! Yechh!


----------



## Josh66 (Feb 17, 2012)

mishele said:


> O|||||||O said:
> 
> 
> > Bitter Jeweler said:
> ...


I don't see many clocks that show the day and date, lol.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 17, 2012)

That clock is the only thing that ties me to the linear world.

I've tried those things called calanders, but they usually get stuck on January.


----------



## o hey tyler (Feb 17, 2012)

Well, David. I shat blood. So... 

That's means there's a print to hang on your wall. Fresh from my rectum.


----------



## e.rose (Feb 17, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> EDIT: And yes.. it pisses me off that either you or Bitter would throw that SH1t at me!  I won't bother asking next time...



  I'm sorry if it seemed like that was pointed directly at you.  I didn't meant it to be... I didn't think that's what you were after anyway, which is why I quoted Bitter and not you, because *his* response reminded me of that thread (probably the one Mish posted... I don't remember what it was called, and I'm too lazy to click right now), and several other comments I've seen flying around lately.

My comment to him was technically off-topic, haha.

I assumed your intentions for asking for a larger version was not to passive aggressively support the latest "how to post" fad... I just did a really sh*tty job of making that clear apparently as I am majorly failing at the English language today.  :lmao:

But yeah... what I said wasn't a reaction to *you*.  :hug::


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

e.rose said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > EDIT: And yes.. it pisses me off that either you or Bitter would throw that SH1t at me!  I won't bother asking next time...
> ...



No problem, Emily... just in a mood! I apologize for the rant! Thanks.. I really appreciate your response!  :thumbup:


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 17, 2012)

Yeah, sorry about that too. Just too coincidental with the gripe du jour.


----------



## e.rose (Feb 17, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...



Shoot, man... it happens to the BEST of us.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 17, 2012)

Ok everyone else here seems to love it and I'm actually kinda wondering if its an inside joke or something for the lack of dissention.




For discussion, even though I completely missed the point! 

​


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Yeah, sorry about that too. Just too coincidental with the gripe du jour.



Thanks Bitter! I do appreciate and understand!


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Ok everyone else here seems to love it and I'm actually kinda wondering if its an inside joke or something for the lack of dissention. I thought it was kinda cool this way, a little bit of play with the composition-
> I guess if I have to explain it its not working, but like this the line makes a 1 and the clock makes the 0, kinda reinforces the 10 o clock thing.



Hey.. it isn't top heavy any more!  lol!


----------



## e.rose (Feb 17, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Ok everyone else here seems to love it and I'm actually kinda wondering if its an inside joke or something for the lack of dissention.



Maybe I'm mis-understanding you here... but...

Go back and look at Bitter's version.

Look at the shadow on the wall and that... piping... or whatever it is... in relation to the hands on the clock... :sillysmi:

So no, there's no tension, but there's fluidity... which is why I dig it.

I honestly didn't get it at first... I was about to shrug it off as one of Bitter's pieces that didn't move me as much as some... and then just as I was about to click away, I saw it.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 17, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Ok everyone else here seems to love it and I'm actually kinda wondering if its an inside joke or something for the lack of dissention. I thought it was kinda cool this way, a little bit of play with the composition- http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7210/6894666419_46514ac06b_b.jpg
> I guess if I have to explain it its not working, but like this the line makes a 1 and the clock makes the 0, kinda reinforces the 10 o clock thing.
> 
> 
> ​



That's cool, but the whole point of the image was that the shadow line, and conduit line mimic the the hands at 10:00...and that I happened to noticed it.


----------



## e.rose (Feb 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Ok everyone else here seems to love it and I'm actually kinda wondering if its an inside joke or something for the lack of dissention. I thought it was kinda cool this way, a little bit of play with the composition- http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7210/6894666419_46514ac06b_b.jpg
> ...



I SAID IT FIRST!  I WIN!

(What do I win?)

:lmao:


----------



## Bossy (Feb 17, 2012)

AHHh I totally missed that. Ok I like it more haha.  Sorry bout the edit!​


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 17, 2012)

Don't be sorry at all!

You didn't need to remove it.

I think Charlie is right though, that your version seems more balanced.

I am trying to figure out if it's that the hands and lines are opposite, or if it's just that the angle feels beete going up to he right, rather than down.

Feel free to put it back up for the sake of discussion. No harm.


I think it now asks the question, which is better, original (natural) intent of capture, or recombination for sake of compositional balance?


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 17, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Ok everyone else here seems to love it and I'm actually kinda wondering if its an inside joke or something for the lack of dissention.
> 
> nm I'm a dork




We're not looking at it as a clock. Even tho that's what it is, we see it as artistic expression.
We're looking at it as the artistic side of time. The second hand that everyone is complaining about was intentional.
It gives a sense of time in every way. What would the clock be without the second hand?
It's very obvious that the OP cunningly waited for the second hand to reach 3 seconds before it started its new revolution.
This indicates " before the beginning of time" and it leaves the viewer wondering, "what might have been?
He is trying to draw the viewers into time and its effect on daily life. Perfect timing indicates being in the right place at the right time.
In this instance, the OP is.
Viewing this image left me wondering," Did this clock really have the right time when the image was captured?

All in all I give this image a 9 on creativity.
A 10 on exposure.
A 12 on artistic value.
This is on a scale of 1-10 too.

Needless to say, I am inspired.

Thumbs up.
Keep up the good work.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Ok everyone else here seems to love it and I'm actually kinda wondering if its an inside joke or something for the lack of dissention. I thought it was kinda cool this way, a little bit of play with the composition-
> ...



( I was joking, btw!... )


----------



## Bossy (Feb 17, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Ok everyone else here seems to love it and I'm actually kinda wondering if its an inside joke or something for the lack of dissention.
> ...



Actually he intended for the shadows/hands to match, not the second hand. Cool insight though ​


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Don't be sorry at all!
> 
> You didn't need to remove it.
> 
> ...



Bitter.. sometimes your shots make my head feel the same way some trig problems used to do, back in school!  lol! This is one of them! I do like it though!


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 17, 2012)

Bossy said:


> LightSpeed said:
> 
> 
> > Bossy said:
> ...



Yeah I know.
This has been mind blowing for me.
To be able to take a clock and do this, is artistic value at its very highest level.
I'm taking notes here.
I wanna be this good one day.
And thanks.


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 17, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > LightSpeed said:
> ...


Somehow and this is a real random thought, is Lightspeed being sarcastic???? I seriously can't tell. But I wonder.....


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 18, 2012)

Seeing as your photos are OK to edit, I used photobucket so the quality might be downgraded some


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 18, 2012)

How can you possibly think that you can improve perfection?
Come to think of it now that I look at it, the clock does look less under exposed. And more sharp.
What did you do?


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 18, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> How can you possibly think that you can improve perfection?
> Come to think of it now that I look at it, the clock does look less under exposed. And more sharp.
> What did you do?



Well I felt that in the orignal, the focus was slightly off on the hands, it felt overall underexposed and the BW conversion looked very flat. A lot of grey tones. So I just some did some slight contrast & exposure adjustments and sharpened it up a bit. Very simple, but makes a big difference. 

And no, Lightspeed is not coaching me here  I just love edits!!!


----------



## e.rose (Feb 18, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> LightSpeed said:
> 
> 
> > How can you possibly think that you can improve perfection?
> ...



I still like the original better.

Yeah yours might have more drastic contrast... but grey tones aren't bad.

In the original you can see the texture in the un-shadowed part of the wall.  In yours... you can't.

I think Bitter's moodier... and I, honestly, think the wall texture adds to the feel.

But that's just me.


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 18, 2012)

e.rose said:


> blackrose89 said:
> 
> 
> > LightSpeed said:
> ...



You want texture I can do texture. I can even enhance it more then the original.


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 18, 2012)

e.rose said:


> blackrose89 said:
> 
> 
> > LightSpeed said:
> ...



Although I agree with you, in part.
I feel though she may have taken away in one area and given back in another.
Tho I find this image inspirational and moving, not to mention I look at time totally different now, I find it very hard to choose between the original or the edit.
Time is a very essential aspect of our lives. Perhaps the most valuable thing that we have.

So umm, you single tonight?
I have time.
lol


----------



## e.rose (Feb 18, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> So umm, you single tonight?
> I have time.
> lol



For the next few hours.



I decided to skip out on tonight's show.  I'll go tomorrow.

:lmao:


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 18, 2012)

e.rose said:


> LightSpeed said:
> 
> 
> > So umm, you single tonight?
> ...



The night is ours!
Got any high heels?
hahahahaa


----------



## e.rose (Feb 18, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > LightSpeed said:
> ...



Yeah, but they're all packed.  I'm too lazying to unpack everything and I rarely wear heels out now-a-days... makes it too hard to shoot at shows, haha.  ...And there haven't been any sexy social parties lately sooooooooo... heels are still packed.  :lmao:


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 18, 2012)

While on the subject of time.
There's a time and place for heels.
That time is NOW E ROse!

As time goes, it's time to unpack.
lmao


----------



## e.rose (Feb 18, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> While on the subject of time.
> There's a time and place for heels.
> That time is NOW E ROse!
> 
> ...



No offense, Speed... while I'm sure you're a very handsome man, if my *husband*, whom I happen to think is *very* handsome, has failed to inspire my sporting of heels... ain't no man gonna get me to unpack them.  

Then again, I'm not a fan of shoes in general.


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 18, 2012)

e.rose said:


> LightSpeed said:
> 
> 
> > While on the subject of time.
> ...



No no , you misunderstand, I was gonna ask to borrow them.


----------



## e.rose (Feb 18, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > LightSpeed said:
> ...





Oh... well... you're more than welcome to come over and dig through the boxes.......


----------



## Netskimmer (Feb 18, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> That clock is the only thing that ties me to the linear world.
> 
> I've tried those things called calanders, but they usually get stuck on January.



Ooh, you could make a life size print and hang it where the clock is. That way time would stand still.



e.rose said:


> LightSpeed said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...



I'd be careful Rose, LightSpeed is just crazy enough to actually show up!


----------



## fotorobot (Feb 18, 2012)

Original is better


----------

