Today’s inspiration comes from Romain Laurent, a highly talented French photographer, famous for his brilliant and creative work.
Also check out: Incredible Photo Manipulations
Today’s inspiration comes from Romain Laurent, a highly talented French photographer, famous for his brilliant and creative work.
Also check out: Incredible Photo Manipulations
TuTu
amazing…
Oct 5th, 2008
nicole
wow. these photos have so much meaning in them. I love the concept of the photos that have the layers of the person, the one saying that everyone is a child within? love his photography!
Oct 5th, 2008
nicolesux
screw meaning, they look awesome
Oct 5th, 2008
Jify Bean
OMG, dude, that is absolutely amazing! Wow.
Jiff
Oct 5th, 2008
Another Photographer
Conceptually speaking – props to Romain. he knows what he wants and pursues that vision with vigor.
but before another amateur writes “wow! artistic”, take a step back and notice how over processed many of these images are. the subjects have little to no semblance to how humans should look in the given lighting schemes. not to mention – a number of the images contain highly overexposed areas that are distracting and amateurish.
diggers…quit using the terms “artistic” and “creative” without being able to explain why it is you feel that way.
Oct 5th, 2008
Another Another Photographer
Amen to that Another Photographer.
Oct 5th, 2008
Not another photographer
To Another Photographer,
That must be one of the most ignorant postings I have seen in a long time. Art is something to be appreciated by the masses and you ridiculing people for simply stating their appreciation (regardless of why or even if they know why they find it pleasing) is absurd. People like you give artists a horrible reputation for being up stuck snobby duchebag who thing they have some insight on the world others don’t (as opposed to a different insight). Way to try to make yourself feel better by “trying” to make others feel less on their capabilities to understanding art/expression. You’re a shameful human being for fostering a mentality of close mindedness.
Oct 5th, 2008
Another Photoraphyer Criticizing Another Photoraphyer
Sure, you can criticize it on a technical level, but the fact that laymen can come away with meaning and appreciation of Romain Laurent’s work means that you’re doing nothing but nitpicking his art. Sure, technical considerations matter, but only when they detract from the photographer’s purpose in his pictures, and obviously, from both your reactions (criticizing the mundane) and other people have commented (simple appreciation), your comments are simply nothing more than superfluous.
Oct 5th, 2008
Into Art
“no semblance to how humans should look in the given lighting schemes.”
So art is only that which perfectly imitates reality? What a limited perspective.
I would argue, the sense that something is slightly “off” in some of the pictures only adds to the “gut reaction” (I can’t think of how else to express that at the moment) some of these pictures evoke.
However, I do agree there is no harm in also assessing technical skill. But this criteria in and of itself, particularly in this case, does not invalidate its quality or impact.
I think some of the pics are far superior to others, but no matter, they really are intriguing to look at.
Oct 5th, 2008
John
I enjoyed these. That is what they are there for, what all art is there for. To not be able to look past a few minor flaws and enjoy something for what it is truly says something about your close mindedness.
Oct 5th, 2008
Amateur
Hi I’m an amateur. wow! artistic. found this on dig it’s so creative and artistic.
Oct 5th, 2008
Haleh
I cannot find words now!
Oct 5th, 2008
800HighTech
Cool pics, this is some very clean work! good job!
Oct 5th, 2008
Blob
While Romain Laurent might have taken base shots, I know for a fact that most post is not his, and includes 3d in some cases (the half-humans pictures notably)
Oct 5th, 2008
Another Photographer
(This is the original poster “Another Photographer”)
A few responses to fellow responders:
1. “Art is something to be appreciated by the masses and you ridiculing people for simply stating their appreciation (regardless of why or even if they know why they find it pleasing) is absurd”
– Couldn’t agree with you more. However, having 100 individuals use meaningless words (meaningless, mind you, in the user’s conception) like “artistic” and “creative” to feign articulation of their ephemeral reactions is simply a waste of web space. more than an attack on the masses, it was plea for something else. a reaction worth reading, that provokes rather than stifles dynamic thought production.
2. “Way to try to make yourself feel better by “trying” to make others feel less on their capabilities to understanding art/expression.”
Have you ever heard of a critique? It in no way infers an attack. It is my opinion/perspective…much like Romain has his. It is how individuals compare and contrast each other’s creative (there, i used it) endeavors. inherently, i am working with limited information with regard to the artist’s intentions/motivations. I in no way am trying to make myself feel better – not everyone is motivated by competition.
3. “Sure, you can criticize it on a technical level, but the fact that laymen can come away with meaning and appreciation of Romain Laurent’s work means that you’re doing nothing but nitpicking his art.”
– I agree with you completely. My original response does not, and should not suggest otherwise. I merely was attempting to challenge the laymen to think outside the narratives of “creative and artistic”, if not, to articulate WHY they believe the work is such.
Romain, if you read this, please know that I have the utmost respect for your work. This discussion has derailed to commentary on another issue. Keep creating, buddy.
Oct 6th, 2008
raddedas
Another Photographer – the people look exactly as they are supposed to look under the artist’s lighting scheme – that’s one big area where the photographer’s creativity comes in. It may not look like a naturally lit scene but it takes a whole hell of a lot more skill to create good effective lighting than it does to just take a shot of whatever is in front of you. There is every possibility that the people who were saying “very artistic” or “creative” in their comments did understand the skills Romain must have had to achieve the shots, and just had no time or inclincation to post a more detailed critique.
Incidentally, there are critiques and then there are attacks. You just attacked a bunch of people, sounded like a c*nt, and then posted again in a semi-apologetic way to try to make yourself look less like a c*nt. Didn’t work.
Oct 6th, 2008
Alex
Not Creative Photography – Creative Photoshop. There’s a difference. Nice images though.
Oct 6th, 2008
my 2 cents
Art is subjective, that’s why on one end of the spectrum you have crappy art that is worth millions and on the other end undiscovered geniuses struggling.
And that is why there are no entrance exams to go to an Art Museum, you don’t need to reach a standard or level of education to enjoy art. art invokes a personal unique relationship with each audience member. so what if they do not have a thesaurus that offers variations to the word “creative” and “artistic”, it is still their own viewpoint.
those are my 2 cents.
Oct 6th, 2008
my 1 cent ,damn recession
in all honesty, yes he might take the photographs, but these stop being photographs as soon as they are fiddled with in photoshop, don’t get me wrong, this is great graphics/digital imagery… but I don’t think calling it photography is ‘right’
still very well done, entertaining and creative…
Oct 6th, 2008
Another Photographer
(This is the original poster “Another Photographer” again)
I am actually just jealous because my stuff sucks compared to this so I am going to take out my anger on random people. Sorry.
Oct 6th, 2008
Preetha Varadharajan
Coool..Artistic and Creative work.But calling this photography is not correct. VERY CREATIVE & AMAZING!!
Oct 6th, 2008
YAP
Not photography you say? At what point do we stop calling photographs photography?
Oct 7th, 2008
my 2 cents should read Kant some day
Art is objective. Read Kant’s definition of art, the only possible modern definition of it.
By the way, before someone says it, you can’t “not agree with it”, because you don’t agree or disagree with a definition.
And no, there’s no other definition for it, if you wanna argue with Kant you’ve gotta have a big pair of balls.
Oct 7th, 2008
Paulo Sacramento
Awesome work!
Oct 7th, 2008
Mxkro
It’s great!!! I like it !!
Oct 8th, 2008
kgb
I don’t know how much photography was involved, but these pics sure were creative.
Creative photography is using a slow shutter speed at night to draw with a light pen…and other camera tricks.
Nice work!
Oct 8th, 2008
mile
Great… and cool!
Oct 9th, 2008
my 2 cents
To the person who loves Kant, with all due respect, I really couldn’t care less what Kant says about Art. If you like name dropping, I could reference David Hume, Thomas Kuhn, Friedrich Nietzsche and Richard Rorty who support a more subjective view of art, but that wouldn’t sway you.
Having a singular view in anything remotely related to Art is ridiculous. Even areas as concrete and certainly much more objective than art like science have dissenting views. So Kant stating that art is objective is meaningless to me.
Oct 9th, 2008
Preetha Varadharajan (preetha.varadharajan@gmail.com)
Yup,We can stop calling that a photography at a point where they have worked on photoshop and that turns out
to be a image(combining two or more picture is image).
Well,Photography is a process and art of recording pictures by means of capturing light on a light-sensitive medium, such as a film or an electronic sensor.
Photography = “A picture captured as it is”.
But this work done here is “aphorism”!!!
MEZMERISING,keep up the good work.
Oct 9th, 2008
ted dancin
as usual, the comments are much more interesting than the images themselves.
sure it’s “creative” but so is an HIV rocket launcher
Oct 15th, 2008
cassers
Just shut the heck up and enjoy the photographs!
Crimeny.
Oct 15th, 2008
Laurent
Romain Laurent work is great. As a photoshop and photo addict, I already seen that kind of discussion hundred of times and it’s truly pointless.
A static image is nice in your eyes or not, no matter how it has been built, it’s always going thru your eyes to your brain where it’s “compiled” with your experience/life/conscience producing a final feeling.
Oct 21st, 2008