Four legs and half dog

[kaskais]

https://kaskaisphotos.wordpress.com/

[Manfred M]

Half a dog in the image? When we amputate significant body parts in both people and animals, it has to be done in a way that works visually, otherwise we get negative tension in the image and the shot does not work. You've done the same thing to the man - we have a headless person with no visual explanation as to where the rest of the man is. Both of these creative choices add negative tension into this image. Too much negative tension, and the image fails.

[Dave A]

While the title certainly fits the image I would have to agree with Manfred.

Dave

[Donald]

I am not aware of the concept of 'negative tension' in relation to visual art, but I understand the point that Manfred is making.

If that is what is at work in this image, then that, for me, is what makes it work. Creating the tension may indeed be the the artistic strength, but I don't feel a tension when looking at it. I feel relaxed looking at it.

[Mike Buckley]

Many photographers would call this style of composition a frame within a frame; the human's legs are framed within the dog's legs and the four legs are framed within the image. As if that isn't already really creative, the image is made even more creative and compelling for me because we don't see the head of either the human or the dog.

EDIT: I just now realized another reason I like the photo so much. We are used to seeing that an adult human is generally larger than a dog. Thanks to the unusual perspective in this image, the dog appears larger than the human.

[Manfred M]

Donald - this is a term a several of my photography professors used when described when dealing with two common issues in photography;

1. "Amputations" i.e. when there are cuts to body parts that look odd, whether that is a headless pair of legs, an arm or hand that seems to not be attached to the body that seems to pop into the image out of nowhere or a pose where a body part seems to be missing. These strike the human visual system as being wrong and create was referred to as "negative tension".

2. Things that run in or out of the frame (edge of the image) that draw our attention by looking wrong - it could be half a body or a head that is cut off, a chimney in a building where the crop makes it look strange. Again things that don't look right and distract us to the point where the image does not work as well as it might.

[LePetomane]

I should do something like this with my three legged dog to see what kind of responses I get.

[Manfred M]

The half dog is there but not seeing four legs.

Have a look between the dog's legs.

[FootLoose]

It works for me, too. I only wish there was a hair's breadth more separation between the two right legs.

[Shadowman]

I like it but would prefer it without the lamppost.

[madcrow]

For me it works, love the title, made me smile and makes it a fabulous image.

[Dave Humphries]

This works for me too, an amusing image which fits the title, and it's one to which we cannot apply all the 'normal' rules rigorously.

That said; are the minor things that, in an ideal world, I wish would be slightly different?
Heck yes, but I'm pretty certain Fernando doesn't do significant PS manipulations - he generally gets it right in camera and leaves the rest alone.

Here we have a firm, dark vignette to help keep the viewer's eyes within the monochrome frame.

It is rare for me to disagree with you Manfred, but as I see it, the half dog is no amputation, it was a deliberate artistic choice, so rules about amputations cannot be applied. Regarding my eye being led out of frame, here I find that my eye, if it does follow the dog's back and hit the edge of frame, travels upwards and around the vignette darkened 'border' until it reaches the clouds and ground on the left hand side, then returns to the subjects.

I believe this was very well timed exposure, skilfully framed (or cropped) that used a lens of the ideal focal length and aperture for the required DoF considering the subject distances involved, having said that, let's see what the EXIF says...

Nikon D5000 14mm (21 mm FFE), f/14, ISO 800, 1/800.

Inspiring,

Cheers, Dave

[IzzieK]

I love the idea very much, as well as the imagined fun in the shooting with it...and the title -- they all matched but I am with John that the lamp post is the distraction here. +1 John's comment. I don't see any tension in this, just the fun.

[Sergio M.]

Awesome shot, Fernando, and great use of perspective. I actually like the inclusion of the lamppost. Combined with the other visual elements they create a very surreal effect.

Sergio

[Manfred M]

It is rare for me to disagree with you Manfred, but as I see it, the half dog is no amputation, it was a deliberate artistic choice, so rules about amputations cannot be applied.

Dave - I think this is all about personal taste. Some people like this shot, not so much. I happen to fall into the "not so much" group.

Just because the choice is deliberate (amputation), does not mean the end result works for me. In this case, I definitely suspect that we are seeing some PP manipulation. The vignette definitely appears to have been put in during post. This shot was taken at f/14, so any natural lens vignette would have disappeared.

[KimC]

I enjoy the conversation this image has sparked; however, it's not my cup of tea. Where I do feel tension is with the human legs ~ to me, they look suspended, like they are not anchored on anything but rather hanging from the dog. And the lamp post gives me the same feeling although to a lesser extent. I actually wonder if this is a composite?