June 06 Contest Discussion

[NancyJ]

Originally Posted by makeovermagic

here she is yet again LOL!!!

Good find, I missed that one. Still an awful statue though - but very detailed

[makeovermagic]

couldn't resist Nancy -- had to look for more photos of her -- this was just too funny!

to the skeptics -- mystery solved!

Marsha

[TwinbNJ]

Too funny!!!! thank you for finding her in other photos!

[cazubi]

How funny that the photographer has a "floozy" statue in his wedding shots. I wonder if it was a joke, or it was significant for the time era?

Craig: I did not crop any of the image. I cloned the corners to match the rest of the photo. Thanks.

Cathy

[dkcoats]

Good eyes, Nancy & Marsha. I looked for her in some of those other photos, too, but I guess not in the right ones. Or I didn't look hard enough.

The tip-off for me was that the tonality and texture of the "special relative's" skin are different from everybody else's (darker and shinier) and the same as her clothes and hat. It took me a while to put her in the same plane as the base but when I tumbled to the fact that she's only a bust it started to make sense.

Another tidbit: these photos are concocted. ("TITLE: Stereographs of staged marriage ceremonies")

I'm still deciding whether to give this a go or not. It ain't gonna be easy.

dc

[Swampy]

Craig.. I did not crop either. I made a selection of the photo area, and did a transform to stretch it out to fit the square.

If you look closely behind the left front palm tree you will see what looks like the base of a pillar that a statue or bust might sit on, but I like to think she is the crazy "floozy" aunt that always cuts up at family occasions. Everyone else is so somber!! arrrgh.

[Kraellin]

cathy,

yes, you'll notice my edit. i did catch this almost immediately after posting. you did such a good job you fooled me

and dee dee,

yours is cut off at the top. if you look at the picture frame in the background and the light (chandelier?) you'll see what i mean. but, if i've missed something here, why just bang me on the head and i'll shut up.

craig

[Swampy]

LOL Craig... may have missed the chandalier, I just wanted to get the damn thing done and posted so I could watch the color experts show off... LOL

[TwinbNJ]

Originally Posted by Swampy

I like to think she is the crazy "floozy" aunt that always cuts up at family occasions. Everyone else is so somber!! arrrgh.

I agree - I have gone back and forth - make her look "real"
Or make her look like a statue!

I think I am leaning to the crazy "floozy" aunt

[NancyJ]

Even though she's clearly a statue, I dont think the small structure behind the plant pot is her base but I wont be penalising anyone for making it so, OR for making her into the floosy aunt

You'd think a staged picture would be less haphazard, its almost like there are several photographers and everyone is looking at a different one

[soleah]

The statue does look off balance if you consider the base, but looking at aceman's attached image on post#29, he drew a vertical line from the base to the torso, that there is the center of gravity.

The shoulder/chest is leaning on the left but the neck/head is leaning towards the right to balance it.

I do agree that even if that is a statue, there is nothing wrong with coloring her like a floosy aunt, base or no base.

[aceman]

Maybe the statue is the camerman's prop.

" Everyone, this is how stupid smiling people look, could you all look morbid and unhappy so you dont ruin the picture.. "

[TwinbNJ]

Originally Posted by aceman

" Everyone, this is how stupid smiling people look, could you all look morbid and unhappy so you dont ruin the picture.. "

Originally Posted by NancyJ

You'd think a staged picture would be less haphazard, its almost like there are several photographers and everyone is looking at a different one

I was thinking the same thing "why is everyone looking in different directions?"

You would think they would all be looking at the bride.

[Lorraine]

Sorry to have missed the statue discussion. I've also been wondering who/what that woman with no arms could be.

Thanks for all the information.

Lorraine

[NancyJ]

Originally Posted by soleah

The statue does look off balance if you consider the base, but looking at aceman's attached image on post#29, he drew a vertical line from the base to the torso, that there is the center of gravity.

Just because you can draw a straight line between two objects, doesnt mean they are connected

[soleah]

Originally Posted by NancyJ

Just because you can draw a straight line between two objects, doesnt mean they are connected

No, it does not. The line just illustrates the center of gravity. Okay, maybe the next thing you will say is "Just because you can draw a straight line between two objects, doesn't mean it's the center of gravity....."

I give up, I have no answer to that.

[TwinbNJ]

Too funny -

here we have a bride and groom - yet our center of attention is the "special relative" ! LOL

I just can't wait to see what everyone does with her.

I think this has become the BEST challenge yet.

[Doug Colwell]

Originally Posted by NancyJ

Just because you can draw a straight line between two objects, doesnt mean they are connected

But disconnecting the two objects does create two new problems - a big grand base supporting nothing, and a floating statue with nothing under it. The center of gravity does appear to run up close to her ear, which would mean most of that very heavy head might balance the rest of the bust.

[Frank Lopes]

Makeovermagic,

I went back to the LOC and retrieved the original that you posted.
I think we all agree it is not a person. But it is not a statue either:
it is a sculpture of a bust on top a pedestal.

The reason why it doesn't seem to align with the column is because the base is offset to right, the chest offset to the left and the head to the right.

This is a different wedding and this image has a different pedestal but the room is the same.

If you want to see the complete stereograph:
http://memory.loc.gov/master/pnp/cph...0/3c07960u.tif

Originally Posted by makeovermagic

here she is yet again LOL!!!

[soleah]

It's a different pedestal/base alright. The sculpture is at a more awkward angle than the first one. Ohh...this is giving me a headache

Does anybody have an idea when this photo was taken?

[Doug Nelson]

I suspect it's something in this genre.

The photo date should be on the download site.

[cazubi]

On the download site it says 1897.

Cathy

[soleah]

Thanks Doug, Cathy!

I love your work Cathy, very vintage.

[Doug Colwell]

As luck would have it the photographer moved the plant and took a second shot.

[aceman]

HEHE nicely done doug.

[Jaime]

This is a commercial stereograph produced massively mainly for entertainment and information purposes. Probably it is not real weeding photograph, just a studio recreation to tell a story (stereographs are frequently described as the “Victorian television” for his popularity).

[cazubi]

Nice work Doug. Try this site to see a collection of wedding stereographs from "The Universal Photo Art Co." This contest is proving to be very educational.

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...::SortBy=DOCID

Thanks soleah.

Cathy

[Swampy]

Well done, Doug. Now it all makes sense.

[CathyH]

That site is very interesting, the bust is in several of the one I clicked on.
And is that a flower she has clenched in her teeth?
Cathyh

[cazubi]

I am now torn between making the "floozy" a bust, or fun loving guest. Since the originals were not in color, maybe the sculpture was meant to really look like a guest. For now I will leave her in my entry as a unique wedding guest, but I will enjoy seeing how everyone else interprets her.

Cathy