Hello All,  Thanks in anticipation of your thoughts. 

This is an older image of mine (May, 2012) which I have not posted anywhere before. You might have seen some of my complaining on other forums about only managing to have in-flight bird shots "published" on 1x.com because they are a-typical of my output. Although I do have different strands of output (as, indeed, do many of us) I would say this image is very representative of a major strand. That strand, I pretentiously state as "trying to undermine our certainty and perceptions of reality." Pretentious moi? Oui - but it is the truth. I loathe the official and societal tick-box culture and the (even earlier) desire to pigeon-hole us. But who is most responsible? Well, we all are, of course (me too). But inside every cohort are individuals.

As the lyrics from the Queen / David Bowie track, “Under Pressure” go:

It's the terror of knowing what this world is about

Watching some good friends screaming, "Let me out"

Pray tomorrow gets me higher

Pressure on people, people on streets…

Though not constructed in response to it, this image is my version of that verse.

NB: There is a slight irony built-into this image. It is based on a photograph of my computer screen at that time. On the screen can be seen some of my image sub-divisions in the “Biology” zone and an image I was working on at the time (one of my many leaves). But categorising and filing my images (and, especially input-photographs) is what, in technical terms, I term “a reet pain in the arse.”

(It is not just images by any means – I have recently had to apply to His Majesty’s Government (HMG) for something and I find all the formalities and tick-boxes over-whelming – which is why I dug this image up to post here.)

So, here are my questions:

(i) If you had, would you have depicted “Information-Overload” differently?

(ii) Given my choice of depiction could I have done it better?

(iii) Would this have been better upside-down? – which I have considered (It’s a topsy-turvy world, man).

(iv) Is this violent enough? I tried to show the screen attacking our psychology. Should I have been more graphic with, (for example), a rhinoceros charging from the screen? – Actually that specific example would be a problem as I have never photographed one but I could use an image of my sweet, late dog looking manic, for example.

And, finally, just for my curiosity: (v) Why would this image very unlikely to be “published” on 1X, were I to enter it into curation – which I am unlikely to do, unless (again, for curiosity) it is to see how low it would score?

If you have any ideas / points / etc which I have not covered do please “voice” them

Again, many thanks. Cheerio.

(Please click to expand)

Woad,

Thanks for sharing the photo and for writing about its theme.

My first thought, before  reading the title, was that the image is about the feeling of a long, late-night editing session when the image begins to swim on the screen and you know it's time to quit for the day. 

To make the frame look more 'screen shaped' the left and right were stretched.  The right side was blurred a little. 

A second version has some 'Liquify' filter effect to suggest the magical power of the screen to draw us in.  

*Now that I see them both on screen I wonder if the right angle shape of the menu contrasting with the free-form blur adds something.  

. . . .  Steven, senior critic

Hello Woad,

interesting observations and references to photography.

I see order emerging from the chaos that surrounds us here. After all, folders arranged in a certain order. Framed - although not yet in the final version, but still clearly dying to be organized. This can have many meanings and probably each of us reads it differently. I read it in this way, that from many overlapping and often antagonistic images you can create a decent, well-arranged area, which will calm our feelings and thoughts. There is something in this image, which on the one hand is disturbing but also attracting. Maybe also these colors, vivid, strong and restless. Interesting.

Best regards

Slawomir Kowalczyk - SC.

Steven and Slawomir,

I'm late, I'm late,

for a very important date -

no time to say "Hello,"

Goodbye!

I'm late, I'm late, I'm late. 

(Lewis Carol - Alice In Wonderland.. the original book, no idea about subsequent adaptations).

Sorry but thanks muchly both and I'll reply ASAP. Cheers!

"Thanks for sharing the photo and for writing about its theme.

My first thought, before  reading the title, was that the image is about the feeling of a long, late-night editing session when the image begins to swim on the screen and you know it's time to quit for the day. 

To make the frame look more 'screen shaped' the left and right were stretched.  The right side was blurred a little. 

A second version has some 'Liquify' filter effect to suggest the magical power of the screen to draw us in.  

*Now that I see them both on screen I wonder if the right angle shape of the menu contrasting with the free-form blur adds something.  

. . . .  Steven, senior critic"

Hello, Steven. My apologies for my somewhat tardy reply. Thank you muchly for your response (ever the first - you are a courageous critic!)

I love your interpretation. I have no idea if that was the case here but, for me, it often is. I do plenty of work in the 1am-4am zone, just before poping-out to silently catch a few mice - I really am a "Night-Owl". So you may well be right; regardless, a great interpretation.

Ah! the liquify filter. (I have it, with many options, in ACDSee, too - which I was using back in 2012 - and long before). Yes, I love that filter for all sorts of artistic reasons; one can (for example) extend tree branches to form cavorting limbs. (Suitable for an owl to perch on, I suppose). But, yes I use it quite a lot, so your idea here is interesting.

I was going to say "but this was an older square-shaped frame," - but I see I am wrong. I did not realise we had rectangular screens for such a while now. Honestly, as one ages, tempus fugit-s even faster. The UK stand-up comedian, Jasper Carrot, once said "Zoom!" - "What the heck was that?" - "That was you life, mate!" Ouch! So rectangular screen it was - stretching leftwards/rightwards, or back to the past / into the future, very interesting idea, too.

I'm not sure about drawing us in, so much as I was trying to suggest being bombarded from the screen. I have vague memories of a 1970s/80s (?) video, "Videodrome" where (I think) people were sucked into the film on the tv - that is what I took from it anyway; then again, I regard Agatha Christie stories as hilarious comedies, so don't trust me. "Videodrome" starred Debbie Harry (of Blondie) - that is what I most remember; I cannot possibly think why that should be so. So yes, I felt assulted by the screen, rather than consumed. But, perhaps in a way they are the same thing, after all. There's a philosophical debate to be addressed - probably was by some Greek a couple of thosuand years ago. Now those classical Greek computer screens definitly were square. 

Thank you, Steven. I shall download your examples and ponder on't.

All the best. Sorry to have taken so much of your time - we should all use it well. Tatty-Bye.

"Hello Woad,

 interesting observations and references to photography.

 I see order emerging from the chaos that surrounds us here. After all, folders arranged in a certain order. Framed - although not yet in the final version, but still clearly dying to be organized. This can have many meanings and probably each of us reads it differently. I read it in this way, that from many overlapping and often antagonistic images you can create a decent, well-arranged area, which will calm our feelings and thoughts. There is something in this image, which on the one hand is disturbing but also attracting. Maybe also these colors, vivid, strong and restless. Interesting.

 Best regards Slawomir Kowalczyk - SC.

Hello, Slawomir, thank you also for your interesting response. Much appreciated, too. And, again, sorry for my somewhat tardy response.

Glad you found the self-referential nature of the image interesting. It is sometimes very hard to make a 2D image respresent, not only a 3D world but also concepts / ideas. I usually fail but great if it works occasionally.

I struggle with keeping all my files neat and ordered. With input-photographs (I have over 1.5 million) it is easier actually. File by Year / month / day / location in that order, then by catagories within - eg Clouds, Dogs+People, Flowers, Trees, Water-Surfaces, etc etc. So that is not too bad. But my worked images are a much bigger problem. Dates and (usually) locations seem almost irrelevent. So I try to catagorize - such as the above categories. However, much of my work then turns into abstract, strange, often unrecognisable works - - and then I struggle to catagorise. One way, of course, is by what the original shot was of. But, if it was of someone walking by a canal but I have turned him into some strange alien plant... becomes very confusing. So the order you see there is forever changing as new images are processed (I have approaching 2,000) and old cats no longer work. Nightmare. (Help!) Q: Does anyone else have a good, workable system for finished or working images (not for original photographs)? You might save me lots of stress and time - I have been struggling all this century to make this work better. (So any illusion of order is very temporary).

Thank you for noticing the paradoxical order v chaos, calm v termoil, disturbing v attracting nature of the image. I did not think I had conveyed that well so glad someone saw it. And I also appreictae your saying the image was "interesting." I am not sure I could ask for more on this sort of image.

Right... more image-editing, I suppose. All the best and thank you so much again. Tatty-Bye.