@King: can you explain me why is "captured at the wrong time of day, or on the wrong day"? I cannot understand!! What is wrong? The light? The shadow?

Hi, Giancarlo. I didn't even look at who took this photo. I'm sorry to make you work so hard to read this long comment in English.

First, let me repeat that I think this is a great idea. Second, the fact that I didn't even glance at the photographer's name tells me that I never would presume this to be one of your outstanding images--just my honest opinion as you know I greatly admire your work.

Third, subtract the frame (and its excellent shadow) and you are looking out to sea on a drab day with the light coming from behind, not very close to sunrise or sunset, which may have added interesting color and contrast--nothing interesting to look at and wouldn't stand on it's own, even as a snapshot.

If the frame were to surround and draw our attention to, for example, a dramatic thunderstorm at sea, or a nuclear explosion, or a shipwreck, or a beautiful and curvaceous woman in a bikini (sorry), or anything of great human interest, this would be a winner.

If the light were simply coming more from the side and striking beautiful and shapely clouds at an oblique angle that brought out their great depth and height, that would be sufficient.

Great idea, Giancarlo, but not your best work.

@King: thank you for the clear explanation. It's true, there's nothing interesting in the frame,only a children and a "negative space" :-). Other featured photo for this theme are full of "nothing interesting" (fog, sky, water, ecc..). If i include in the frame a nuclear explosion or a dramatic thunderstorm, someone could tell me "where is the negative space?". I don't know if i can explain the idea.

Giancarlo,

More long explanations in English...sorry! Is Italian your native tongue? I *love* Italian and have traveled through Italy, but only speak a few words.

"Nuclear explosion" was inserted to make you smile.

The main thing I would like to see here is an image that contains more beauty or interest, no matter how simple, no matter how well the negative space is illustrated.

Remember that we are discussing only my opinion and that this image may (and probably will) attain featured status.

I don't remember the ratings I gave this image, but I think I gave it a 4 or 5 in Relevance and average (3) marks in Impact...I don't remember the other ratings, but nothing that would keep this image from being featured, on average.

I don't suppose you have read the WeeklyShot Google group thread I started when this theme was announced. Dennis, who submitted the theme idea, reveals on that thread that his original intention was "truly minimalist photos that have great impact. Show us how a little can be a lot!" to which he later appended the title, "Negative Space," which was probably a mistake.

You say, "Other featured photo for this theme are full of "nothing interesting" (fog, sky, water, ecc..)." but you fail to say, "beautiful, fog, sky, water, that evokes feelings and contributes greatly to the success of the image, even if not interesting in and of themselves."

Well I think it is minimalistic, the repeating rectangle, 4 times including the original image shape by my count, and then a tiny subject to add context. Sure there could be a lot of things framed differently in this simple concept but for the theme I think it nails it.

@King: sorry if i cannot understand all the words!! :-) First of all, it's a pleasure for me to write about photography with you, and i'm not offended by your or other opinions, it'a a great way to learn more! My only limit is the language. It's true, the theme is a little bit controversial. Thank you for spendind your time with my photos. :-)

@King: for this shot i was inspired by a great italian photographer, Luigi Ghirri.
You can see the (very small) original inspiring shot here:

http://www.senzafumo.com/libri/images/8884909651.jpg

and a small biography:

http://www.absolutearts.com/artsnews/2001/09/02/29071.html

I see! My personal inspiration is the great Italian photographer Giancarlo Malandra.

Dan,
I don't think you see me arguing that this image does not nail the theme. I'm just wanting to like more things about it than simply nailing the theme.

@King. The fact that there isn't a nuclear explosion or a curvaceous woman IS why this works. It doesn't over do it, but simply frames the tiny girl on the beach. I think it's perfect. Without the frame, it's very much like other shots that have done well. The frame takes it to a higher level.

Ana,
I simply disagree. In my opinion, this is a very drab, dull, uninteresting photograph with a frame around it that is highly relevant to the theme. It is not representative of Giancarlo's best work and has little appeal for me other than its Relevance, in an academic sort of way.

Giancarlo, I hope you understand that this is not a personal attack, just a discussion of opinions about this image.

@King: don't worry, my revenge will be awful: 1's for all your shots!!!! :-))
"Vendetta, tremenda vendetta!!!!" sing Rigoletto in the famous Verdi's opera!! :-)

the dull tones and the shadow of the frame make it for me! i think this is a fine example of subtly profound.

After reading the comments: I don't see the point in saying " without the frame, it would be a dull picture". The frame is here. The frame makes the picture. Without the frame it would be ANOTHER picture. If Cleopatra's nose had been smaller...

philippe, my esteemed friend,
It remains my opinion that the frame does *not* make the picture, it merely enhances the picture
To trade quotes with you, "Can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear."

@King: my idea of "negative space" in this shot is represented by the negative space INSIDE the frame. It isn't a ornamental frame, it is the essence of the shot. When i made this shot, my idea was to represent a large space inside a frame. The only ornamental thing is the human presence.

Giancarlo,
I have no argument with the success of this photograph as representing either negative space (the pseudo-theme) or minimialism (the actual theme).
I simply don't care for this photograph. It is nothing more than my honest opinion and I think that is what is requested of those providing comments. I'm not trying to be the bad guy here, but I haven't heard any aruments in favor of this photograph that aren't centered around the Theme. I don't care about the theme in this case. I grant this image a FIVE for relevance, but that doesn't mean I have to put in my list of top ten favorite photographs.

@King: i really appreciate your honest opinion, it's very important for me!! Thank you very much!! ;-)

Giancarlo,
I think you are a fabulous photographer and a warm and wonderful human being.

Thanks for understanding...and, again, I appreciate that it is more difficult for you, considering the language barrier. May I be excused from further comments on this image?
:>)

Cheers

@King: feel free to make further comments or anything else you want. :-)

Ana
I meant a minimal nuclear explosion with lots of negative space around it.

SeekingFocus

Neither Out Far Nor In Deep

The people along the sand
All turn and look one way.
They turn their back on the land.
They look at the sea all day.

As long as it takes to pass
A ship keeps raising its hull;
The wetter ground like glass
Reflects a standing gull.

The land may vary more;
But wherever the truth may be---
The water comes ashore,
And the people look at the sea.

They cannot look out far.
They cannot look in deep.
But when was that ever a bar
To any watch they keep?

Robert Frost