Enchanted Lake - Kevin Bjorke




15 March 2002
Enchanted Lake, Oahu

Camera:   G2
Lens:   45
Film:   HP5+
Exposure:   1/125, f/4 after sunset
Flash:  
Support:  
Filter:  
Adjustment:  
Posted:   19-Mar-2002

Rating: 7.83 (6 ratings)

Comments

Beautiful

One of the nicest shots I seen here and I look at what's new everyday...

Skip Nall     20-Mar-2002 at 06:53

great

job on this photo. composition is lovely, and the punctum (to borrow from barthes) of the silver wrapping is fantastic. not sure about the title - if it's literal (name of development, or area), perhaps a location could be given as well. if it's merely a title, it doesn't really add anything to the photo for me. but hey, titling images is difficult...great job overall.

wes kline     15-Jul-2002 at 13:49

OK, finally found one

(Sorry Kevin, but this popped up on the "Have you seen"). Two positive comments, and I simply don't get it. Barthes and his dratted punctums get me anyway, which has nothing to do with Kevin's image, but I find it hard to see what is attractive or artistic about this.

Charez Golvala     15-Jan-2003 at 02:21

...finally found what?

Color me confused. Could you go over this punctatim?

Kevin Bjorke     15-Jan-2003 at 21:27

Oblique reference

for all that were not in my stream of consciousness yesterday. Glen's Thoughts on Rating and my replies, coupled with Bob Michael's comment in response to a criticism of one of his photos....well it all led me to post a few comments while actually looking for a phto that I thought was less than 5/10. Hard to do and then this one popped into view. The punctum is a piece of philosophic terminology drawn from the work of Barthes. Wes Kline mentions it in his comment on this image and Carlo Consoli wrote a piece on it ages ago (41st posting I assume) which you can find at http://contaxg.com/document.php?id=41. Knut and i were the only ones to reply to that and I'm afraid that my reaction was fairly strong. In short, the punctum is Barthes' word for the "point" of the image a sort of Joycian epiphany when the not-message,-but-yet-comment/intent comes through to the viewer. Mine is a poor explanation from memory, you should see Carlo's article and then try to understand Wes' comment (I certainly can't).

Charez Golvala     16-Jan-2003 at 00:44

Charez

I find is really nice that you take this discussion up again. Gives me an excuse to dive into Barthes book once more. Give me a couple of day and I will come in more substantially and follow you around as you comment on a variety of pictures. I hope others will join in to: Carlo, Kevin, Bob, others ... Basicly I don't think that you can argue against a "punctum" in an image, since these punctums are all very subjective and emotionally based in the viewer. You simple have to accept them. (I might alter this statement, when have reread Barthes book).

Knut Skjærven     16-Jan-2003 at 13:07

Thankfully,

I don't have to accept anything. Tellme, what is the punctum (to you, if we have to be subjective) in Wilfred's Ripple (to take an easy example)? Besides which , if you or Barthes argue that the punctum is purely subjective, then how comes he can analyse and categorise it? Not to mention, presumeably, apply the philosophy to achieve better photographs. Awaiting your reply with whetted appetite.

Charez Golvala     20-Jan-2003 at 01:06