Noah Grey Photography

[Jason Dunn]

<a href="http://www.noahgrey.com/">http://www.noahgrey.com/</a><br /><br />Noah Grey is the creator of Greymatter, the content management system that our site used to run on until we integrated with phpBB. Noah has been a dabbler in photography, and I've always loved his work - his photos have lush tones that I find entrancing (and he won't tell me his digital secret!). I decided to check in on Noah, and instead of finding a personal blog with photos, I found Noah Grey Photography, based in LA, selling his beautiful photos online. Wow! He has an incredible eye for framing the images, and with his portraits at least, he captures the moment AFTER the perfect moment - and from a different angle. That's what I see when I look at his work - something a little different, something quite wonderful. At any rate, <a href="http://www.noahgrey.com/gallery/">take a walk through his site</a>, and consider supporting him if you see a print you know someone else would appreciate with Christmas coming up.

[Terry]

His photography is well done...his journal and captions are a bit too bohemian for my tastes (I'll never understand why artists think using the f-word enhances emotional writing).

[njb42]

Speaking as a photographer, I'm not as enthusiastic about Noah's work as most other people. Yes, his choice of subject matter and his sense of composition are excellent, but his exposure is often way off. I'm aware that he deliberately underexposes most of his shots to give them a moody atmosphere, but the result is often large portions of an image that are featureless black -- a big no-no in classic photography.

Look at the work of Ansel Adams, Georgia O'Keefe, or Weegee. All of them took very dramatic, often moody, photos, but they also managed to keep almost everything in the frame visible.

I do like Noah's B&W work much more than his color photography. Yes, I'm nitpicking, and Noah continues to improve his technique.

[Coralie]

Yes, his choice of subject matter and his sense of composition are excellent, but his exposure is often way off. I'm aware that he deliberately underexposes most of his shots to give them a moody atmosphere, but the result is often large portions of an image that are featureless black -- a big no-no in classic photography.

Look at the work of Ansel Adams, Georgia O'Keefe, or Weegee. All of them took very dramatic, often moody, photos, but they also managed to keep almost everything in the frame visible.
i disagree with you there, but not because i claim to know more about photography than you. i dare say that you've forgotten more about the subject than i'll ever know.

isn't art subjective? i mean, whether some of his photography adheres to the rules of classic photography or not is irrelevant. i think art should be about pushing the boundaries. i'm not talking 'piss christ' here or anything, i mean some things should be subject to the boundaries of taste, but if no one had ever broken the 'rules' of art then photography as we know it wouldn't even be considered to be art.

:painting:

anyway .. just my two cents. :)

it's art, jim, but not as we know it .. :rainbow1:

[njb42]

Well, ferrous, you're right of course. I should have started my post with a big fat "IMHO". :)

And I do like a lot of Noah's work, despite the lack of shadow detail.