Welcome to Panachallenge!
If you are already a member, Click Here to Log In.

t t rss cal
    Home   ·   Rules   ·   Mugshots   ·   Challenges   ·   Stats   ·   Forums   ·   Help Register    

  #162 Vintage
Entry 23 of 38
Musidora - a study in marble.       ©2015 A.N.Other
Fujifilm FinePix S100FS       23rd place, 36 points
1/40s, f3.8, ISO 400, 97mm, Normal Program, Pattern, no flash
Post-Processing: Cropped, burn, dodge, clone, vignette, sharpened, blur, resized.       Extra Info: People have been carving statues for thousands of years, but only in the much more recent past did they reach the pinnacle of their art.

This marble sculpture is a tour-de-force of naturalistic carving, especially in the deeply undercut hair and the folds of the stockings.
10 comments on this entry
Log in to
add a comment

Sep 7, 2015
    This is a super shot and should have finished much higher. I believe that your extra info was the reason that it did not do well. The first sentence ". . . much more recent past . . ." implied that it was done recently.

I read that and was confused by the second sentence. My thought was 'I've seen deeply undercut and naturalistic sculptures that are very old. Why are they suggesting that this pinnacle has only been reached recently.

The Musadora that I remember was a French actress who died in the 50s - so I figured maybe this was a statue of her in her prime. In sum I accepted that this was done in the recent past and would therefore not be vintage.

Sorry about that, I guess I misread your info. The photo has your usual excellent quality. If you had said "Carved in 1830" it would have been in my tt.

    Comments After End of Challenge    
    Comments During Voting    

Sep 7, 2015
    I guess it could have been carved yesterday but was in fact carved in 1830 by Robert William Sievier. I ummed and ahhed quite a bit regarding whether or not to mention the date it was created, but in the end I decided to imply it's age in the 'Extra Info' in case some people might consider 185 years old to be beyond the scope of vintage. I though wasn't thinking about just the age of the sculpture when classifying it as vintage, but the fact that it is a 'tour-de-force' of sculpting art. This, according to the challenge description confirms it as vintage and that was good enough for me :-) . I think if I had or hadn't included the date of sculpting, either way some people would probably have seen it in a negative way. You can't please all of the people all of the time ;-) .
Edited on Sep 7, 2015

Sep 6, 2015
    Yes-statues can be very old (vintage), but this statue could have been carved yesterday. Although the image is nicely done, if you had given a date when this stature was completed, and it was old, I would have given you better marks.

Sep 6, 2015
    Thanks very much. The second line of the description is a direct quote from the carvings information plaque.
Edited on Sep 7, 2015

Sep 6, 2015
    as yesterday is the past you are spot on theme. this as you say a fine piece of carving .

Sep 5, 2015
    aoc46 - I was lucky to be able to take the photo. I had to crouch on the floor with my head resting on the side of a large display cabinet. I must have looked rather odd ;-) . There wan no room to get any wider and I only just managed to get the feet in the shot. I had to clone out 1/3 of a painting on the left of the photo too.

Anthony Comyn - It was taken in our local museum. I was quite pleased with the lighting. I think if it was even all over, it would it would make the sculpture look quite flat. You are right though, I don't think the security guards would have appreciated me fiddling with the lights :-) .
Edited on Sep 7, 2015

Sep 5, 2015
    Nice, clean presentation of the sculpture, which has a definite 'vintage' quality.

Anthony Comyn
Sep 4, 2015
    Interesting sculpture and you did well to capture the image in good detail, however the shadows were not on your side, but that might have been out of you control. Where did you photograph this? The hard light resulting in a hard shadows is a pity and if this was in a gallery I guess it would have been inappropriate to ask them to change the lighting :)

Sep 4, 2015
    Glad you think so :-).

Yes, I believe they are water lilies similar to these :-


possibly resting on a lily leaf. She is sitting on the bank with her feet in the water.
Edited on Sep 7, 2015

Sep 3, 2015
    great subject, are those flowers at her feet?
Entry Navigation
First       Prev       Entry
23 of 38
      Next       Last      




23 of 38



Vote Stats
8 total votes:

1st  ():  
2nd  ():  
3rd  (1): |
4th  (1): |
5th  (2): ||
6th  (1): |
7th  (0):  
8th  (0):  
9th  (1): |
10th  (2): ||


By A.N.Other


72 Challenge

#180 9th
#181 3rd
#182 4th
#184 21st
#186 2nd
#187 5th
#188 2nd
#190 3rd
#191 1st
#192 23rd
#193 1st
#194 4th
#195 4th
#196 3rd
#197 9th
#198 11th
#199 21st
#200 3rd
#201 18th
#202 11th
#203 3rd
#204 4th
#205 1st
#206 2nd
#209 4th
#210 11th
#211 15th
#212 7th
#213 7th
#214 9th
#219 21st
#221 19th
#222 1st
#223 1st
#224 5th
#226 17th
#227 10th
#228 1st
#229 3rd
#231 24th
#232 16th
#233 5th
#236 1st
#237 3rd
#240 14th
#241 2nd
#242 1st
#243 19th
#244 12th
#245 8th
#246 2nd
#247 4th
#249 1st
#250 2nd
#257 2nd
#258 11th
#259 1st
#262 3rd
#263 6th
#264 4th
#265 3rd
#266 1st
#267 14th
#268 1st
#272 4th
#273 3rd
#274 7th
#275 1st
#281 17th
#282 3rd
#284 8th
#285 2nd

Avg rank:




23 of 38


    Comments? Suggestions? Problems? Click here!       Disclaimer