This is one of my favourite styles of painting, I believe based on an impressionist artist’s work. I have not yet had the chance to explore the upper reaches of the Seine but, were I to go, I would want to take a cast of models to recreate some of those paintings.
I took a look at more of this sculptor’s work and really liked what I saw. What a talent!
I 'm not sure it’s a painting.
George
It’s not, but obviously a very good photo of a “mise en scène” of sculptures in the style of an impressionist painting.
I agree 100% with that.
George
Photo 1 i had hoped to get more of mothers hands there as well just couldnt get it all in
Maybe silly but subject was parents guiding hands and bubs second.
Although many of Seward Johnson’s French impressionist sculptures are based on actual paintings by Monet, Renoir, and others, I don’t believe this work is representative of a specific one.
While many of his sculptures are in the French expressionist style, most others are not.
Being one of the heirs of the Johnson & Johnson pharmaceutical company headquartered in New Brunswick, New Jersey he was very rich and had the money to follow up on his artistic passion. Hundreds of his sculptures can not only be seen in this 42 acre sculpture garden and arboretum, but in parks and on the streets of cities and towns around the world. There are also dozens of other sculptures there from other artists.
Mark
I started to think the two “people” were statues, because of the shine on the fellow’s pants, and that it looked too “good” to be real", but now I understand. The people blend in with the boats almost too perfectly. Lovely photo. Were the people just regular people, walking around, or were they dressed that way for a performance?
The only correction I would make, is show a bit more at the bottom so it doesn’t cut off part of the shoe, and maybe that same amount less at the top. Lovely photo! Things fit together perfectly. Also, more cropping at the right, to match the tight cropping at the left. I love the “seats”! 
They really do look like lovely sculptures, frozen in time. Beautiful!
I bought one of those inexpensive Chinese lenses for my Leica - it was so cheap I had to try it. It came with instructions on how to disassemble it, and set the focusing to match my camera. Turns out that the center part of the lens was adequate, but the outer areas were blurry. Not too good on my Leica M10, but perfect (along with the crop factor) for my Leica M8.2.
Because, if Mike had used 100 ISO, that would have necessitated a shutter speed of 1/100 sec, which is going to give movement blur handheld. Mike also needed f/10 to give get the most depth of field without diffraction.
But they are statues. Read the rest of the conversation.
Understood, thanks @Joanna
Sure - will do so today or tomorrow. I wanted more area at the top, but if I moved further away, there was a huge canopy over me that started to block my view. I know what you mean, and will try to move a few inches one way or another.
The buildings at the right - they looked so nice, and fitted in with the theater that I didn’t dare crop any of them out. Your view is perhaps better, but I wanted both.
I will shoot it vertically if I have to, to include the top of the theater, but the canopy is going to be a challenge.
If I go there early in the morning, the streets are mostly empty. A few hours later, and people are all over. Maybe I’ll get there even earlier next time. I could go right now but it’s already 10am.
I just looked up:
Bertolt Brecht - Wikipedia
It doesn’t sound like he had to flee, and unlike ten other artists, he decided to testify at the hearing, just before he returned to Europe.
Not sure what I think about him, but I LOVE the saying that I quoted, up on the theater billboard.
Art is not a mirror held up to reality,
but a hammer with which to shape it.
I’m glad the first word is “Art”, and not “Photography”, because when I take off my photojournalist hat, and try to be an artist, this fits what I do perfectly. To me, reshaping reality is great fun, and with the camera, I can record it.
I need to read up on Bertolt Brecht later today. He seems to have a fascinating history
Joanna put it into words better than I could have. Unless forced to do so, I don’t want to use slow shutter speeds, because I’m shooting hand-held. That’s one “bookend”. The other bookend is “diffraction”. To me, f/10 is “safe”, f/16 is a problem, and I was trying to find a nice compromise. My D780 tells me exactly what my settings are going to be, and I try to stay within a range that I feel is “safe”, whenever possible. ISO 1,000, or 2,000 would have worked, but there was no need, with me being in bright sunlight.
I used to shoot in Manual mode, with auto-ISO turned on. That’s still an option, but I find myself wanting to control everything, whenever possible. This came from @Joanna - I wasn’t smart enough to figure it out on my own, and many web pages treat auto-ISO like a “magic pill”.
I also used to want to use ISO 100 all the time, but I’ve learned that everything is a compromise. My suggestion for you - go ahead and try to use ISO 100, but before you take the photo, check what the other settings become, to accommodate ISO 100.
Auto-ISO - to me, it’s a “magic pill”, as in when I don’t have time to figure out proper settings, that “fixes” things. 90% of the time, I make sure it is OFF. Sometimes I deliberately turn it on, as with modern cameras, even ISO 25,000 (or higher) is useful. My D780 and my M10 get my good photos at ISO settings I never dreamed of in the past. It’s useful though for night photography and street photography.
Aha!!! So my eyes were not playing tricks on me. Sure, obviously I missed something - will re-read. Thankyou!!
Mutter, mutter, mutter. Excuses, excuses, excuses 
Isn’t it always the way. Next time, you’ll have to take a chain saw and cut down the canopy 
Maybe if you take just a step or two forwards - there seems to be enough space in front of the theatre for that but I would also look out for a time of day when the shadow of the canopy is narrower, because I wouldn’t like to crop that.
As I said earlier, I could go with both, either or. You’ve certainly got enough space at the left to balance it if necessary.
At the moment, I would tend towards square and remove the trash can if necessary to gain extra room. But… what makes this is the way the lines leave the left corners, the “complementary” building on the right and the “looming” canopy. If you didn’t last time, take a tripod and take your time with the framing.
So, try both square and 5x4, but being very careful to leave the extra space you’re going to need.
BTW, I saw a shot on the internet, taken from the right corner, of just the theatre, and wondered if that might give you more space? That is, if the lighting is any good.
This is one occasion when I would blitz the place, trying all sorts of different angles and times of day. Or you can just perfect the 5x4 shot with the right hand building in it.
Looking forwards to the perfection you can achieve.
Oops; I should trust my own eyes, and not what I read.
That explains a lot of confusing discussion that I didn’t understand. Me bad! The joke is on me.
Do you know what? I can see the reasoning behind your desire but… with DeepPRIME XD available, you really don’t need to worry. I wouldn’t think anything of shooting at 4000 ISO, or even higher, knowing I am guaranteed clean results.
And don’t forget, I am printing to 24" on the long side all the time and, looking at a print from less than a couple of inches, there is absolutely no noise (grain) visible.
When facing a professional ban one doesn’t have an income. Then it’s getting time to go somewhere else. In this circumstances it is fleeing. The English article on Brecht is probably written by an American paying a lot of attention to his personal activity. He was judged for his political/social activities. Just like many others.
Art is not my main interest but I like it. So I googled a little for you.
This is part of it.
On the other hand, the hammer symbolizes the active, transformative role of art. A hammer is a tool used for construction or destruction, and in this context, it represents art’s ability to shape, critique, and even dismantle the prevailing reality. Brecht’s quote implies that art should be a force for change, a tool for challenging norms, questioning authority, and prompting viewers to reconsider their perspectives. It suggests that artists should not be content with passively reflecting the world; they should aim to impact it actively.
With all due respect, you don’t make this by a long shot.
George
Helen has a great idea, but let me start with just one more. One at a time fits me better - but I like Helen’s idea. I think she suggested that a year or so ago.
Here are a few, but capturing them without a crowd means going there perhaps at 6 or 7am.
