Come on then, let's have some properly clever (or just good) photos

I'll start with these that I just found
http://www.thephotoargus.com/inspiration/35-extraordinarily-clever-examples-of-toy-photography/

Posted 11 years ago

No Nicolai. No bloke in a judo suit.

FAIL.

Posted 11 years ago

Posted 11 years ago

unpossible

Posted 11 years ago

Posted 11 years ago

eth3er, i like that!

Posted 11 years ago

Posted 11 years ago

AAAAAAGH!!!! That pic of eth3r's is doing my head in!!!!

Posted 11 years ago

Posted 11 years ago

djglover – Member

Short term ban coming your way me thinks. 😯

Posted 11 years ago

Posted 11 years ago

a ban for that?? are you taking the pi$$

Posted 11 years ago

It's just not right is it, proper headache inducing.

Posted 11 years ago

Oh fug, it gets even worse, eth3r…

… I've just spotted (ok, I'm slow) that it's all the same guy, right…? Or two guys?

Posted 11 years ago

same guy.

Posted 11 years ago

same guy.

aw fvck!!!!! no!!!! seriously!!!!!! my head!!!!!! kabooooommmmm!!!!!

Posted 11 years ago

same guy

How do you know ? I can't tell the difference.

Posted 11 years ago

Take a closer look at the photo he is holding, frankly I think it's alchemy.

Posted 11 years ago

Cheesyfeet,

Sorry to be a pedantic c*nt but these aren't photographs.

Define your terms – clever or lucky? And for it to be a photo, it has to have been captured by a camera by a photographer rather than drawn by a graphic artist.

Posted 10 years ago

Sorry to be a pedantic c*nt but these aren't photographs.

So the claim that : toy photography provides great opportunities for clever composition, creative lighting and a chance to really have some fun. When done right a photographer can breath life and personality into the inanimate objects being shot …….. is just bollox then ?

Posted 10 years ago

For starters. Photographs by photographers with wit and vision using just a camera and film.

Posted 10 years ago

Ernie – not bollox.

I'm differentiating between photography and digital imaging. Simple distinction, no?

Posted 10 years ago

Posted 10 years ago

Simple distinction, no?

I'm not disputing it. But if those aren't really photos of toys in "clever compositions" and using "creative lighting", then the claims on that link are clearly nonsense. I was asking really – I hadn't figured out that they weren't real objects.

Posted 10 years ago

Oh – I just read the original article.

They are photos.

Don't I look a bit silly…

Posted 10 years ago

Is this clever?

Posted 10 years ago

Clever. Always a delight!

Posted 10 years ago

Posted 10 years ago