Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login


Submitted on
January 5, 2012
Image Size
6.2 MB


1,093 (2 today)
43 (who?)

Camera Data

Shutter Speed
1/40 second
Focal Length
55 mm
ISO Speed
Date Taken
Sep 25, 2011, 4:19:11 PM


Creative Commons License
Some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
An eye for an eye. by darkHunTer2009 An eye for an eye. by darkHunTer2009
Spontanous photo of my friend eye ! took so long to figure out who's eye it was ... I found it in my archives :)

FB link- [link]
Add a Comment:
I really like this photo, it is perfect! The colours are so lovely and you have captured them so well! I like the way that it almost looks like water. I like the blurry effect around the edges and the sharpness of the iris, it really makes it stand out. The angle on this photo is really good too.

My only critique would be that it is not particularly original - as I have seen many pictures that are similar on Deviant Art but saying that, I still believe it was skillfully taken and that it is a great picture and it is one of my favourite!

Amy x
What do you think?
The Artist thought this was FAIR
2 out of 2 deviants thought this was fair.

The Artist has requested Critique on this Artwork

Please sign up or login to post a critique.

awfultosee Featured By Owner Nov 6, 2012
featured [link] :heart:
darkHunTer2009 Featured By Owner Nov 6, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Thank you sooo much :) :heart:
awfultosee Featured By Owner Nov 7, 2012
welcome :)
Emuzin2 Featured By Owner Jan 6, 2012
***Alex -------see note made in your defense against Niklas's confusion---again, as always-you rock
NiklasWalendy Featured By Owner Jan 6, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
What does this have to do with the talion principle? I don't understand the message.
Maybe I just don't see it, but to me it seems as though you're just using bold words.
It's a good picture, uncreative, but well executed. Above I'm merely talking about the title of the deviation.
Emuzin2 Featured By Owner Jan 6, 2012
I would love to dispute this for Alex....We are all entitled to our I agree to disagree with you. The picture is so much more than a TITLE. Don't confuse The Talion Principle (or from the Bible an Eye for Eye) which was more commonly used for a defense-with Alex's play on words---He has used the Eye of the Camera to capture the Eye of the Beholder who's eye has captured the reflection of all that is in front of the definition now becomes bigger than the catch phrase An Eye for an Eye....everyone "sees" things differently---here we see a lot more than one person seeing something that is right in front of themselves, but more so ----two directions. I say he has made more than just an original effort...and since no two eyes are the same as another set of eyes----He has made a creative difference. (Alex--you rock) ***
NiklasWalendy Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
a) Your interpretation mentions three perspectives, eye of the camera, eye of the beholder and the reflection of all that is in front of that person. That's three levels and the title only reflects 2 levels, 2 eyes, so I think this is a pretty vague interpretation. Later on you speak about 2 directions, but still there are so many better titles to reflect the idea of two perspectives than one using a biased catch phrase with the coordination conjunction 'FOR'.
b) Albeit the phrase is used as a catch phrase, it is much more than that. It is a principle of law embedded in it and... to turn a blind eye to that(haha) doesn't really speak for the person using it. It's kind of like using 'Arbeit macht frei' as a title for a piece of art and entirely ignoring the historical background to such a sentence.(translates to 'work makes (one) free' and was written on many gates of concentration camps in the Third Reich)
c) While I do agree that any two eyes are different from one another, I don't see that as a creative effort of the photographer. Because I) it takes no effort. It would take more effort to take a picture of eyes that have already been taken pictures of. II) He didn't have any input into the creation of those eyes. The root of creative is obviously 'to create' and I don't see a lot of creation in this work. The thing I probably like the most is the depth of field and now that I look at it again I am really liking that aspect. So props for that.

However, now that I look at the EXIF data, an aperture of 5.6 makes me wonder whether he technically planned this depth of field.
I'm just saying what I think and I tend to be a very doubtful person, don't take it too hard. :)
It's early in the morning, so there'll probably be some logical fallacies in this thing. :D
Emuzin2 Featured By Owner Jan 16, 2012
not a problem------as indicated, everyone is entitled to their own artistic interpretation. So to compromise his art---maybe his title should be a reflection upon itself "An Eye for An Eye's Eye"
darkHunTer2009 Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
I am impressed with how much detail you looked into this ...
But I can simply say this :

The title was set as I saw fit. You can read it in every single angle you want ... but when the photo was took our eyes were so close together ... the tittle seemed fit.

Also with the 5.6 apperature .. This was shot with a Reverse lens ... Therefore the DOF was controlled on the other lens :)

Please also note It's a spontaneous photo :) There was no planning behind it. Why must something be dissected to such an extreme ? Why not just enjoy ?

If you see a beautiful sunset, do you question it's existence and how it is create and if the conditions are right for having an even better sunset?

No. You just enjoy it , because that is all that is given to you.
NiklasWalendy Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Maybe it's a personal thing. I've studied the talion principle quite a bit and whenever I see an instance of it I just can't help but see it pop right out. For me it's not a catch phrase and considering the meaning behind it, it may be important to educate people about it so that people don't use it as a catch phrase. It's a terrible and outdated idea and the amount of people who believe it is righteous just saddens me. That being said it's of personal importance and meaning for me, thus I had an issue with it being used as a sort of catch phrase.
Add a Comment: