Rise Above

Traveling along the roads leading to the many capes and coves of Georgian Bay late yesterday afternoon - - - the shape of this tree grabbed my attention and then even moreso when I noticed the huge pile of rocks that supported the base.

As I backed up the car to find an interesting view, it was clear that while the content was interesting, the photo wouldn't be. The line of trees in the background, ran right across the middle of the big tree's branches and there was too much confusing content in the background. As well, I only had access from the ditch at the side of the road - - - so I was initially just going to forget about it.

Remembering the difference that can be made when I have shot from a very low angle, I wondered if I could get into a position to lower my camera enough to minimize the confusing background. I got out of the car and walked into the long grass up to the fence, flipped out my cameras tilt screen and pushed the lens through the wire fencing near ground level.

It worked. As I lowered the camera, the feature tree rose up out of the bush in behind and sat against the intense sky. Buildings, cars and other rubble in the field all but disappeared.

Hi, Robert,

A beautiful shot, and an interesting and valuable story!

Thanks.

Best regards,

Doug

Those trees are of sufficient interest on they're own amid whatever context, why would you want to turn this into something it isn't, and why the nomenclature?
A lot of the context (cars and other details), is lost with the tight framing and the processing has taken centre stage. I cannot understand the need to try and make everything look beautiful and refined...why didn't you paint the scene?

Best regards...

Robert Watcher said:

Traveling along the roads leading to the many capes and coves of Georgian Bay late yesterday afternoon - - - the shape of this tree grabbed my attention and then even moreso when I noticed the huge pile of rocks that supported the base.

...................As I lowered the camera, the feature tree rose up out of the bush in behind and sat against the intense sky. Buildings, cars and other rubble in the field all but disappeared.

Click to expand...

I like the picture, Robert. climbing, leaning, balancing and being on one's stomach has always been part of my own hunt for discovering the view I will be most happy with.

Still, also getting one which would show what cause passers' buy would normally notice, provides some educational context.

Asher

Paul Abbott said:

Those trees are of sufficient interest on they're own amid whatever context, why would you want to turn this into something it isn't, and why the nomenclature?
A lot of the context (cars and other details), is lost with the tight framing and the processing has taken centre stage. I cannot understand the need to try and make everything look beautiful and refined...why didn't you paint the scene?

Best regards...

Click to expand...

Paul,

For a photographer who bathes, (even drowns), us in "context", look at the pictures by Antonio, here. (Also, BTW, almost all Robert's extensive work in Nicaragua!) Still, for "art" we do tend to lean towards artificially isolating our subjects.

When I took my kids, as promised, to go for a walk and "do photography", they had no cameras. I would in all seriousness stop by some interesting feature on a tree or rooftop or perhaps folk arguing in a doorway, and we would scout for a position to frame the "picture". This, I taught them, was the most important thing in photography, to isolate what is interesting and exclude everything else. For a "frame", each child used thumb and first finger of both hands brought together as sides of a rectangle held to the eye. After thus "photographing" a street, we celebrated at a donut shop and discussed their different approaches to what was interesting.

OTOH, documenting a scene, requires a much broader view and obtaining much more context to provide relevance and some measure of "truth to the scene. "Photography" can cover both aspects more or less to the needs and taste of the photographer-artist or news reporter. For art, the only rule is that either the photographer satisfies his or herself or else his or her client.

In this case, as you have mentioned context, sure I'd like to see everything, including that fence and the objectional line of trees and whatever else one would come upon. But you must agree, that when you yourself take a picture of a sculpture, monument or statues, you frame meticulously for that subject, although, where artisiticlaly fitting, you might include a passer by, a bird or other feature that ornaments or balances the composition.

Asher

Paul Abbott said:

Those trees are of sufficient interest on they're own amid whatever context, why would you want to turn this into something it isn't, and why the nomenclature?

Click to expand...

But then, why not? That is the beauty of creativity, you can do anything you want. Either choice is good.

Paul Abbott said:

Those trees are of sufficient interest on they're own amid whatever context, why would you want to turn this into something it isn't, and why the nomenclature?
A lot of the context (cars and other details), is lost with the tight framing and the processing has taken centre stage. I cannot understand the need to try and make everything look beautiful and refined...why didn't you paint the scene?

Best regards...

Click to expand...

Sorry Paul. I disagree. The interest of the tree was non-existent with normal perspective - - - only to the eye. And probably only a trained and keen eye as there were others in the car with me and they couldn't figure out what I was looking at - except for one person who said she loved the pile of rocks in the field.

Just as a large vista or sunset only matter to the person who photographed it because the experience is still in their mind. No-one else sees or appreciates it the same.

BTW - my photography is my canvas and paint. I have no need or desire to work with those tools and just paint the scene. LOL

---

An evocative image. One wonders why the collection of stones and the tree looks to have suffered other damage even before the stones probably at a young age, from it's growth pattern.

Originally Posted by Paul Abbott View Post
Those trees are of sufficient interest on they're own amid whatever context, why would you want to turn this into something it isn't, and why the nomenclature?
A lot of the context (cars and other details), is lost with the tight framing and the processing has taken centre stage. I cannot understand the need to try and make everything look beautiful and refined...why didn't you paint the scene?

Best regards...

Click to expand...

Robert Watcher said:

Sorry Paul. I disagree. The interest of the tree was non-existent with normal perspective - - - only to the eye. And probably only a trained and keen eye as there were others in the car with me and they couldn't figure out what I was looking at - except for one person who said she loved the pile of rocks in the field.

Just as a large vista or sunset only matter to the person who photographed it because the experience is still in their mind. No-one else sees or appreciates it the same.

BTW - my photography is my canvas and paint. I have no need or desire to work with those tools and just paint the scene. LOL

---

Click to expand...

So I just now decided to take the hour drive up the Peninsula to revisit the location where I photographed this tree image yesterday. Being that when I look at what is in front of me to photograph, I see it as I want to present it in the final print. I don't really spend time and analyze all of the angles and possibilities.

Well you made me curious as to whether I was missing out on something or that maybe the image would be just as good or improved by accepting what was first presented to me, or if in fact the tree had enough character to have an impact without my choice to select an angle lower to the ground than what I would get when standing up.

The results are fine I guess and I have a certain way of shooting that when even pointing my camera for a snapshot I tend to compose and could make a nice image from the result. But I will stick with my choice above for the way that I see and want my photographic canvas to be presented.

But thank you Paul for inspiring me to revisit. It is not something I would take the time to do. And the reality is that only to my eye is there too much distraction with the background elements - probably not to others.The cars on the side road weren't there today either. LOL

As a side note, I already have two print sales from this image from posting it on my Instagram account. Not sure either person would have been as excited about these last two so as to spend money on a print or even consider them.

First shot is as I pulled up on the scene and noticed the tree and rocks.The second is where I stopped the car to analyze whether it was worth getting out and walking up to the fence to take the shot. These are resized for web straight from the camera as I captured them:

An important part of the original is that wonderful sky.