Rachel Foster
New member
Are any of these better than the others?
-
Please use real names.
Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed
Firstname Lastname
Register
We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know! -
Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!
Dandelions
- Thread starter Rachel Foster
- Start date
Maris Rusis
Member
To: Rachel Foster.
Re:Question: "Dandelions.
Are any of these better than the others?"
Better is a highly subjective word and it elicits the next question "Better for what?". If there is a commercial context then "better" is probably the same as "more profitable". If illustration is the objective then "more recognisable" is probably good. But what is the agenda in this thread. Is it personal expressive art?
If art is at stake then "better" must surely mean that the pictures succeed in expressing, in pictorial form, what you had in mind when you made them. No one else can look at these pictures and figure out if this is the case. They would have to know what was in your mind. Only you can decide and your judgement is not only correct but beyond challenge.
The alternative is that you made these pictures with nothing in mind. Artists can work like that. It is no great shakes to roll the optical dice with a paint brush, pencil, or camera and see what eventuates. Maybe one of the pictures will capture your imagination in an evocative way and entertain or enlighten you. But again only you can tell.....and you can't be wrong.
Re:Question: "Dandelions.
Are any of these better than the others?"
Better is a highly subjective word and it elicits the next question "Better for what?". If there is a commercial context then "better" is probably the same as "more profitable". If illustration is the objective then "more recognisable" is probably good. But what is the agenda in this thread. Is it personal expressive art?
If art is at stake then "better" must surely mean that the pictures succeed in expressing, in pictorial form, what you had in mind when you made them. No one else can look at these pictures and figure out if this is the case. They would have to know what was in your mind. Only you can decide and your judgement is not only correct but beyond challenge.
The alternative is that you made these pictures with nothing in mind. Artists can work like that. It is no great shakes to roll the optical dice with a paint brush, pencil, or camera and see what eventuates. Maybe one of the pictures will capture your imagination in an evocative way and entertain or enlighten you. But again only you can tell.....and you can't be wrong.
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Are any of these better than the others?
As Maris has pointed out, you have not indicated with what ruler we should measure the worth of you images. Still, if you are thinking of how they impact on us, the viewers here, I can share my own impression. These are not, IMHO, creatively as good as your best. They do not seem to demand to be remembered or reported to anyone else. A work of worth, seems to make demands on us for recognition. None of these do that for me.
You seem to be lost as to what the composition is and what the depth of focus should cover. The instances you have shown are all over the place and might well only represent what the camera got reflections from rather than some demanding idea you had in your brain for which you positioned yourself, your eye and the camera.
They are not large enough for me to see the technical quality of the fine structure, if you want a technical comment.
So I would ask you to figure out, "How you want to present the ball of seeds, ready to fly in a score of directions?" Then try to show that! With a portrait of a person, you have so much experience to bring to bear that you can frame the subject well. Same with a flower which has a face too. Here, you seem lost and appear to have no opinion!
Maybe you are merely trying to show us the dandelion and if that's the case, yes, we see it. But then what?
In kindness,
Asher
Rachel Foster
New member
Thank you, Maris and Asher. I think your points are valid and helped me realize what is troubling me about these. It wasn't until I read your comments that I realized I was "seeing" the images with what my eye saw when I took the images superimposed over the actual images. There was a lighting effect that I now realize the camera did not capture. Consciously I think I was unable to disentangle what I wanted to see from what is actually in the image.
You're right. These don't "have it."
That brings up an interesting question, though: How does one learn to see an image without forcing the circumstances of the capture on the perception?
You're right. These don't "have it."
That brings up an interesting question, though: How does one learn to see an image without forcing the circumstances of the capture on the perception?
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Defining the image that you will get from the scene you point your camera to!
We all want to make impressive images that have our defined stamp of identity and that seem to demand to be seen.
You have, luckily for you, stumbled on a barrier a lot of folk have to getting from their imagination, through their chosen hunting position and viewpoint and the lens plain of focus to sample some of the light from a scene to match what's in the brain.
First you have to know what's in your brain. We feel the wind, smell the sea and notice the seabirds circling as you spot a family picnicking. The mother is nursing and the father is playing "horse" for his little boy. How do you get this atmosphere into the picture. Just pressing the shutter wont do that. You need to work on many solutions, comparing one with another. What of the scene do you wish to embed into the physical form of your art? What vantage point would get the ambience that makes this scene special. Let me reassure you, Rachel, Ansel Adams dod not simply set up his camera in the wilderness and shoot. He spent a lot of time working out that shot. So why not bring a sketch pad and force yourself to set out your goals and then you have something to build on. So getting this vision defined is where you, perhaps need the most practice.
The other point is that pressing the shutter button merely records some of the light from the scene, that's it! Photography gurus can seduce one to think that framing the image already makes the photograph. All one has is a latent image. From there on the real creative work starts. It's likely that a lot of vertical markets will have shot-[taking schemes which allow a high percentage of deliverable images with little further work. So wedding and product photographers, for example, use a pattern of photography which works for them 99% of the time. Some special shots do get worked on but most are processed with little local editing.
However, the best work requires multiple efforts to increase or decrease some parameter of importance to parts of the composition. The camera records everything with the same emphasis except for position, perspective, depth of focus and lighting which you control beforehand. So local adjustments can help define your idea of what is significant.
You did not define what you were trying to do. Some can do this instinctively with certain subjects they have gained experience in photographing. Wedding and news photographers have to do it or else they would starve! For most others, we need to work beforehand and afterwards to make sure that shot represents what we imagine. The beginning of this is defining what you want. Eventually this might even happen in a Bresson-split second and you will get a rush, such a creative rush when you photograph, as you know you have nailed it!
I hope this helps,
Asher
Rachel,
We all want to make impressive images that have our defined stamp of identity and that seem to demand to be seen.
You have, luckily for you, stumbled on a barrier a lot of folk have to getting from their imagination, through their chosen hunting position and viewpoint and the lens plain of focus to sample some of the light from a scene to match what's in the brain.
First you have to know what's in your brain. We feel the wind, smell the sea and notice the seabirds circling as you spot a family picnicking. The mother is nursing and the father is playing "horse" for his little boy. How do you get this atmosphere into the picture. Just pressing the shutter wont do that. You need to work on many solutions, comparing one with another. What of the scene do you wish to embed into the physical form of your art? What vantage point would get the ambience that makes this scene special. Let me reassure you, Rachel, Ansel Adams dod not simply set up his camera in the wilderness and shoot. He spent a lot of time working out that shot. So why not bring a sketch pad and force yourself to set out your goals and then you have something to build on. So getting this vision defined is where you, perhaps need the most practice.
The other point is that pressing the shutter button merely records some of the light from the scene, that's it! Photography gurus can seduce one to think that framing the image already makes the photograph. All one has is a latent image. From there on the real creative work starts. It's likely that a lot of vertical markets will have shot-[taking schemes which allow a high percentage of deliverable images with little further work. So wedding and product photographers, for example, use a pattern of photography which works for them 99% of the time. Some special shots do get worked on but most are processed with little local editing.
However, the best work requires multiple efforts to increase or decrease some parameter of importance to parts of the composition. The camera records everything with the same emphasis except for position, perspective, depth of focus and lighting which you control beforehand. So local adjustments can help define your idea of what is significant.
You did not define what you were trying to do. Some can do this instinctively with certain subjects they have gained experience in photographing. Wedding and news photographers have to do it or else they would starve! For most others, we need to work beforehand and afterwards to make sure that shot represents what we imagine. The beginning of this is defining what you want. Eventually this might even happen in a Bresson-split second and you will get a rush, such a creative rush when you photograph, as you know you have nailed it!
I hope this helps,
Asher
Rachel Foster
New member
Yes, it does. But it raises more questions.
One may make two errors when shooting: not thinking it through or thinking too much. I often do both, sometimes simultaneously it feels like. So, the next question is to figure out how to put the right amount of thought and the right kind of thought into it so that it gets at what I want to capture but doesn't leave me with "analysis paralysis" or become overly-studied and/or stilted.
Who knew photography was so psychological? Go figure.
One may make two errors when shooting: not thinking it through or thinking too much. I often do both, sometimes simultaneously it feels like. So, the next question is to figure out how to put the right amount of thought and the right kind of thought into it so that it gets at what I want to capture but doesn't leave me with "analysis paralysis" or become overly-studied and/or stilted.
Who knew photography was so psychological? Go figure.
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Obsession and procrastination are part of wanting perfection which kills a project!
A quick sketch might be the answer!
Then perhaps go to some art galleries and see how others approached the same dilemma.
Asher
Gary Ayala
New member
Adams called it "previsualization". This is when you previsualize the final image in your mind's eye prior to releasing the shutter. Then you attempt to recreate your vision through the camera settings and choice of lens ... and finally polishing the image to reflect the preconception via post processing manipulation.
The closer you consistantly get to attaining your previsualized image the better your photographic skills. And the less post processing you require the better your skills.
Remember to take a hard look at the light and not the reflective subject. For static shots (ala Dandelions), it is the light which is fluid and plastic ... not the subject. Walk around your subject and see how the light changes and how this change is reflected in the subject. Think about different times of day and how the light quality change from morning to night.
The closer you consistantly get to attaining your previsualized image the better your photographic skills. And the less post processing you require the better your skills.
Remember to take a hard look at the light and not the reflective subject. For static shots (ala Dandelions), it is the light which is fluid and plastic ... not the subject. Walk around your subject and see how the light changes and how this change is reflected in the subject. Think about different times of day and how the light quality change from morning to night.
Hi Rachel,
Why did you choose to use f4.5? Why manual; why not Av? If you want to get at least some of the seed head in focus then f8 or even f16 would have been better. Of course then the shutter speed would have to be slower, but with a tripod that shouldn't be a problem. You could also up the ISO - the 5D should be able to take much higher values without excessive noise.
WRT lighting I found that a small LED spot shining upwards through the seed head gives a nice effect.
Regards,
Stuart
Why did you choose to use f4.5? Why manual; why not Av? If you want to get at least some of the seed head in focus then f8 or even f16 would have been better. Of course then the shutter speed would have to be slower, but with a tripod that shouldn't be a problem. You could also up the ISO - the 5D should be able to take much higher values without excessive noise.
WRT lighting I found that a small LED spot shining upwards through the seed head gives a nice effect.
Regards,
Stuart
Rachel Foster
New member
Stuart: I was experimenting with bokeh using the macro lens. I shot some 2.8 and some at smaller than 4.5 as well.
Shooting manual: At this point I'm still exploring various settings and letting the camera choose for me wouldn't teach me as much as shooting manual (or at least that's the theory I'm working on).
Gary, this also addresses your point. I'm still learning how to capture what I visualize. Your point about the light: I shot those in the later afternoon with a glorious effect from the light. I didn't manage to recreate what I saw though. I'm not sure I understand the difference between looking at the light and the reflective subject. I typically try to see how the light is falling on the subject. Is that what you mean?
Thanks for the questions. It helps me figure out what to examine more closely.
Shooting manual: At this point I'm still exploring various settings and letting the camera choose for me wouldn't teach me as much as shooting manual (or at least that's the theory I'm working on).
Gary, this also addresses your point. I'm still learning how to capture what I visualize. Your point about the light: I shot those in the later afternoon with a glorious effect from the light. I didn't manage to recreate what I saw though. I'm not sure I understand the difference between looking at the light and the reflective subject. I typically try to see how the light is falling on the subject. Is that what you mean?
Thanks for the questions. It helps me figure out what to examine more closely.
Gary Ayala
New member
When you have some free time ... find a large fountain in the late afternoon, with sunlight hitting the fountain directly. Do a 360 around the fountain, taking your time and stopping every few steps/yards and examine what is happening to the water droplets. See the light, examine and quantify/classify the light ... then separately, see and quantify/classify the subject.
Use a gray card or incident meter to measure the light falling on the subject and shoot accordingly then take a reflective reading (on-board meter) and shoot using those readings.
annnnd ... see what you get ... (to be honest there may be a huge difference and may be no dif ... lol ... but try it nonetheless.) One of the best things of metering off a gray card or handheld meter is that it slows you down ... gets you to think of where you're at, what you're after and what you need to do to attain your final destination.
G
Rachel Foster
New member
Sounds like a very interesting exercise. (I'll have to use a gray card. I've yet to get an incident light meter.)
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Gary, Stuart and Rachel,
I am grateful for this discussion. It points to the need to both experiment and also have some plan but be willing to turn on a dime to exploit accidents.
Here's a pictures from Flikr's SteveP!'s photostream
I'm writing to Steve to let him know I borrowed his image to illustrate a point. Here it seems as if the image is boosted by having the underlying motif of a cart or ferris wheel. when we can do this, connecting to a know class of object or mythology, the picture gets a great boost in relevance.
When I came across Steve's dandelion photograph, I immediately thought of our struggle to give identity to our images.
Asher
I am grateful for this discussion. It points to the need to both experiment and also have some plan but be willing to turn on a dime to exploit accidents.
Here's a pictures from Flikr's SteveP!'s photostream
I'm writing to Steve to let him know I borrowed his image to illustrate a point. Here it seems as if the image is boosted by having the underlying motif of a cart or ferris wheel. when we can do this, connecting to a know class of object or mythology, the picture gets a great boost in relevance.
When I came across Steve's dandelion photograph, I immediately thought of our struggle to give identity to our images.
Asher
Rachel Foster
New member
That helps make the point nicely!