LF01-0182

A very confusing jumble of shapes and lines which I find difficult to look at so it's not for me I'm afraid Stephen.
 
They are like Dancers on water Stephen, the detail even as a scan is superb, thanks for posting
 
A very confusing jumble of shapes and lines which I find difficult to look at

Fair enough. Very few photographers like my photographs, which is one reason I rarely bother to post any. There's only one small detail in this one that I would change if I could reshoot; and it is only a small detail.
 
Stephen... I am going to be straight forward... first by asking this one question..

For whom do you make your photographs? Do YOU derive 'pleasure' from those 'physical' and 'mental processes' that you find in being creative?
I know I now make 'mine' for ME. I spent too many years 'doing/making' for others... most of whom had far more years of 'formal' education... but might not know the 'up' from either 'down' or 'sideways'... or even that essential part of their anatomy from a hole in the ground.

If your 'inner self' derives ANY modicum of pleasure and/or creative satisfaction from the end result of that which you 'do' for yourself', under the dark-cloth, then in the darkroom, you have succeeded... there should be no need to 'analyse'. Take the time to remember the feeling when you were there... observed... and 'enjoyed' the seeing.

Ken
 
I like this image for two reasons.
Firstly, I like ponds and also rock pools because you can examine a miniature aquatic world. There is detail and depth captured in this pond to give it that appeal.
The second reason is that it can be viewed as a two-dimensional abstract. I like images where you can stand back and see the patterns created on a single plane. This one works well like that, with an overall balance of tone,as well as areas of contrast to add interest. I hope that makes sense!
Alex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I like its sharpness and clarity and its obvious that its something you wanted to capture, it also has a very pleasing even tone to it.
Richard
 
Stephen... I am going to be straight forward... first by asking this one question..

For whom do you make your photographs

I'll be naive and say that I would hope that all amateurs make their photographs for themselves alone. If you're not being paid to produce images, there's no-one to dictate to you and you have a completely free hand. Some painters have enjoyed this degree of freedom, and some haven't - at least, for some of their works.

It raises an interesting question - which I'll sidestep after this paragraph - as to whether some painters and photographers receive commissions based on their perceived style or whether they can simply be relied on to produce something at the end of it all.

I fully realise that many amateurs throw away this freedom and accept slavery instead - to produce photographs that will please camera club judges, win competitions, or just please the rank and file of other (in some cases, mediocre) photographers (question to self - did I spell that last word correctly? Should the "g" have been a "c" and the "h" omitted?) who can only appreciate an image if it conforms to the rules that they judge by. Some rules being compositional, others related to the necessary light that a photograph should record if a landscape.

In my case, I try to use my eyes, and find something that interests me. It may be an object, or a grand vista. But something that must first and foremost catch my eye. After that, it's the questioning. Why did this catch my eye? What's the essential feature of it? What do I want to emphasise or show to others? And what's the best way of achieving this in terms of arrangement within the frame of my viewfinder? And finally, how do I want the tones to map to the print?

Once I've done all that, and made the print, then that's it. If others like it, fine. If not, then I don't mind. I can happily accept that one man's meat is another man's poisson (as the French say). On the other (large) hand, if someone thinks that I've failed to achieve what I set out to, then I'm happy to hear why, so that I can try to keep it mind next time, and learn from it.

The pleasurable parts for me are the initial looking and considering of the scene, and the final contemplation of the print. Everything in between is a necessary evil to get from the image in my mind's eye to the image before my two eyes.
 
Last edited:
Stephen....
I do thank you for you honest response.

When I went to earn my degree (post-retirement) after about 50 years 'under the dark-cloth and (of which) so many years as 'working' photographer recording to film that which was important as visual 'evidence' that had to be recorded for their 'scientific' needs and publication as evidence of what could be observed, I found that a few fellow class-mates were very much inclined to 'find out what the Prof likes' and present 'that' rather than follow their own creative 'path'.

I decided (at the side of my mentor those many years ago) that it was easier to 'make my own
path' rather than attempt to walk behind someone else... and 'in their shadow'. That path was the one that my mentor then encouraged me to make as an 'independent'. If one is not 'allowed'... or encouraged to produce the images that he/she likes 'for themselves', I believe that it is time to put the camera away.

You MUST make the photographs that YOU need to satisfy that inner and creative 'spark'... and you 'should' (if not MUST) be willing to share the results of your work with others... every image that you 'share' may not be accepted with the same level of grace... but... by 'sharing you will find you are no longer "alone".

Best...

Ken
 
Stephen,

I'm late to this party, but I quite like this image! The vegetation in the background, to my eye, appears to float in space as if the plants are lifting off from the plants in the foreground. Personally, I'd be very proud of this image because it morphs into something beyond the actual subject matter. Exactly the kind of thing I look for in my own work!
 
Back
Top