I am grateful for the snow, mountains, trees, & the sunrise
...and I am grateful for my little Moe.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
gratitude
I wanted to re-do "smile," but just didn't get around to asking anyone to model for me. I was at a coffee shop & saw the cutest young woman, thought I could get "smile" & "coffee" all in one swoop! But a failure of nerve stopped me from asking her for permission (& there was no way to be discrete about lifting the camera...she was sitting right beside me!). So gratitude.
Friday, November 25, 2011
smile 1.0
My husband, featured in the first picture below, took two days to give me permission to post this picture. It is my contribution to "smile," as it is about as close to a smile as anyone (besides me) might witness of my husband...smiling. It is possible that my husband has two expressions: stony face; and stony face. So. There you have it.
This is not related to the theme at all. I was shoveling the deck & there was a hole in the stack of snow on the rail (this photo is tweaked - seriously tweaked!)
This is not related to the theme at all. I was shoveling the deck & there was a hole in the stack of snow on the rail (this photo is tweaked - seriously tweaked!)
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Smile
While these photos are probably not technically what was intended by "Smile", I am taking a bit of artistic liscence and interpreting SMILE in my own fashion. Orzo behaves like a cat. We have discovered that he will chase a laser dot ALL OVER THE PLACE just like a cat. Up the walls, across the yard, under furniture. I keep waiting for him to wake up and realize that this is going no where, yet he continues to amuse. I do think he understands that I am the creator of this diversion, but he is happy to oblige regardless. I have been entertaining myself for days, not only smiling but totally belly-laughing. Seemed an appropriate submission for SMILE.
As a continuation of our tweaking conversation, I discovered that I am really bad at it! Turns out that taking the pic itself was a photographic challenge since I had to try to capture the laser dot and the fast moving dog in dim light (gloomy here today). I tried unsuccessfully to lighten up these pics by tweaking but all I discovered is I really don't know how to do it properly! No matter what combination I tried they came out too pixelated. I know there is a lesson in there somewhere but since my family is dancing from foot to foot waiting to be entertained, I will have to revisit the topic at a later date. Off I go!
As a continuation of our tweaking conversation, I discovered that I am really bad at it! Turns out that taking the pic itself was a photographic challenge since I had to try to capture the laser dot and the fast moving dog in dim light (gloomy here today). I tried unsuccessfully to lighten up these pics by tweaking but all I discovered is I really don't know how to do it properly! No matter what combination I tried they came out too pixelated. I know there is a lesson in there somewhere but since my family is dancing from foot to foot waiting to be entertained, I will have to revisit the topic at a later date. Off I go!
Friday, November 18, 2011
tweakin'
The comparison between these shots is an exploration into the question: to tweak or not to tweak?
This may not be a very good photograph to use as an example. Although I like this picture, I find it hard to like. That's part of why I used it last week - it felt like a risk to put up a picture I was unsure whether anyone else would see value in.
In truth these are two separate shots, but they can still be used for this comparison (I must have not saved the original for the "after" shot, though normally that is my habit). Still, the natural lighting in both shots was the same as they were taken only seconds apart and the camera settings were identical. What they illustrate is the difference manipulating cropping, brightness, contrast, & gamma correct can make after the shot has been taken.
Coming to photography after decades of being a writer seems to make this potential issue of "to tweak or not to tweak" a non-issue for me. Editing, after all, can be a wildly magical process where the initial nugget of inspiration gets polished & brought to a shine. That shine is inherent in the original, couldn't come from anywhere except the original. Editing a photo feels like an integral process very much the same as editing a piece of writing.
If you don't like this photo then the differences between the two shots here are barely noticeable! Yet to me the "after" shot brings the viewer in. Just this movement of coming in, allows the picture go from "a picture of a dead leaf" to an invitation to meet an entity (albeit that entity happens to be a dead leaf!). Once cropped for this "invitation" the brightness was enhanced & contrast increased. The invitation to meet this entity is enhanced by allowing more detail to be delineated.
This is a subtle perspective, a picture of something v an invitation to meet someone, and it is likely that such subtleties exist merely in the eye of the beholder. Which, moving from the issue of to tweak or not to tweak, expands this exercise to the value of art regardless of editing!
Mastering the masters is a delicious exercise for our growth. To play with mimicking the work of others can be a fantastic way to try things for ourselves and extend & enlarge our awareness. More than editing, tweaking, or any academic knowledge, expanding awareness is what art, making it and viewing it, can do. To tweak or not to tweak... lay in the eye of the beholder. Art is a prayer that the eye of the beholder is ever maturing by risk of failure to find vision & voice.
before
after
This may not be a very good photograph to use as an example. Although I like this picture, I find it hard to like. That's part of why I used it last week - it felt like a risk to put up a picture I was unsure whether anyone else would see value in.
In truth these are two separate shots, but they can still be used for this comparison (I must have not saved the original for the "after" shot, though normally that is my habit). Still, the natural lighting in both shots was the same as they were taken only seconds apart and the camera settings were identical. What they illustrate is the difference manipulating cropping, brightness, contrast, & gamma correct can make after the shot has been taken.
Coming to photography after decades of being a writer seems to make this potential issue of "to tweak or not to tweak" a non-issue for me. Editing, after all, can be a wildly magical process where the initial nugget of inspiration gets polished & brought to a shine. That shine is inherent in the original, couldn't come from anywhere except the original. Editing a photo feels like an integral process very much the same as editing a piece of writing.
If you don't like this photo then the differences between the two shots here are barely noticeable! Yet to me the "after" shot brings the viewer in. Just this movement of coming in, allows the picture go from "a picture of a dead leaf" to an invitation to meet an entity (albeit that entity happens to be a dead leaf!). Once cropped for this "invitation" the brightness was enhanced & contrast increased. The invitation to meet this entity is enhanced by allowing more detail to be delineated.
This is a subtle perspective, a picture of something v an invitation to meet someone, and it is likely that such subtleties exist merely in the eye of the beholder. Which, moving from the issue of to tweak or not to tweak, expands this exercise to the value of art regardless of editing!
Mastering the masters is a delicious exercise for our growth. To play with mimicking the work of others can be a fantastic way to try things for ourselves and extend & enlarge our awareness. More than editing, tweaking, or any academic knowledge, expanding awareness is what art, making it and viewing it, can do. To tweak or not to tweak... lay in the eye of the beholder. Art is a prayer that the eye of the beholder is ever maturing by risk of failure to find vision & voice.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Denis Oliver, master
I will put it right out front: I failed. And it is my favorite new thing to do. Okay... while failing may not be exactly new to me, enjoying the freedom to fail is a threshold I've crossed & am glad of it. In this particular case the failure comes in the form of not actually making much effort at all to create a new interpretation of the work of a master. I can't put his picture side by side with mine as an offering for comparison.
But, I can offer an exhibition or two by Denis Oliver (I didn't copy-n-paste his work into this blog as during my attempt to do so I received a kind message asking "please do not copy" and did NOT fail to honor it). What I allowed myself for this stage of the challenge is to start simply by letting his work inspire me, taking whatever effect it does.
The first link above is to Denis Oliver's "Nature" gallery. The first two pictures below were inspired by that gallery (particularly by "How Many Lifetimes" & "Skyflakes"). The second link is for the "Landscape" gallery and was the inspiration for the third submission.
I loved this challenge. I could not come anywhere close to reproducing/understanding how Oliver captures the sky in his landscape work. I really really want to make the claim that I just need a better camera! But that would defeat the pleasure of being a novice & flubbing. What I learned was to pay more attention to how the background looks when I'm working with shallow depths. And I had a serious lesson in the preparation (lifetime long?) for photography. When the sun came out & the clouds looked promising, I raced around town trying to find a location from which to shoot while we still had daylight! Photography, as the name implies, is light-written, but it also must be an art form controlled by the god Kronos!
I challenge myself to make a more in depth study of Oliver's work & in time, Kronos willing, I'll offer that side by side comparison.
But, I can offer an exhibition or two by Denis Oliver (I didn't copy-n-paste his work into this blog as during my attempt to do so I received a kind message asking "please do not copy" and did NOT fail to honor it). What I allowed myself for this stage of the challenge is to start simply by letting his work inspire me, taking whatever effect it does.
The first link above is to Denis Oliver's "Nature" gallery. The first two pictures below were inspired by that gallery (particularly by "How Many Lifetimes" & "Skyflakes"). The second link is for the "Landscape" gallery and was the inspiration for the third submission.
I loved this challenge. I could not come anywhere close to reproducing/understanding how Oliver captures the sky in his landscape work. I really really want to make the claim that I just need a better camera! But that would defeat the pleasure of being a novice & flubbing. What I learned was to pay more attention to how the background looks when I'm working with shallow depths. And I had a serious lesson in the preparation (lifetime long?) for photography. When the sun came out & the clouds looked promising, I raced around town trying to find a location from which to shoot while we still had daylight! Photography, as the name implies, is light-written, but it also must be an art form controlled by the god Kronos!
I challenge myself to make a more in depth study of Oliver's work & in time, Kronos willing, I'll offer that side by side comparison.
DO NOT DENY IT
AS I REACH
ONCE, THEY SANG
Master the Master and Cool Colors
Well it has been an interesting adventure this week! I can't say that I mastered the master (Andy Goldsworthy) but I certainly have come to appreciate how hard he must work at creating his ephemeral sculptures. I tried to create several 'copy cat' versions and none came even remotely close to the reality I had envisioned. Add that I then had to beautifully photograph said creation and it was all a bit much for me. I did give it a whirl though and had fun trying a variety of different options. Below is my closest rendition. First photo below is obviously the master himself, second is my feeble copy.
To be totally honest I was so absorbed in trying to master a master this week, that I had pretty much decided I was going to completely ignore "Cool Colors". Then the fates intervened. I woke this morning to the most amazing pea-soup fog, thicker than I have seen for a very long time. I dropped Kelly at school then raced home, got my camera and set off on a fog-filled photo journey. While these may not in fact classify as cool colors, I wanted to share them anyway. I figure they are close enough? Cool and mysterious? Cool and eerie? Cool and misty?
To be totally honest I was so absorbed in trying to master a master this week, that I had pretty much decided I was going to completely ignore "Cool Colors". Then the fates intervened. I woke this morning to the most amazing pea-soup fog, thicker than I have seen for a very long time. I dropped Kelly at school then raced home, got my camera and set off on a fog-filled photo journey. While these may not in fact classify as cool colors, I wanted to share them anyway. I figure they are close enough? Cool and mysterious? Cool and eerie? Cool and misty?
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
seasonal warmth
Like you, I didn't tackle primary colors, though I like the idea of it. I did play with it last year in our 365 game. And... for warm colors I had desired to get some outdoor, sunset-y kinds of photos, golden hour stuff. But the snow arrived and though a sunset may have still a warm glow, the wind has been wicked & I never made it outdoors! So, I looked for warmth at home.
Warm colors
Ok, I confess that I had absolutely no clever ideas for primary colors, so I just ignored it. Warm colors, however, were pretty easy given the time of year. I decided to try to work on my night photography without a tripod - playing with the iso/shutter/aperature in an attempt to get a decent working pic. I take pics each year at our local pumpkin festival and inevitably I can't get the right combination so the pictures all come out blurry. I think I did a little bit better this year...perhaps the ratios are finally sinking in. At any rate, so as not to bore you with a thousand glowing pumpkin pics, these are our three pumpkins which we submitted for the festival.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)