LIGHT (was: Re: [Leica] WAS: LEICA SEMINAR! 2004. NOW:PHOTOGRAPHIC DISCUSSION. ?)

[tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant)]

Richard S. Taylor offered a second time: ;-)

> Though I'm a little shy of trying to follow on to such great shots from
> Doug, sometimes it's finding just the right sunset,
>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/PICKS/P6250007_lug>
>
> or, the right mist,
>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/PICKS/P7010008_lug>
>
> or catching a reflection.
>
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/PICKS/P7060074_2_lug>
>
> (This is actually an unabashed attempt to get someone other than Philippe
> and William to say something about the photos I posted yesterday.)<,,

Hi Dick,
Well some days response just don't happen, ;-) Doesn't mean folks aren't
looking. I find most times it's a look and move on, doesn't mean it's a
good, bad or ugly photograph. In my case more times than not I don't have
time to answer many of them. In your case your original post was still on
the screen to make comment when the "LIGHT" topic brought it back.
Therefore. ;-)

Now remember in this case I'm a photo-editor and have absolutely no idea how
difficult any of these photographs may have been to shoot. Besides those
difficulties are absolutely meaningless to any editor because we don't care
and are merely looking at what is presented.

And critiques are not open for major discussion, other than
with the creator of the picture, whether the photo-editor is right or wrong.
And for those who don't believe it, just try working for a newspaper, wire
service or magazine where the photo-editor rules the shop! ;-)

#1: P6250007 reflections.
Clean shot well exposed and just the right time for sky and refection to
complement each other.

However, I'd crop the bottom off about half way or smidgen more between the
bottom and little red lights reflected on the right tower. In this fashion
moves the horizon line from almost dead centre. And too much on the bottom 
is
just waste space in this case, while removing it allows not only for a
better balance in strengthening of the domes.

#2: P6280031 sheep and misty hills.
Well done, excellent balance and capturing the mist lightly as mist and not
having it slip into a darkened kind of grey sky.. When printing I'd be
careful the misty sky doesn't go too dark because the sky and mist should be
kept "light in feeling" as it is when one is in this kind of environment.

#3:  P6300019  heads.
Interesting and I saw the cropping offered by Sonny and I agree with him as
it's an immediate improvement and strengthens the picture.

#4:  P7010008 misty hills and trees
First re-action? It needs to be lightened to open it up and about a 1/2 inch
of the "dead space bottom" needs to be cropped as this drags the overall
feeling of the picture down. As it is, it doesn't even feel sombre, it
just sits there looking like it's too dark over all.

The cropped bottom and a touch of lightening will create a better overall
feel and mystique to the picture. Well OK I think so. ;-)

#5:  P7050042 street scene vertical
Excellent feel and you might be surprised how strong this shot is if you
turn it into a B&W! Only thing I'd change or certainly have a look at in a
slightly different crop, and that is.... the lady on the immediate lower
right corner? Cut her off just at her back leaving the 2 windows right
behind clean. Then cut off the top of the frame right at the upper left
corner there's a slight protrudence off the building, Just nick them off
right a cross from there.

Now you have better feeling of emptiness and the picture over all becomes
more effective. And for those who are doubting, try it! I mean cut and paste
and make a print of both and see how well the slightly cropped version 
looks.
As the woman is a distraction as seen in the original.  Besides she's about
to bang into the edge of the frame.

#6 & 7:
Both are interesting and I can well understand how the reflections caught 
your eye. #6 with it's large area of out side the bridge is a distraction, 
although at least it allows one to understand more about the reflection 
being on the underside of a bridge, it's still a distraction. However, in #7 
now we really don't have any idea what it is other than some kind of light 
pattern with no where to absolutely lock your eye to what you're looking at.

And if one didn't see #6 they wouldn't really have any idea what it was, but 
some kind of light reflection.  But the weird thing is #7 is fascinating as 
it could be "clouds" or whatever ones imagination wants to take it. So it 
can't be discounted as a nothing shot simply because it does evoke thought 
and feeling.  And question.

Certainly others have been moved by it.... therefore it works no matter what 
your motivation was any more than.... "WOW! Look at the neat light!" 
click-click!

You see sometimes we're motivated by "just light" but there isn't any 
picture elements that go with it to create a picture. All we're re-acting to 
is a momentary flash of light. Absolutely nothing wrong with that as it 
falls under "better to recognize an element of light and have a momentary 
re-action than not to understand the value of light at all!"

And quite frankly there's millions out there who wouldn't react to the value 
of light if they were hit by a bolt of lightening! ;-)

So the bottom line on #6 & 7 is? I prefer 7 because it evokes questions and 
could very well make an interesting art print.

Basically just keep doing what you are doing and you'll be fine. :-)
ted