Monday, December 7, 2009

Assignment 1 The theory and Practice of contrasts

Below are the photos that I submitted for Assignment 1 TAOP. In hindsight and with the benefit of my by now greater experience I would definitely change some of photos submitted.
Overall the feedback was encouraging. This was an assignment I found difficult. It was the first time I have ever had to produce something to a specific set of criteria. It was also the first time I ever had to submit work for scrutiny and criticism.
I printed them in pairs on sheets of A4 fine art paper. A pair to a page, this is a give away on how I was thinking, they were to be seen in pairs.

Strong.
ISO 100. F 5.0 @ 1/60 second.
Very good feedback for this, my tutor describes it as "an excellent image". although he does go on to say that if the chain was rusty it could be considered to be weak by some.


Weak.
ISO 1000. F 4.0 1/160 second.
I agree with his comments on this photo. " Looking at this image I am not sure what it represents".

Many.
ISO 100. F 9.0 @ 1/5th of a second.
very good feedback here "Yes, but it could also say matches"

Few.


Straight.
ISO 100. F 16 @ 1/160 second.
"A powerful image".

Curved.
ISO 100. F 18 30.0 seconds.
"The abstract and textural quality of this image is well chosen"

pointed.
ISO 1000. F 7.0 @ 1/50 of a second.


Blunt.
ISO 250. f 2.8 1/2000 second. The feedback here is that my tutor feels that these are better viewed as a pair. Particularly blunt. the first is definitely pointed but "the hammer is always a hammer". I was working off a definition in a dictionary as below:
blunt |blənt|adjective1 (of a knife, pencil, etc.) having a worn-down edge or point; not sharp :a blunt knife.having a flat or rounded end : the blunt tip of the leaf.

Smooth.
ISO 200. f 9.0 @ 1/400 second. Good feedback and the lighting was singled out.

Rough.
ISO 100. f 10 @ 1/50 second. Similar feedback as above.



Transparent.
ISO 250. F 2.8 @ 1/6400 of a second. He rightly points out that I should try and eliminate the horizontal line running through the frame.

opaque.
ISO 200. F 1.4 1/1000 second.
"The choice of lighting here enhances the opacity and provides a strong image"


Light/Dark together.
Very good feedback on this one" excellent lighting and pattern created by cast shadow".


Thick.
ISO 100. F 9.0 @ 1/10 second.
Feedback was good about the wooden boards here but does it immediately conjure up thick?
Thin.
ISO 100. f 10.0 1/4 second.
this one works better alone.

Sweet.
ISO 400. f 4.0 @ 1/320 second.
" This one nearly answers the question"

Sour.
ISO 800. f 1.4 @ 1/40 second.
" An Excellent photograph"





Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Project 15; Cropping

Shot 1.
The shot on the left is obviously the original uncropped one. My reason for the crop is that I wanted to remove the superfluous border around the main subject. I also like the circle inside the square frame.



Shot 2.
Again the first shot was the one on the left. The crop is on the left. I wanted to draw attention to the detail in the wood.


Shot 3.
Here the crop was made to take away the distracting sun on the left and to emphasise the curves in the cloud formation.


Sunday, November 8, 2009

Project 14 Vertical and horizontal frames


Again, for me this project has made me realise that unconsciously I frame a vertical subject with the main weight of the subject at the bottom of the frame.

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Project 13; The Golden Section.

Having been initially puzzled by the difference between the golden section and the rule of thirds I am at least in my own head a little clearer. Both are theories on how to subdivide the frame of a photo or a painting.
It seems to me from the little research I have done on the internet that the rule of thirds is derived from the golden section. So far it seems to me that it is an approximation or quick and handy ready reckoner for the golden section.
The golden section is a theory or rule originally used in painting. It has been variously called the golden section, the golden mean and my personal favorite the divine proportion.
This idea has been written about and used by such artists as Leornado Da Vinci, Salvadore Dalí and Mondrain.
In the notes on the AOP course Michael Freeman states that "the ratio inside the frame, from the small part to the large part is the same as the large part and the whole". I can see that it is possible to get more and more engrossed in this. Basically in composing a picture there are ways to subdivide the frame that give a harmonious composition, I suppose its possible to call this balance? So in order to achieve an aesthetically pleasing composition one would use the golden mean. On the other hand perhaps to achieve a picture with tension or disharmony would one deliberately ignore or break the golden mean?
One of the interesting things that I have realised about this is that it happens unconsciously.
Here is a picture that I took several months ago, its of the old harbour in Biarritz. The subject of the picture is the light house. I have drawn a grid on top of the picture using the principles of the golden section and the light house is sitting pretty right in the centre of the golden section.

Scan of the photo on ordinary paper and the original.




Here are some shots that I have deliberately composed on the golden section.





Having been busy composing using the golden section I began thinking about this rule and the possibilities offered by deliberately breaking it. I came across the work of Paul Reas in Langford's Basic Photography. Here is a link to some of his work;
The photo on this page reminds me very much of the work of Mondrian. Here is a link to some information on his work. http://www.artcyclopedia.com/artists/mondrian_piet.html
Paul Reas's website can be found here;
There are some good example here on how to create tension, chaos almost by changing the camera angle.

project 12; Positioning the horizon.

Positioning the horizon;
The horizon in a photograph is a point of division. It is a division in the frame. By positioning the horizon in different places the emphasis of the photo changes. These to photos have completly different feeling by changing the position of the horizon.



The viewer must see through the foreground to get to the subject of the photo here.
A different perspective. This second photo has a more desolate, wild feeling to it. Perhaps its because of the scale change. The subject feels smaller.

This next series of photographs shows how changing the position of the horizon changes the scale, perspective and emphasis of the photo.
The mountains look a little insignificant here.
A little more significant here.



Beginning to dominate the picture and you get a feeling of how big they actually are here.


Here the viewer is dwarfed by the mountains.

I think that the horizon works well in many different positions. I think where it is placed in the picture depend on what the photographers intention is. More and more this word is coming up for me with photography, what is my intention with this photograph?

Sunday, November 1, 2009

Project 11: Balance

Photo 1 and sketch showing balance.

Photo 2 and sketch.


Photo 3 and sketch.
Photo 4 and sketch.


Photo 5 and sketch.


Photo 6 and sketch.