Today I had a little bit of time for walking outside with the children before and after sunset, which was a gray one, no beautiful reds or yellows, only shades of dirty gray.
Some say that photography is about light, but can it be about this kind of light? And some others say that light doesn't matter.
In any case, whether light matters in photography or not, it matters to me. There has been so little light recently here in Finland, and little colors, little everything except gray, black, dirt, brown, muddy. Of course, it is quite probable that you can take great photographs even in these conditions, but what about when the photographer (at least me) is not at all inspired?
I took a few photos, using once again the iterative method of taking many successive photos of the same subject. Recently Earthbound Light had a nice posting on Iterative Composition: 'The basis of iterative composition is rooted in the age old philosophy of "if at first you don't succeed, try, try again." It's the instant feedback provided for by digital photography that makes this possible. Take advantage of it.'
I have been using this method excessively, and I very much like it. You learn also from the failures. Of course, the amount of photos becames easily quite big - I'm approaching 25,000 photos with the LX3 - but you can always delete those which did not work.
Update: Actually, this photo was number 25,031 taken with the LX3, so I'm now above that milestone.
Posts
When are we going home?
3 hours ago
7 comments:
Ah yes. I went and read the article about light over at landscapist and it only served to remind me why I don't visit there often. Most of what I've read over there is pretty pompous and self-aggrandizing, but that's my opinion.
Anyway, I don't think it even matters whether or not I think it's important or not. I much prefer contrasty light, unless I'm doing something like macros. I get the same feeling as you do when the light is just flat. It's uninspiring. There's nothing wrong with that and it doesn't make you a lesser photographer if you like more contrast! :-)
Shoot what you like in the light that you like.
I prefer to think that photography is not JUST about light!
I think there are problems at either extreme positions - that photography is just about light or that it has nothing to do with the light.
About the attitude towards different kinds of light - whether the blinding light of Sahara in midsummer or the depressing darkness of Finland in autumn... Perhaps someone coming here in the middle of Novermber would be keen to use the exceptional darkness and wetness as material for a photography masterpiece. Or vice versa, perhaps someone from here could use the light of Sahara in a novel, insightful way.
But is it just about the attitude, I can't say. What I mean is that if the photographer would change his/her attitude, would he/she see things differently and produce excellent photographs whatever the circumstances.
Well, when Mark Hobson says photography is not about light, I guess what he really means is, that it is not about the cliché of "golden light", and he is right about that, but it certainly helps a lot, if only to improve one's mood :)
When I have the problem, I normally search for colors in shop windows, street lights, advertising and so on, and I use that, frequently with very shallow depth of field, often only as a background. In many cases I go macro (but on the street) or use a longer lens.
Abstraction also helps a lot, and so does shooting after sundown. Even on a completely cloudy day, yes even in fog, you get nice color contrast between the cool bluish land/cityscape and the warm, orange sodium vapor lamps of so many street lights. On the other hand, the greenish pale light of many other street light is, well, less appetizing :)
One thing is have sort of discovered recently - not that I'm able to do much with it yet - it that even the flat uninspiring light has good properties.
Michael Brown has posted photos which illustrate this, how the "flat" gray light can be used, together with overexposure, to isolate winter plants etc. from the background.
Hm, maybe it's not mainly the light as it is capture by the camera - but more of an indirect effect. On the mood, motivation and inspiration of the photographer...
@Thomas: It is indeed interesting to ponder the relation of "the light" with the mood of the photographer.
The photographer is interpreting the light according to his/her personality, history, skills, expectations etc., and at the same time the light is affecting the mood of the photographer.
Post a Comment