Sunday, July 02, 2006
Through my toilet window
Comments:
Great minds think alike (or is it fools never differ)
I have a similar set of images of my toilet/bathroom window as the sun set and the shadows of the trees played on the window.
For me the pattern on the window plays too large a part of the composition. It is 'pretty' but that's the glass maker's work.
Moulin Rouge!!! I know what Rex is saying about originality but if you have this glass why not show it off? It is rococco in the extreme and enjoyable for that. The play of light and shadow is redolent of fin de siecle Europe (nineteenth/twentieth century!)
I'm finding it hard to comment on this because it's a strangely familiar image, and I don't mean in the sense that I've seen another image just like it. I think it tugs at a memory from my very young childhood but I can't pin it down. Weird.
As for the shot, I can see why you took it. The light and shapes are appealing. I like the fade off into darkness. If the size of the window would allow, perhaps another shot with the sun top or bottom left in the frame (perhaps clipped). That would allow more of the gradual fade into darkness across the rest of the image with bits of orange sparkle here and there.
"It is 'pretty' but that's the glass maker's work."
I'm afraid I can't say anyting too perceptive about this. I like it. If it leans to heavily on the glass maker's work, that doesn't impact it's beauty, nor does it take away from the photographer's roll in seeing and showing it.
There is definitely more to be done with this. As the subject is close to home I'd have another go. Somehow I'd like to see this as a ball of fire, therefore I need much stronger light middle bottom.
I've been thinking a lot about this. The subject of "isn't it just a copy of somebody else's work" comes up fairly frequently on one of the photoblogs that I visit.
I can't really see what difference it makes. There are very few things that we can take a picture of that are not the results of human endeavour. Even landscapes are managed. Even a lot of plants are the result of specific human intervention. I haven't checked, but I bet the allium in my recent picture is a breeder's cultivar.
(As an aside, I think one of the enduring appeals of street photography is that the arrangement of people in a given picture hasn't been orchestrated by anybody. It just happened).
What I see with this picture is a piece of glass that the photographer has added something to by the use of lighting and framing.
The photo contains a lot of the usual elements of a strong picture. It has a good use of colour (this would be dull in monochrome). It has a centre of interest, and it has a frame to keep the viewer in the centre of interest.
For me, though, that doesn't seem to be enough. I have no emotional reaction to it.
Post a Comment
I have a similar set of images of my toilet/bathroom window as the sun set and the shadows of the trees played on the window.
For me the pattern on the window plays too large a part of the composition. It is 'pretty' but that's the glass maker's work.
As for the shot, I can see why you took it. The light and shapes are appealing. I like the fade off into darkness. If the size of the window would allow, perhaps another shot with the sun top or bottom left in the frame (perhaps clipped). That would allow more of the gradual fade into darkness across the rest of the image with bits of orange sparkle here and there.
I'm afraid I can't say anyting too perceptive about this. I like it. If it leans to heavily on the glass maker's work, that doesn't impact it's beauty, nor does it take away from the photographer's roll in seeing and showing it.
I can't really see what difference it makes. There are very few things that we can take a picture of that are not the results of human endeavour. Even landscapes are managed. Even a lot of plants are the result of specific human intervention. I haven't checked, but I bet the allium in my recent picture is a breeder's cultivar.
(As an aside, I think one of the enduring appeals of street photography is that the arrangement of people in a given picture hasn't been orchestrated by anybody. It just happened).
What I see with this picture is a piece of glass that the photographer has added something to by the use of lighting and framing.
The photo contains a lot of the usual elements of a strong picture. It has a good use of colour (this would be dull in monochrome). It has a centre of interest, and it has a frame to keep the viewer in the centre of interest.
For me, though, that doesn't seem to be enough. I have no emotional reaction to it.