Actually, the above sentence is not quite accurate. My favourite photo taken on a recent trip to Melbourne wasn't even taken by me, but the admirably committed, talented Looki. I repost it here, without permission, but with a link. Go and see her photos. They is lovely.
Here is my attempt at the same sort of thing:
Similar emotion, lousy composition. I couldn't even post the one of Charlie cuddling into Dan's neck because it was blurry and boring. You might post it on Facebook. Maybe.
I'm fairly certain that I take more photos than Looki, but she practices more, if that makes sense. Me, I'm still in the half-way house between the hard-living life of the happy-snapper, recording every event, finger held firmly on the shutter, and the serious amateur, who, to borrow a nice phrase from pro-photog Joe McNally, stops taking photos and starts making them. Whereas Looki actually goes out with the express purpose of taking photos, takes the photos and comes back and actually edits them. Not Photoshop, but just sorting out the good and cutting the crap. Then she bravely posts them online!
Me, I store everything. I can barely bring myself to delete any shot, ever. Hence the 140Gb or so of digital memories. Partly, it's laziness. Partly it's a nostalgic bent; every image tells me a story about the day I took it. And a small, but significant reason I don't delete photos is because I constantly imagine some Blowup-type scenario (or CSI, if you must) where my casual photography will help solve a murder.
That said, I do like some of the photos I 'made' in Melbourne. I aspire to be like Looki and post more photos, and that will start now:
I realise that I have regressed to the old art filter setting, but I think it brings out the red in the carriage.
I might have mentioned it before, but I'm a massive fan of the blurry photo. Not the fancy bokeh Looki engages in, but just straight up blurry photos. I think they can tell their own kind of story. This is my portrait of Looki the photographer, courtesy of complimentary water for the table.
Looki has a ridiculously expensive Nokton something or other lens. Even the photos I take with it look good (when I get the manual focus right). That charlie over the shoulder photo was great timing and composition, but with a kit lens the background would have looked the same as the foreground, making it flat.
ReplyDeleteJust look at your "charlie and dan playing peggle" shot, and imagine if the TV was blurred but the back of our heads was in sharp focus. Actually you don't have to imagine, I've 'shopped it in for you (badly).
Dan - Hmm. Mebe. Expensive lens, yeah yeah. I believe the workman/tools example only makes sense for iffy quality work, rather than giving credit for good stuff.
DeleteI still maintain that Looki's photography practice yields better results that my "shoot everything and hope" approach.
Thanks for the 'shop. I still think it's too busy in the background to adequately focus on the nice little lean Charlie has going on.
Dan, it is not all about the lens, but yes, it makes it easier. My photo had the benefit of a much more distant background than Sam's. So even if I was at Sam's maximum 3.5, it may have still had a blurry enough background to work (and Charlie would have been in focus!). But for the television shot, you'd need to be a lot closer, even with my lens at 0.95. (Then maybe the focal length of my prime might've been too much to fit you both in the shot...)
DeleteI think it was probably just unlucky that Sam's comfy seating position on the couch was in view of the junk I have piled up there, something you might not notice until looking at photos on the computer. If Sam had been directly behind you may have only the TV.
You've got to remember, Charlie like most people doesn't hold still for long, so like 90% of my photos of him it's a very small window of opportunity, and good shots are flukes.
Try black and white with the 'shop? It should make it less distracting.
I'll leave the rebuttal, if any, to Dan here ...
DeleteI clicked over and had a look at some of Looki's photos, they are very nice.
ReplyDeleteHey, quit with all the praise already!
ReplyDeleteYeah I think nowadays everywhere I go I have my camera, and the times I don't, I'm still looking around sizing up imaginary shots. I don't know if that's always a good thing, but it does make me take notice of things around me.
I LOVE the first shot. My shot has Charlie in it, so it automatically gets points, but yours is way more artistic and beautiful and photographicky. Frame it.
I love the idea of the photos being used to solve crimes! I think it's nice to have so many memories at your fingertips too. Personally, I just find it a lot easier to find the good ones if there are less bad ones. And my bad ones are bad enough I can never imagine using them (and I usually have 5 or so of the exact same place and time). And if I have too much clutter, I won't be able to find anything and give up. (Like my pantry and cupboards at the moment).
That train photo is cool, makes me think of Russia, not that I've been there.
Can't say I recognise myself in the last shot, but the colours look familiar. Abstract and portrait in one! Like it.
I had to stop bringing my camera everywhere, because really, there are only so many photos you can take of work, Charlie in the loungeroom, Charlie in the kitchen, Charlie in the garden.
DeleteI basically need to go to more exciting places ...
In the portrait in the top half you can see you glasses and your mouth underneath and the black bit is you holding the camera. The bottom half is ... stuff?
Try looking from a step back, it helps you see it a bit better.