It's stopped raining, everybody's in a play
And don't you know, it's a beautiful new day.
Running down the avenue, see how the sun shines brightly
In the city on the streets, where once was pity,
Mr. Blue Sky is living here today.
(it's an ELO song)
It has been foggy and rainy all week, but yesterday it was sunny, with a bright blue sky. There was frost everywhere, and it was a bit cold, but since there wasa no wind and plenty of sun it didn't really feel cold.
I went out for a ride. I went the long way to Cow Bay and through to the Cobble Hill road. I rode along the highway to Wippletree and stopped in at "The Loom" to get some wool to make some fingerless mittens for taking photos. I then rode along the highway and turned off at the bottom of the hill along the road that goes to the tennis club, went back the way I came, and then rode around the lake to Maple Bay and back along Herd Road. I was going to ride along Richard's Trail and back along Bell McKinnon, but accidentally turned off along Osbourne, and by the time I came back and got to Richards it was starting to get dark (well... that was an excuse. I was actually getting tired - not riding for two months really takes it's toll!), so I headed home.
Although this was quite a short ride, it took me all afternoon, not because my legs are slow or I was on a mountain bike with knobby tires and no big ring, but because I had to stop every few minutes to take pictures.
I have been finding that I can take tens of pictures of the same scene, and not be happy with one of them. As in most things (arty things, anyway) there are two sides: the arty side, and the technical side. For example: pottery. When Hilary makes mugs, she has to know more than what shapes and colours are aesthetically pleasing and what shaped handles are ergonomic, she also has to understand the chemistry behind the glaze composition and how the clay and glaze will react during firing (I could be getting this horribly wrong - I don't know much about pottery). I understand the technical side of photography. I know how to use my camera, I understand the science behind photography (thanks to Mr. Stone!), and (probably most importantly) I can apply my knowledge. But I have trouble with the arty stuff - composition and the like.
I have come across the photostreams of several photographers on Flickr recently that are the opposite - the content, composition and design of there photos is very good, they clearly leave the camera on auto all the time, and I read in the photo descriptions and on there blogs that the auto settings on the camera take work away from the photographer to leave him to concentrate on the subject matter. I disagree with this - although leaving the camera on auto exposure, auto ISO, auto focus, auto etc, will give you a "correct" picture - it's boring. The camera will probably do a very good job of choosing the "best" exposure, focus point, but wouldn't it be cool to have the motion blurry, the tree silhouetted, the lights out of focus? The camera just does what's "best", and best is never cool.
I know the basics of composition: the rule of thirds, leading lines, direction of motion, focal points, framing, et.c (sort of literary devices of the photography world). I thought I would try and find some information on this sort of stuff. All the tutorials and information on "how to be a better photographer" was about learning about f-stops and ISO. I know all that, and couldn't find anything that went beyond the technical stuff. So I started browsing Amazon.com to see if I could find an old-fashioned book (not an e-book - one actually printed on paper). All the recommended books covered less than I already knew. I checked Listmania, and found nothing but more of the same. I didn't see any point in buying a book with one chapter at the back called "Composition", which would, no doubt, be very basic. And then I came across The Photographer's Eye - Composition and Design for Better Digital Photos (Michael Freeman) - there were only two customer reviews, and it wasn't a big seller, but the reviews and blurb sounded promising, so I bought it.
It arrived a few days ago, and I leafed through it yesterday. The chapter headings look interesting: The Image Frame (Dynamics, Shape, Stitching, Placement, etc), Design Basics (Contract, Balance, Pattern, Perspective, Weight, etc), Graphic and Photographic Elements (Points, Vectors, Triangles, etc), Composing with Light and Colour (Chiaroscuro (what?), Colour in Composition, Colour Relationships, Back and White, etc), Intent (Conventional or Challenging, Reactive or Planned, Documentary or Expressive, Simple or Complex, Clear or Ambiguous, etc), Process (The Search for Order, Reaction, Anticipation, Exploration, Construction, Photographs Together, etc). Reading the Table of Contents, I wanted to jump to the chapter on "Intent", which seems very interesting, but I didn't.
Before I'd even finished the first paragraph I found myself rummaging through my desk draw in search of a highlighter. I can't read without one. I think it was Mrs Fletcher (Year 6 teacher) that pushed the highlighter thing. Mrs Fletcher pushed a lot of things though, such as putting the date on the top line in the left margin, and the title in the middle of the second line, but everything else she encouraged was dropped as soon as it was someone else marking my work that didn't care which line the date went on. I think the Level 2 SAT was the first "proper" test I took, and that was in Mrs Fletcher's class. We spent quite some time preparing for the tests, and our little village school always got very good marks. I think I got all 5's with a 4 in English (let down by my story writing). Highlighting key words might not have been a huge importance when the questions were one sentence, and I'd highlight 80% of the words, but in university physics it would often take several minutes just to read the question, and three reads before you start to understand what you're being asked, only to realize that you don't know how to do this one and will come back to it later. When you're doing research for a paper, you might only need a couple of sentences to quote out of the whole book, so good luck finding them again if you didn't highlight.
I always need a highlighter with me whenever I'm reading - bike magazines, mail, books, instructions, work orders at work - I find it saves me a lot of time if I can read one or two words instead of the whole think. When reading books and magazines I often come across a sentence or phrase that summarizes what would take me a long, drawn-out blog post (such as this one) to get across.
The first thing I highlighted in this book was "Facility at using this frame depends on two things: knowing the principles of design, and the experience that comes from taking photos regularly." (Freeman, p9). I'd actually been thinking about that recently. Nothing can substitute for experience, including education - in everything. Watching "Bike Skills" videos doesn't make you a good rider - riding your bike makes you a good rider. Passing the A+ with good grades doesn't make you a good tech, working as a tech makes you a good tech. Reading about using your camera doesn't make you a god photographer - taking pictures makes you a good photographer - which reminds me of something I said higher up as well about applying knowledge. A lot of people in my photography class at school got good marks on the tests - they had studied and learned what depth of field and chromatic aberration were, but when it came to the assignments they didn't know where to start. What's the point of having knowledge if you don't know how to use it? This was even more evident in computer science class. Some people thought that if the studied the syntax and structures they would pass the test - but computer science exams were always biased heavily towards application - usually 75% programming and 25% theory. A lot of people dropped out of computer science - the remainders got good marks and never bothered to study. If you can do the labs without the TA having to hold your hand you can pass the exam no problem.
And once again I have gone way off track. Wasn't this supposed to be about my ride yesterday?
I was going to go riding again today, but felt knackered - I need to start going to bed earlier.
Distance: 47.9 kmTime (total): 4:09
Time (moving): 2:33
No comments:
Post a Comment