Category Archives: Part one From that moment onwards

Research point: Part One Reviews by Campany and Colberg

Leave a reply

Brief
Read the reviews on Thomas Ruffs Jpegs by Campany and Colberg, and if you haven’t already done so, use them to begin the Research section of your learning log. Try to pick out the key points made by each writer.
If you wish, you could add a green grab of an image from Ruffs Jpeg series, and one or two of your own.
Write about 300 words.

At first glance both reviews seem to be saying something completely different but both reviewers appreciate Ruff’s work even if, for different reasons.

Colberg seems to have doubts about the relevance of the pixels and feels that they do not necessarily add anything to what he already thinks of as beautiful images. He does, however, give Ruff full credit for pushing the boundaries of photography but wonders if the concept itself is thin. He also doubts the reasoning behind the large prints, suggesting that it might be a bit  pretentious”. On the other hand, he has great praise for the images when printed in book form and for Ruff’s work in general and admits that he may be just have been expecting too much.

It was quite difficult to work out quite what Campany was trying to say in his review which was very wordy and hard to understand. He clearly likes to make contradictory statements in a single sentence presumably believing that this adds merit to the prose. Unlike Colberg, he does believe the pixels play a large part in the impact that the images have. He also highlights the archival grid from which the images came. He comments rightly on the fact that we currently see pixels negatively rather than as something that could add to the image and gives Ruff some credit for changing our response. He likens Ruff’s pixels to photographic grain, in the sense that grain changed from an unwanted artefact to a useful quality. But the example he gives of grain changing the feel of a photo is one in which it was used accidentally, whereas I presume we are to assume that Ruff’s use of pixels is deliberate. Campany believes that the viewer can only fully appreciate what Ruff is trying to do if one views them in their normal photographic state, then in the large pixelated state, and then back again and suggests that this rationality and irrationality has “something of the character of modern life”.

There are a couple of common themes throughout both reviews considering they seem to be at generally at different ends of a spectrum; they both admire Ruff’s work itself and his ability to push photographic boundaries.

Exercise 1.4 Frame

Leave a reply

Brief
Take a good number of shots, composing each shot within a single section of the viewfinder grid. Don’t bother about the rest of the frame! Use any combination of the grid section, subject and viewpoint you choose.
Select six or eight images that you feel work both individually and as a set and present them as a single composite image. Add to your learning log together with technical information such as camera settings and two or three lines containing your thoughts and observations.

Creating a set of coherent images is a something I find difficult. I am hoping that as part of this exercise it will start to help me unravel my confusion.

I found it virtually impossible to ignore the rest of the frame! So much so that I decided to force it by creating several paper templates that covered all but one area of the viewfinder when in live view. This was so much easier!

Camera: Nikon D800 Manual Mode 24-70mm Nikon lens

First attempt below using the templates
There is definitely a feeling of coalescence in the set of images. They were taken in a small area, so the same materials and some objects appear in more than one images, although they are being shown from a different angle or focal length.

 

 

 

In my final attempt below I think the some of the images are too similar. For example the tree and grass in In Image 1and 6.

I was quite surprised at how the images turned out. In particular image 5. I placed the middle tree  in the central portion of the frame which meant I was ignoring the rest of the trees, bikes, people to the left and right and the, roof (top) and paving slabs (bottom). The shadows have framed the central strip, with the trees, bikes and people making it a far more interesting shot with plenty of movement along the horizontal line.
Image 4 was also a pleasant surprise with the perspective lines (Paving stones, bikes and trees) leading the eye from the red child carrier (point) into the distance. The eye is kept in the frame on the left by the strong vertical line of the building and shadow.

I don’t think they all work particularly well as individual images, but I think they work as a set.

Apart from image 7 with the woman walking out of the frame on the left, there were surprisingly no unsightly random unwanted objects in each frame!

Composite image

I enjoyed this exercise but found ignoring the rest of the frame quite challenging. I ended up using a paper template over the live view panel with different sections removed.

I think it has helped me somewhat with my understanding of what makes a coherent set of images, but I think I may have a lot more to learn and understand about this aspect of photography.

 

Exercise 1.3 (2) Line

Leave a reply

Brief
Take a number of shots using lines to flatten the pictorial space. To avoid the effects of perspective,

the sensor/film plane should be parallel to the subject and you may like to try a high viewpoint. Modern architecture offers strong lines and dynamic diagonals, and zooming in can help to create simpler, more abstract compositions.
Review your shots from both parts of Exercise 1.3. How do the different lines relate to the frame?

It was quite difficult to get the sensor parallel to the frame as some of the scenes were quite high. I didn’t crop any of the images which allowed me to see in more detail if there were any perspective effects. In both images the eye is kept within the frame along the lines which os the opposite to the effect in the previous exercise.
For image one, the steps and wall on the left (coming towards me) could have been flatter if I had moved a bit more to the left when I took the shot.
Image 2 was an easy one to take as the bricks started from the ground and I could get close enough to them to get the sensor parallel. When I reviewed the image I wondered if I should have taken the shot with a bit of fill flash to remove the shadows. I also think that by rotating the camera I would have produced a more interesting abstract image

I decided to go and retake image 1 and 2. (below)
There is still a bit of distortion for Image 1a (drain pipe leaning to the right) The problem seems to be, not being able to get far enough away or high enough to get the sensor parallel. The eye is still kept within the frame.
I noticed that in image 2a, although I think it makes a more interesting image, the eye is not kept in the frame as much as it is for Image 1. I believe this may be because in Image 1 the horizontal and vertical lines act like bars, stopping the eye leaving the frame. For image 1a the eye is free to go along the lines and out of the frame, although not as quickly or as effectively as when using perspective lines.

With both image 3 and 4 it was difficult to get far enough away to get the sensor parallel. There was either something in the way behind me or I ended up with subjects included in the frame that took away the flattening effect of the image as a whole. However, In both cases I had nice vertical lines to match up with the frame so that I could judge how flat the scene was. I think both of them have a small amount of perspective effect going on but not enough to completely spoil the flattening effect.

 

Image 5 was a scene that caught my eye as I was on my way home. Lots of perpendicular lines framed by the roof and the paving stones.

When I reviewed my shots from both parts of this (Exercise Line 1&2) it is clear that the flattened images cause the eye to move around the image and along the lines but not out of the  frame. The eye seems to move along the horizontal and vertical, being almost constrained by the lines. This is in complete contrast with the converging lines which take the eye all the way to the end of the line without coming back. There was an exception for one  of my shots (6) where there was an object towards the end of the line which stopped the eye on the chairs and brought it back into the frame. This image was being taken for the “Point” exercise so the lengthening perspective for the fence is not that strong, however it still leads the eye to the chairs and if they hadn’t been there the eye would have moved out of the frame.

 

Exercise 1.3 (1) Line

Leave a reply

Brief
Take a number of shots using lies to create a sense of depth. Shooting with a wide angle lens (zooming out) strengthens a diagonal line by giving it more length within the frame. The effect is dramatically accentuated if you choose a viewpoint close to the line.

I took image 1 first and wondered if the line would appear lengthened if a took portrait shot instead of landscape. There is indeed less to detract the eye from moving down the line and into the distance and therefore appears longer. In the brief it suggests that the lengthening effect is dramatically accentuated if the viewpoint is close to the line. In both these shots the camera is sitting on the wood itself.

In image 3 the tractor tyre marks on the grass help to to create a sense of depth, pulling the eye down the track into the converging lines created by the hedge.
In image 4 I once again got close to the line (fence) to accentuate the depth. A rather distracting bollard on the left though (more “points” sneaking into my Line exercise!)

 

I really enjoyed this exercise but trying to look for points and lines at the same time to cover both exercises caused me some issues and I think I discovered quite a bit about how lines and points can work together well.

 

Exercise 1.2 Point

Leave a reply

Brief
Take three of four photographs in which a single point is placed in different parts of the frame. When composing the shots use these three rules:
. the place of the point shouldn’t be too obvious(such as right in the middle)
. the composition should hold tension and balanced (the golden section or rule of thirds)
. the point should be easy to see)
Evaluate the shots according to these rules and select which one you think works best.

Then take a few more shots without any rules, just being aware of the relationship of the point of the frame. Without rules how can you evaluate the shots? That will be a key question throughout the whole degree programme.

I have often wondered what makes a “great photo” i believe that it can be many things such as perfect technical image, an image of historical or world importance, an iconic journalistic image, a beautiful artistic image or indeed any image that provokes some sort of emotion or thought.
Rules in photography or art seem to be there to help the artist to achieve one or more of the above. I suppose its all down to what the artist wants the image to convey.
I have to say that I love the rule of thirds and now find myself using them unconsciously. I love the impact they can have on what could be inane, static images and the way they can help to provoke thought and imagination. I’m a great fan of images that only tell a bit of the story leaving the rest up to the imagination.

When I first looked at completing this exercise I thought it might be worthwhile just taking a point (pool ball!) on a relatively blank background (pool table!) to get me started with the idea of point in a particular place in the frame, and what difference it might make without the influence of foreground or background items. I noticed that the shadows were influencing the eye but decided no to try and get a completely blank background as they were making a statement in themselves.
Points 1,2,3 and 4 are balanced, as is point 5 which appears more static. The eye goes straight to it without any need to look anywhere else in the frame. Point 3 causes the eye to move up and to the right but I think this may be due to the shadow. Point 1 is a bit uncomfortable because the placing and the shadows cause the eye to move up and to the right and out of the frame.

Looking at one of my favourite photographers , Anja Neideringhause, I found a couple of images showing that where something is placed in the frame can make a big difference in how the eye perceives it and how the eye moves across the image.
In Flag Rebel (2011) the eye goes straight to the man wrapped in the flag which is situated on the intersection of the lower left grids (rule of thirds). It is also the strongest colour and immediately attracts the eye. The eye then moves above to the car, then to the car on the right and back to the man.
In Afghanistan’s Record Opium Year (2013) the boy in the bottom right hand corner is almost out of the shot.  Although placing him in this part of the frame is uncomfortable because there is no space for him to move into, it works. I was left not knowing if he had a long way to go or if he was heading for something that was just out of shot. His posture tells me that it may be the former. The lines in the image however distract from the boy and the eye is led up and down the lines, to the left and right, where, if the viewer hadn’t already seen the boy they would see him now. There is a lot of movement in this shot and a lot of things that take a while to see such as the mountains and the sky.

When I went out with my camera looking for scenes that had a “point” in them I was surprised how confused I got about what constitutes a point.  I decided to look for both Point and Line shots (for the next exercise)
Looking for “Point” shots started out being far more difficult than I imagined! For the first 30-45 minutes of walking around, I really didn’t see anything that constituted a point at all.
I looked again at the brief and took on board the fact that the point should be small within the frame and easy to see. I realised that the things that tended to catch my eye were either a strong colour, or bright against a darker background.
I decided to leave “Point” for a while and look for lines. Thats when I started seeing “Points” (typical!)
In the image below I was looking to create a sense of depth using a wide angled lens to shoot the lines on the ground and the row of pillars on the left (for the next exercise). When reviewing the shot I noticed the bike with the red child carrier to the left of the frame (Point)  and a person wearing a red T-shirt in the centre (Point). I noticed that in this shot, the eyes are drawn down the lines then left and right between the 2 points. It struck me that points and lines together might give an interesting dimension to images that I hadn’t conciously thought about before.

Still looking for points, i wondered if 2 points were very close together would they act as one, as long as they were small in the frame and easy to see. I had seen these 2 small signs on what I had taken initially as a fairly blank background. When I looked at the shots I realised that the images ended up with lots of movement around the points and then along all the lines. In the first image where the 2 points are in the centre They do appear to be acting as one but their effect as a point is being disrupted somewhat by the strong horizontal and vertical lines. Placing these points in the middle seems to be less static because of the lines than they might be if the background was completely blank. The eye is down to the centre then along the horizontal and vertical lines. In the second image the effect is the same but although the eye is drawn to the points it then moves left and right and along the converging lines to the edge of the image. It also seems to be drawn back again by the points, so doesn’t actually flow out of the image.

My final images for this exercise were all taken in the same location using 2 chairs as my point. I feel the shots worked well in relation to the brief. The only thing that made a difference is the fence and trees behind the chairs which span the width of the frame. I think, in the same way that the horizontal and vertical lines affected in the above images, the same effect is occurring in these. There is movement in some of the images that I believe would otherwise be more static.

In the first 4 images below, I have placed them according to the “rules”
Image 1 causes the eye to go from the point (chairs) to the right where there is space for  the eye to move into. The trees on the left give it some balance.
Image 2 I find less balanced and appealing. This may be because we read from left to right and the eyes are being sent to the left. It is also not as balanced, with a bit of a building and clump of trees on the left which are reducing the impact of the point.
Image 3 feels nicely balanced with room for the eyes to move to the left. There is a sense of space given by both the sky and the sand or the arena.
Image 4. I took this additional image which is almost exactly the same as image 3. I was curious to see if the object (drinking trough) on the left, in line with the chairs would change how the image is viewed. It did make a difference and I found my eyes bouncing from the chair to the object and back. This wasn’t the case in the image without the trough.
I think image 3 works best. There is a sense of space and movement with a nice proportion of both sky, sand and trees.
The image that I like the best is image 8! Once the eye has moved from the sky to the darker are of grass and trees there is a hint of something about to happen (expectation) but not enough sand to work out what it is. The chairs are centred, giving an impression that something very organised and regimental might be going on.
The arena is used for dressage practice which by its nature is very organised and regimental!

In the next 5 images, I tried not to think about where I was placing the chairs. It was indeed quite hard not to place the point according to the “rules”
Image 5. The chairs are very close to the bottom edge of the frame and are not as prominent as they are in the previous images. The sky has become the focus.
Image 6. The chairs are close the the right hand edge of the frame which might have been less of a problem if they had been facing to the left. One thing that is happening is that the fence is leading the eye to the point and and back again thus stopping it from leaving the frame.
Images 7 and 8. The chairs are centred on the vertical with one image having them centred on the horizontal as well and in image 8 being close to the bottom of the frame. There is very little movement in image 7, although there is a sense of space in front of the chairs. If it wasn’t for the fence leading the eye along the horizontal I think the image would be quite static.

 

Bibliography

Niedringhaus, A. (2011) Flag Rebel [Internet] Available from: https://www.anjaniedringhaus.com/image/51988382032 [Accessed 20th May 2019]

Niedringhaus, A. (2013) Afghanistan’s Record Opium Year  [Internet] Available from: https://www.anjaniedringhaus.com/image/67125512817 [Accessed 20th May 2019]

Exercise 1.1 The Instrument

Leave a reply