> From: Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > only partly so - > My eyes can't take in the whole picture at once at the size it is on my > monitor... > and my eyes just go from left to right. No matter what I'm looking at - > The left side of an open magazine, the left side of a room when I enter it - > and I'm left handed -- but I did really think it might have been something that > had it's roots in the way were were guided when young.
I think it has more to with other things than whether a person had religious training. Based on your thoughts, might not the Chinese or Japanese start looking at a photo from the top. Frank noted that he may start looking at a photo from any point. You tend to look at things starting from the left side, I'm drawn to the right side unless looking for something specific. When I skim a magazine, as when in the Drs waiting room, rarely do I look at the left side pages unless I'm reading an article that's on the left side. > > > Yes, I went to Hebrew school, but I > > also went to public school. One fosters reading from the right, the other > > from the left. I suppose that might mean I always start looking at photos > > from the center <LOL> > > Ah - now all is clear! <lol> > > > > > > > Bill, I believe, noted that he started his viewing on the right side of the > > pic. This flies in the face of a couple of theories put forth here. > > Yup. But my particular eye problems probably contribute to how bright and > therefore distracting, the leftside of the picture is. On my monitor the > display is so white that it just leaps out at me. Not something Ive ever > noticed before in your stuff, btw. Mostly I print dark, work a lot more with middle tones and blacks. Of course, rarely am i photographing something white. The real world, life on the streets, natural scenes like landscapes, don't contain much white, up in Zone 8 or 9, not in large, continuous areas, anyway. I don't think you'll notice much of anyone's work with large areas of white or in the higher luminance ranges. > > > > > The beauty of a photo is that one can start viewing anywhere, and just let > > the eyes wander through the photograph at will, stopping here and there to > > examine a detail, moving back to encompass the entire print, averting one's > > eyes and then coming back for a second look. > > One can, but one doesn't - I mean I really think it is a physiological thing > in part. You don't ... others may, and others do. > > I tend to see people first and foremost, in any photo. Even when looking > > at a landscape I quickly scan to see if there are any people in the frame, > > and am generally disappointed when i find none, even though none are > > expected. > > > > Shel > > Thats a little different, I think - but I, of course, quickly scan to see if > there is any text :) > > I think bruning in the stuff on the left and bringing up contrast on the people > might > improve things. I don't think Frank and I are the only ones who read left to > right. But Frank already stated that he may start viewing a photograph from any point in the image. So, of the four people who have commented on this point, you're the only one who generally (always?) starts the viewing process on the left side. Not that it's wrong any more than it's right for me to want to see people in photos .... > I'm only being picky because it is an inheirently interesting subject and shot > but you probably realize that Far less interesting than many other photos I've made. Were I to lose the negative it wouldn't bother me a bit, unlike if I lost other negatives. Kind regards from the cold, dark blue state of California Shel
