Boris ... I'm not advocating nor arguing against what was written in the article. Someone pointed it out me and it seemed that it might be of interest to some here on the list. I put up a pointer to it ...
Make what you will of the article. Take from it what you wish, discard what doesn't suit you or your style of photography. I will say this, though, there is much to be said for a considered approach to making photographs. I have spent a year on making a shot of one mural - waiting for the light to be right. Once the light was right, I made almost 100 exposures of the subject, using different lenses, moving closer or further, shooting from different angles, using different films, color, B&W, and so on. Why wait so long? Well, at some times of the year the sun was too high in the sky, and unsightly shadows were cast on the wall. The time of year when the sun was lower created harsh contrasts and shadows on other parts of the mural at certain times of the day, so waiting for the right time of day and light was important. Some times the light was right on the mural but objects in the background were not right. After a while I got to know what the best time of day was, and then, when all was right, I went to work. Going out with the idea of making a single exposure is an exercise in training your eye, in making you think more about what you're photographing. It's an idea advocated by many successful photographers, just as is shooting more than one frame of a scene. But in order to know if the scene itself is worthy, you have to be able to recognize it, Going out with a "single frame" mentality is one way to hone the skill needed to recognize a good scene. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Boris Liberman > Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > http://wilson.dynu.net/dilution.asp > > Strange I should say, but yesterday it just refused to open, this > page... Even more fascinating, just after I closed the browser and > started writing this e-mail, I realized I wanted to open the page again > - 404 No such Domain... The Matrix... > > Anyway, to the subject... > > I can hear you and the author of an article, Shel. There're some things > that I think are left unmentioned there... How come "artist Thomas > Moran" came along with "photographer William Henry Jackson"? Somehow I > am sure these two guys were talking to each other... I don't have much > knowledge in history of photography, but I suspect that "photographer > William Henry Jackson" had some art background... > > In other words, let's assume that when I was in Norway, Jostein would > set himself a goal to make me shoot as few frames as possible with as > high percentage of top levels keepers as it was possible on location. > So, Jostein, with all his knowledge of Norway's nature and with all his > knowledge of photography, that does exceeds mine, would restrain me from > clicking and clicking, say, by looking into my viewfinder each time > before I'd click... Somehow I am sure it would be amazing experience to > me... Perhaps later, I would not invite him to Israel, unless he would > agree to completely reciprocate :-). > > Jostein, I took my trip to Norway only as an example, don't be offended, > I meant no offense... > > Shel, I am not trying to advocate shutter happy fellows... But I think > that there are different yet valid approaches to photography. Remember, > quite a few times you were asking me "Boris, have you tried other > angles? Boris how many frames you shot on that location?"... > > What is true is that one has to approach photography with true heart. > Otherwise, of course, most of one's work will end up either in family > album never opened again or in trash bin. > > To give you another example. I have a co-worker... Just a programmer > like myself. He has rather old Nikon 3MP point and shoot. I must say he > has a great eye. He's been showing us his stuff from the travels - some > of the images just shine... Probably just a half dozen from each of his > vacations. By the way, I think he will be buying either *istDL or *istDS > quite soon... (I had to tie that to Pentax some how, hadn't I?) Does it > mean that he was lucky he passed by this and that scene during his > travel? Does it mean that "photographer William Henry Jackson" would > produce better shot? The answer to both questions - "definite may be"... > Still, I think the guy has dormant talent... > > Shel, you have great eye for starting very fascinating disputes... And > naturally, that's a compliment :-). > > Boris > >
