Hello paul,
Sunday, January 4, 2004, 6:01:21 PM, you wrote:
> Interesting, but not a lot about digital in here....??
> paul sav
As a contributor who probably has more experience with an artist's
brush and canvas rather than a digital camera, my contribution may be
not one of a purist, but I think I have to disagree with you.
The digital revolution - hardware together with processing software -
makes it so much easier to repeat all the compositional tricks that I
learned in the darkroom many years ago - changing perspectives,
composition, colour - we know them all of course, and can now
manipulate them without spashing about in the dark. Also with cameras
which can take hundreds of shots at a single loading, and downloaded
at effectively zero cost, a more blunderbus approach to capturing
images can be pursued.
Therefore I feel that the link between composition and digital
photography is new and changing.
As an artist, I think I know when a picture is well composed or
balanced. Just as one can look for harmony in music. Yes, there are
trends - John Constable's pictures are, in my view beautifully
composed, if perhaps dated.
I would suggest that at one stage it is necessary to teach composition
- especially if one is to produce art commercially. The punters
usually have clear ideas about what constitutes good art (and
photography?). Their tastes can be very conservative! We cannot
always afford to disagree, and at the very least it is nice to be able
to predict them.
Don Lodge
--
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===============================================================
GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
