[Leica] Trying to catch up

[Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway)]

Hi Ted:

Thanks for the further comments... much appreciated.

Jim, "Almost all I know I learned in Art School" Hemenway

P.S. I learned the rest unloading coffee ships, (only two times, whew) 
and boxcars in San Francisco and Oakland. ;-)
ILWU late '60s.



Ted Grant wrote:

> Jim Hemenway offered:
> 
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Trying to catch up
> 
>  
> 
> 
>>>More often than not, a good composition has one place, (usually not in the
> 
> center) which catches the viewer's eye and then brings it on a little trip
> through the whole of the image, and finally returns the eye to the starting
> point.
> 
>  
> 
> Here that place is the point where the curving branch on the right meets 
> the
> trunk of the sapling. That branch then leads the eye down to the bottom
> right corner of the image where it can leave the photo... I agree, that's
> not good.
> 
>  
> 
> Otherwise the eye moves along the bottom, climbs the right side area,
> traverses the leaves across the top, and again meets the smooth background
> on the right side.
> 
>  
> 
> I took a second shot with more DOF, but decided on the softer background of
> this image.
> 
>  
> 
> I don't think of you as a "smart ass", so to answer your very fair 
> question,
> I shot it because the lighting caught my eye and I was enamored of the soft
> colors and the atmosphere.
> 
> Thanks for looking and for commenting.
> 
> Jim, "I might be right" Hemenway  ;-)
> 
>  
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> WOW!! :-) That's some compositional motivation breakdown! :-) Sure have to
> give you credit big time for the explanation above. :-) Good on you! :-)
> 
> 
>>>I shot it because the lighting caught my eye and I was enamored of the
> 
> soft colors and the atmosphere.
> 
>  
> 
> BINGO!!! 
> 
> It's right here >> the lighting caught my eye<< was the main motivation to
> shoot! Sure the other stuff had a bit to do with it, but!
> 
> We as photographers generally relate to light as a triggering reason to
> shoot, certainly far more often than we realize. The "light effect" catches
> our eyes which in some cases makes the scene look better than it really is.
> And we press, "click!" 
> 
> But when we show the picture to others later, or we do a hard nose look
> during the edit we often ask, "Why did I shoot this?" Trust me, been there
> done it more times than you can imagine. And no amount of analytical
> analysis will make it work. Even putting the image in a dark cupboard for
> six months wont make it any better! ;-)
> 
>  Yet the light is still the "prime motivation" even when there isn't a real
> grab your gut content. I've often said to myself, "Oh man look at the
> light!" But that's it, an appreciation of the light effect. Unfortunately
> with "no subject content" to go along with it.
> 
> By the same token reacting to light and making a subject error is far 
> better
> than not re-acting or seeing the light at all. Quite simply because, some
> folks wouldn't see fine lighting if they were hit in the head with a brick!
> 
> In this case even with your wonderful composition description the light was
> the motivation to shoot, the other stuff ? Well Ok you explained yerself
> very well! :-) :-) 
> 
> ted
> 
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>