ben sheares revisited

Jan 16, 2006 01:34

I know I posted a photo of the Sheares Bridge circa 2003. But that photo has long since been lost, most of you didn't see it anyway - and most importantly, I probably wouldn't have taken it the same way today. So let's see how our old friend's doing.

I'm quite pleased with how this one turned out:


Read more... )

sg, photos

Leave a comment

Comments 14

queerbychoice January 15 2006, 19:04:09 UTC
These are nice, but I am a color addict and the withdrawal symptoms interfere a bit with my enjoyment of them. Did something clash badly and cause you to drain all the color out in an effort to salvage the scene?

Reply

rekraft January 16 2006, 07:12:53 UTC
Did something clash badly and cause you to drain all the color out in an effort to salvage the scene?

Er, no. I like black and white!

The previous photo I took of it was in colour, and it didn't turn out half bad either. But I thought the first picture in particular worked nicely in monochrome, with all the texture and shade and geometricity going on. Oh, and they were originally taken in B & W, which isn't the same as draining colour out after taking a photo, because a lot of nuances tend to get lost in the conversion from colour to B & W.

Reply

queerbychoice January 16 2006, 07:47:05 UTC
I don't think I'll ever "get" black and white. It seems so arbitrary to me, so much based on a sheer fluke of certain outdated technology that previously couldn't handle color. I feel like if people are going to go around taking pictures with an unnatural absence of color, they should equally frequently also go around taking pictures in color-negative, and color-shifted, and dramatically increased saturation, and all sorts of other variations. But no, they take pictures in black and white far more often than any of those other things. I can't understand it.

Reply

rekraft January 16 2006, 16:27:13 UTC
I feel like if people are going to go around taking pictures with an unnatural absence of color,

But it isn't as if colour is always reproduced accurately or naturally by most cameras anyway, digital or otherwise. Besides liking the aesthetics of it, black and white photography is challenging - one needs a far better understanding of light, tone and contrast to pull it off, and a lot of things that work in colour cannot be pulled off in black and white.

they should equally frequently also go around taking pictures in color-negative, and color-shifted, and dramatically increased saturation,

But all these other variations typically only involve a spot of photoshopping or gimping, unless we're talking about lomography, or really going back to the darkroom. Black and white photography is probably the most accessible and versatile of all these variations.

Reply


kaidude January 16 2006, 12:44:40 UTC
Methinks the first pic would look awesome if the lighting is more 'noir' - the shadows and all. Perhaps a point for me to KIV if I ever pop by there the next time.

Anyhow, that's actually a nice peaceful stretch.

Reply

rekraft January 16 2006, 16:12:42 UTC
Darker like the second pic, you mean? Hm, maybe you oughta drop by there and come up with your own interpretation of it too. :]

Anyway, here's an alternative take which I briefly considered posting instead - a little darker, tonally more similar to my usual photos, but I kinda like the silvery light of the first. I thought the bike would be nice at first, but decided in the end there were too many things going on in there.


... )

Reply


kaidude January 17 2006, 16:55:07 UTC
Hmm, yeah, I do like the shadows and colors of this 2nd pic more, though the composition of the first one had great impact. Suggestion: if you feel comfortable enough, lie on your back or go really low and shoot from that angle, methinks it would throw up some interesting dynamics - such a massive concrete structure.

Reply

rekraft January 17 2006, 17:18:12 UTC
Do it, Kai, do it!! :]

Yeah, I was going for composition with the first one. I did think the tones on the second pic were a bit too heavy-handed, but it might be that our monitors are calibrated differently or something.

Reply

kaidude January 21 2006, 13:39:53 UTC
Ha, why me? Why not you? *mutual egging on* Say, I really gotta step out of the house more [and not just to school] one of these days.

Yeah, agree on the monitors thing... I'm sure if I view it in school, on one of the Macs, things might be a bit different.

Reply

rekraft January 21 2006, 18:14:13 UTC
Wot mutual egging? You're the one who needs to get out of the house more. I've already done that bloddy bridge twice! :P

Ok, if you can distinguish X, Y and Z, and ideally A, B and C as well, you shouldn't be missing anything:


... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up