Toni Ahvenainen
Ice swimming
Season of Photographic Eye - picture 11
Week 50, Wednesday
The photographic eye, which I've been discussing for whole season, is all about learning your own way of seeing things, applying it to your photography in a more conscious way and bringing greater depth & personal style to your photography. The opposite of using the photographic eye are the numerous images we often take which just 'snapshots' or uninteresting in other ways. Now, when it comes to taking interesting images that in some way manifests one's photographic eye, I'll be first one to admit that most of the shots I take are 'snapshots' indeed and only few of many really satisfy me. I find myself often thinking that a good image cannot be just a flat representation of the reality. Instead the photographer has to add something to it by using photographic means which lifts it beyond a snapshot. The obvious following question is, of course, how one should to do that?
At the simplest level adding something to image might be the skillful construction of the image. With a skillful construction I refer to images that are good in both technical and conceptual level. Carefully chosen subject, good exposure and sense of light, satisfying sharpness, correct choice of the used focal length, etc.. While these might sound pretty basic things, I wouldn't underestimate their meaning and sometimes basic things are enough. One should also remember that there are no rules carved into a stone (even the famous rules of third). There are certainly rules, but I would like think them as a flexible repertoire of suggestions that are pretty often broken as well. One also learns his/her own way of translating these rules into photography. Personally I like, for example, to use 50mm lens (equivalent of 75mm on a full frame) for many pictures because it gives me a bit of telecompression and lets me often isolate convenient slices from reality. I have learned to translate many of the photography basics around this focal length and it shows in my photography. That being said, I often feel I would need to know the basics much better to be able to come with a skillful photograph from any situation.
Another way to way to lift photographs to another level is to create images that evoke reactions. (Indeed, Captain Obvious!) Snapshots of course don't evoke much of reactions, but then again there are loads of technically great photographs that don't evoke those reactions either. It's because we become tired of seeing similar images, visual motifs and tropes - even if they are perfectly realized. While 'the perfect sunset' and many others are old clichés, there are also new ones created everyday as well. Personally I feel, for example, that certain kind of edgy wide-angle landscapes with post processed skies and distant horizon have become a bit too widespread to evoke reactions anymore (you see these often at the cover of photography magazines). They are admired from technical point of view, but their quality as photographs are reduced because they have become new clichés. Personally I like to, just like many others, add a bit of dark sublime character in to my photographs when possible, but I make sure that I work on a border of interpretation where it is not so explicitly pronounced. Often just a little bit of underexposing the scene to make shadows and contrast stronger is enough - if the subject is already fitting for it.
Where things get hard, is trying to create pictures that offer more than one level of experience. This is the most powerful way to bring greater depth and own vision into photographs, but it is also perhaps the hardest. Sometimes one can have a concept in mind which will create another level on interpretation, like juxtaposing different elements for example. Sometimes it happens by accident and is only noticed when pictures are viewed later on from the computer screen. When I create 'a concept-image' I have often already taken that image before without the concept and my idea springs up when viewing it from the screen. Some image might be perfect in my mind if it had lemons in it, for example. If the concept is doable and sounds like a fun idea, I pack my packs and go to take it again with a new idea. Some of the best images I've done have required at least couple of tries on different days to get it right, but it's most often worth it.
Ps. I haven't explained much of the posted images as they have been pretty self-explanatory. This one, however, benefits from little explanation. For this picture I went to local ice swimming house and while it isn't quite a street photography, it isn't very far from it either: the ice swimming house is situated very close to central and it happened to have more traffic than the main street. Before swimmers descend into almost zero degrees water they warm up in sauna. This particular day there were so many of them that they were in lines walking down to chilly water.
Year of the Alpha – 52 Weeks of Sony Alpha Photography: www.yearofthealpha.com
Ice swimming
Season of Photographic Eye - picture 11
Week 50, Wednesday
The photographic eye, which I've been discussing for whole season, is all about learning your own way of seeing things, applying it to your photography in a more conscious way and bringing greater depth & personal style to your photography. The opposite of using the photographic eye are the numerous images we often take which just 'snapshots' or uninteresting in other ways. Now, when it comes to taking interesting images that in some way manifests one's photographic eye, I'll be first one to admit that most of the shots I take are 'snapshots' indeed and only few of many really satisfy me. I find myself often thinking that a good image cannot be just a flat representation of the reality. Instead the photographer has to add something to it by using photographic means which lifts it beyond a snapshot. The obvious following question is, of course, how one should to do that?
At the simplest level adding something to image might be the skillful construction of the image. With a skillful construction I refer to images that are good in both technical and conceptual level. Carefully chosen subject, good exposure and sense of light, satisfying sharpness, correct choice of the used focal length, etc.. While these might sound pretty basic things, I wouldn't underestimate their meaning and sometimes basic things are enough. One should also remember that there are no rules carved into a stone (even the famous rules of third). There are certainly rules, but I would like think them as a flexible repertoire of suggestions that are pretty often broken as well. One also learns his/her own way of translating these rules into photography. Personally I like, for example, to use 50mm lens (equivalent of 75mm on a full frame) for many pictures because it gives me a bit of telecompression and lets me often isolate convenient slices from reality. I have learned to translate many of the photography basics around this focal length and it shows in my photography. That being said, I often feel I would need to know the basics much better to be able to come with a skillful photograph from any situation.
Another way to way to lift photographs to another level is to create images that evoke reactions. (Indeed, Captain Obvious!) Snapshots of course don't evoke much of reactions, but then again there are loads of technically great photographs that don't evoke those reactions either. It's because we become tired of seeing similar images, visual motifs and tropes - even if they are perfectly realized. While 'the perfect sunset' and many others are old clichés, there are also new ones created everyday as well. Personally I feel, for example, that certain kind of edgy wide-angle landscapes with post processed skies and distant horizon have become a bit too widespread to evoke reactions anymore (you see these often at the cover of photography magazines). They are admired from technical point of view, but their quality as photographs are reduced because they have become new clichés. Personally I like to, just like many others, add a bit of dark sublime character in to my photographs when possible, but I make sure that I work on a border of interpretation where it is not so explicitly pronounced. Often just a little bit of underexposing the scene to make shadows and contrast stronger is enough - if the subject is already fitting for it.
Where things get hard, is trying to create pictures that offer more than one level of experience. This is the most powerful way to bring greater depth and own vision into photographs, but it is also perhaps the hardest. Sometimes one can have a concept in mind which will create another level on interpretation, like juxtaposing different elements for example. Sometimes it happens by accident and is only noticed when pictures are viewed later on from the computer screen. When I create 'a concept-image' I have often already taken that image before without the concept and my idea springs up when viewing it from the screen. Some image might be perfect in my mind if it had lemons in it, for example. If the concept is doable and sounds like a fun idea, I pack my packs and go to take it again with a new idea. Some of the best images I've done have required at least couple of tries on different days to get it right, but it's most often worth it.
Ps. I haven't explained much of the posted images as they have been pretty self-explanatory. This one, however, benefits from little explanation. For this picture I went to local ice swimming house and while it isn't quite a street photography, it isn't very far from it either: the ice swimming house is situated very close to central and it happened to have more traffic than the main street. Before swimmers descend into almost zero degrees water they warm up in sauna. This particular day there were so many of them that they were in lines walking down to chilly water.
Year of the Alpha – 52 Weeks of Sony Alpha Photography: www.yearofthealpha.com