Here’s a quiet scene ― what shot might you take & why?

[Heroique]

Below is sleepy marina w/ a curving jetty in mid-day light. Nothing special.

Now that we have that out of the way, let’s do something different…

Let’s say you walk into this scene w/ your equipment. You’ve never been here. You know nothing about the immediate area. What photo possibilities, if any, spring to mind first, and what helps you explore the possibilities here for a shot?

For example – where might you set-up your tripod? Here, on the jetty, on the wooden pier, across the lake? What might be your principal subject? What camera, lens, film or accessories might you use? What orientation? Would you wait for better light? Different weather? More action?

Are your habits similar from scene to scene?

In other words, I’m curious how you’d investigate and compose your own shot inside this general type of scene. (I’ve tried to choose one w/ limited possibilities to sharpen the focus.)

Your thought process will be interesting to hear, and might give others some ideas for next time...
;)

Tachi 4x5
Schneider XL 110mm/5.6
Fuji Tungsten 64 (w/ Lee 85b filter)
Epson 4990/Epson Scan

[Heroique]

I’ve tried to choose a scene w/ limited possibilities to sharpen the focus.

I forgot to add this was to help bring-out your original & unique ideas, too.

Ideas to “shake things up” in situations like this.

:rolleyes:

[Diane Maher]

A few quick thoughts on the subject.

I could set up in the same place. I would choose the 5x12 format for this (I don't have a 4x5 anymore). I would definitely use a longer focal length lens to lose the boring sky and the distracting foreground.

I would focus mainly on the pier and that stone wall.

[Ken Lee]

I would return when the lighting was more favorable: morning or early evening. 99% of the Noon shots I see feel like Noon, which has a certain stagnant quality to it in my humble opinion.

[Heroique]

Here’s an approximation of Diane’s 5x12 ratio from this tripod position, plus some magnification to “lengthen” the lens. It was new for me to use this ratio. Now if I could just get the sun lower for Ken. I suppose the sun at lower left would be nice, but low L, R, front, or back would be better than this high, mid-day light.

Sometimes when I arrive at a new and potentially good scene, I just select a quick spot and take a practice shot. That’s what the first shot actually is. Gets me into the scene and thinking better. I also walk around w/o expectations letting things find me.

I did walk out on this jetty for more shots which I’ll eventually scan...

[Stoogley]

Definitely favor the early morning or evening. Or even a day with some light fog.

As for other vantage points and POV, I'd need to see what the other views provide.

I do prefer the reformatted version so far.

[Heroique]

Yes, Diane’s 5x12 format adds potential to this type of scene.

Here’s her ratio once more, but w/ a “longer” lens.

The wooden pier is lost, and so are the vertical mast tops – but the jetty comes to get you, plus its sign is readable. Since the jetty is so close now, I brightened its shadows. I do miss the water’s texture from the very first shot.

[Daniel Stone]

just MY interpretation

8x10 aspect ratio

-Dan

[Heroique]

Nice! I like the minimalism – and regret losing that lonely pole in the variations above.

I should add that I’m less curious about your interpretation of my photo, and more curious about what steps you might take to capture your own photo if you were inside this scene. So ideally, there should be no need to excerpt my photo, which would be my preference anyway. Above, I’ve created new personal images of my own based on Diane’s refreshing building-block ideas, because she surprised me by saying she could use my identical viewpoint; however, what I’ve created from my high-resolution file may not be very representative of what she imagined.

Naturally, my first image is only a fragment of what your “experience” might be if you came upon this scene & considered whether to explore it. Yet, I thought your “initial impression & plan of action” would be interesting to hear, and practically useful, too.

[jnantz]

the masts and mountains behind would be my subject .. no sky and b+w
i'd shoot a little closer and wide open focused infront of the subject.
probably over expose it and over process it as well.
then enlarge ... to soften it. the tallest mast would cut the frame so it is 1/3 + 2/3rds.

[jp]

I'm doing this without reading any other responses, so what I'm writing is what I see in the scene.

I'd probably instantly rule out >1/2 sky scenes because the sky is lacking clouds or interest.

If the camera had sufficient movements, I might get down lower, put on a polarizer, and try to get the yellow flowers in focus along with the boats and have a nice colorful scene with unreal depth of field because of the tilted plane of focus. But I don't do color with LF. I shoot B&W. TMY2 with PMK would be my choice for dealing with the contrast.

I'd then take a little stroll along that pier in the rhs to scout out compositions. Maybe hang out there and shoot a boat leaving or entering the protected harbor with a wide angle lens. Those frames that hold the pier look like an interesting composition, and maybe a narrow DOF photo with one of those would be cool if you could get that large old sail boat with the big bowsprit in the background. Shift would allow you to get the frame the right shape and choose your position for the right background choices. A portrait might be nice with the background from there too.

Then I might walk the jetty. I'd probably get distracted by some cool composition of rocks or small sea life while looking down to watch my step. I'd get a few photos of details on that jetty. If an interesting boat was motoring through, that'd be a nice spot to photograph it from as well.

In addition to normal and wide-ish sharp lenses, a soft focus lens might be nice to put the contrasty scene to good use. Those masts might glow with aura and shadows surrounding hulls might be solid pieces of dark doom in your composition.


Below is sleepy marina w/ a curving jetty in mid-day light. Nothing special.

Now that we have that out of the way, let’s do something different…

Let’s say you walk into this scene w/ your equipment. You’ve never been here. You know nothing about the immediate area. What photo possibilities, if any, spring to mind first, and what helps you explore the possibilities here for a shot?

For example – where might you set-up your tripod? Here, on the jetty, on the wooden pier, across the lake? What might be your principal subject? What camera, lens, film or accessories might you use? What orientation? Would you wait for better light? Different weather? More action?

Are your habits similar from scene to scene?

In other words, I’m curious how you’d investigate and compose your own shot inside this general type of scene. (I’ve tried to choose one w/ limited possibilities to sharpen the focus.)

Your thought process will be interesting to hear, and might give others some ideas for next time...
;)

Tachi 4x5
Schneider XL 110mm/5.6
Fuji Tungsten 64 (w/ Lee 85b filter)
Epson 4990/Epson Scan

[Kirk Gittings]

I personally wouldn't bother with it-too cliched-unless it was for a commercial or editorial assignment. In which case I would try and find a day where the light was more brilliant and maybe try and catch a bost motoring out of the harbor in front of the flowers.

[Heroique]

Then I might walk the jetty. I'd probably get distracted by some cool composition of rocks or small sea life while looking down to watch my step. I'd get a few photos of details on that jetty.

Walking the jetty was the best part. Just like you say, three harbor seals emerged from three different recesses, and jumped into the lake in front of me. Here, among the rocks, were the best viewpoints, I thought – and there was no way I could have imagined how good they were w/o making the stumbling journey w/ my tripod. I fell twice. The stacked rocks offered some cool “near-far” relationships w/ the boats and mountains, but the mid-day light on the rocks was really too harsh.


...try and catch a boat motoring out of the harbor in front of the flowers.

About 2 or 3 boats passed by each hour, so you could compose and wait for the action.

In the distance, on the right side of the jetty, you can see a white boat quickly approaching...

[rdenney]

I'd check to see if there was a better picture in the gift shop postcard rack, and buy it.

Rick "channeling Petronio" Denney

[Asher Kelman]

Heroique,

Unless this is for a memento or for Hallmark™, there's a danger that the color picture becomes just another pretty postcard shot, (while the B&W version lacks contrast in the background and a sense of unity that can make a B&W picture excel.

At least, in a panoramic view, one gets the interesting rock hook, but what does one do, add sky and spend time carving out texture in the hills.

My approach here is to leave my camera and just walk around and make sketches with my digicam or pencil and paper. The idea is to first recognize the obviously pretty sentimental shot and ask how can I depart from that and put my style, my fingerprints on the scenes. I'd look at the ground, the dirt, the plants, the waters edge and keep moving until I'd have walked the entire bay and even gone on that protective curved rock setting.

It might be that it would end up being a macro or a panorama. It has to be something that comes of the reaction between the photographer's heart and the place.

Then I'd make an estimate of the time to take the pictures and turn up with tripod and camera and take the shot. Otherwise, one spends too much time in one place and there's no real spiritual intercourse between you and the being of the place! It might even be that I'd set up the tripod with the composition made except for the folk walking by. At the right time serendipity might complete the picture with the right posture or gesture. In the best of circumstances, if one is fortunate, it should be that someone who sees your picture would see the genetics of it and it's inheritance from your values and techniques. So it cannot be what we say, rather the technique I offer is instead something that might perhaps work with your own esthetics. But first, the place has to be walked!

If it's merely pretty, pleasing and sentimental then anyone with a digital camera has a fair chance of getting that shot too.

Asher

[Daniel Stone]

Nice! I like the minimalism – and regret losing that lonely pole in the variations above.

I should add that I’m less curious about your interpretation of my photo, and more curious about what steps you might take to capture your own photo if you were inside this scene. So ideally, there should be no need to excerpt my photo, which would be my preference anyway. Above, I’ve created new personal images of my own based on Diane’s refreshing building-block ideas, because she surprised me by saying she could use my identical viewpoint; however, what I’ve created from my high-resolution file may not be very representative of what she imagined.

Naturally, my first image is only a fragment of what your “experience” might be if you came upon this scene & considered whether to explore it. Yet, I thought your “initial impression & plan of action” would be interesting to hear, and practically useful, too.


agree to disagree, I guess I mis-understood. Oh well. If I was shooting color(and I'm using slide film 95% of the time now, maybe a sheet or two of c-41), I'd wait until I had less contrast in the scene(so around dusk/sundown). Then use a GND to bring down the sky values(not a CC filter or color grad, just a neutral 2-3 stop). But this is me.

oh... I included that crop of the "lonely pole" just to show what I might have photographed, thought that was what you were requesting

-Dan

[Brian Ellis]

I walk around the area, without carrying equipment or even thinking all that much about a photograph. I just like to get a sense of place. Then after doing that I walk some more, still without equipment but often with a viewing card, and start thinking more about the photographic possibilities. Since I can't walk around the area in which your photograph was made I don't have any idea what I might end up photographing. In general marinas aren't something I usually go to to photograph so I might very well not photograph anything

[Heroique]

I included that crop of the “lonely pole” just to show what I might have photographed, thought that was what you were requesting.

It was! I think it’s a great type of subject when one is careful, and not just from the first photo’s viewpoint. I have an interesting crop of that same pole taken 10 minutes later. Something quite interesting happened to it. It was worth a shot of Velvia. I’ll post it later if it makes sense.

[Heroique]

I’d look at the ground, the dirt, the plants, the waters edge and keep moving until I’d have walked the entire bay and even gone on that protective curved rock setting.


I walk around the area, without carrying equipment or even thinking all that much about a photograph.

Quite effective “plans of action” in my book – very similar to JP’s walk down the jetty, and my own – and a good way to “shake things up” from my post #2, and explore beyond the image described as “nothing special” in post #1, and a “warm-up” shot in post #5.

It occurs to me that in the occasional scouting threads – my favorite type of thread here, as most people know – Asher and Brian’s “state of mind” informs the best posts. It’s a temporary escape of sorts to immediacy, spontaneity, and first bearings.

In contrast, the best of the hilarious posts here (Mike & Rick, for example) show the more common and, I think, less effective approach – an escape from boredom & clichés by escaping to boredom & clichés, while pretending to be “in the know.”

We need to hear from these people, too – or we shouldn’t be reminded of our sanity. ;)

[baronvonaaron]

i think i would have to have someone trigger the shutter right as i leaped and plunged into the water

[Jim Galli]

A beer and a shot? There's nothing there to photograph.

[cyrus]

Frankly, I'd pack up and go home. Does the world need yet another pretty picture of a landscape? THat's something I've been struggling with. But as a sailor, I might look to see if there's a particularly interesting old (wooden?) sailboat there that I can photograph.

[Peter De Smidt]

Wow, so much elitism. Does the world really need any more photographs of any kind? No. But take away all of the things that we don't need and our lives would be pretty drab.

[Steve M Hostetter]

.... I like your ruins on the beach shot!:)

[paulr]

I find the question puzzling, because it's not a scene; it's already a photograph that was distilled from a scene. For someone to to know what they'd have done there requires them to reconstruct all of there based on this one small artifact.

A bit like someone showing you a statue and asking, "what would you have carved out of that rock?"

[Heroique]

Hi Paul, yes, I wanted to address that concern in post #9:

“Naturally, my first image is only a fragment of what your ‘experience’ might be if you came upon this scene & considered whether to explore it. Yet, I thought your initial impression & plan of action would be interesting to hear, and practically useful, too.”

This is an odd thread, but it means to be odd.


...I like your ruins on the beach shot! :)

(Oh, in the “Ruins” thread – thanks Steve, it was a fun day, despite the sunburn.)

[cyrus]

its not a question of elitism, peter, it is a question I've been struggling with personally in my work. I'm actually anguished about it. Sally Mann recently said that if a photo doesn't have any mystery, why bother. Why bother. That's what I've been asking myself everytime I've been composing a shot. Yet another nude, yet another landscape, yet another flower, yet another rusty truck, yet another cliche. What do my photographs "say"? What are they expressing? What should I express? What have I got to say? I'm thinking about this more often nowdays. I think about this whenever I page through my photobook collection too. I was trained to exert extreme discipline in taking and processing/printing images so much so that the process overwhelmed the creativity. As Ive gotten older, I'm less concerned about development curves and zones settings and the discipline of the darkroom.

This has recently led me to engage in more "constructed images" photography, where I not only take photos of things I made but I go nuts with the negative (scratch it, boil it, draw on it, cut it and paste montages together, etc.) instead of "straight" photography. I love watching the horror-filled faces of fellow photographers when they see me drop a negative onto the floor and proceed to stomp on it. I want to break out of this idea that a photo has to capture something "real".

[baronvonaaron]

its not a question of elitism, peter, it is a question I've been struggling with personally in my work. I'm actually anguished about it. Sally Mann recently said that if a photo doesn't have any mystery, why bother. Why bother. That's what I've been asking myself everytime I've been composing a shot. Yet another nude, yet another landscape, yet another flower, yet another rusty truck, yet another cliche. What do my photographs "say"? What are they expressing? What should I express? What have I got to say? I'm thinking about this more often nowdays. I think about this whenever I page through my photobook collection too. I was trained to exert extreme discipline in taking and processing/printing images so much so that the process overwhelmed the creativity. As Ive gotten older, I'm less concerned about development curves and zones settings and the discipline of the darkroom.

This has recently led me to engage in more "constructed images" photography, where I not only take photos of things I made but I go nuts with the negative (scratch it, boil it, draw on it, cut it and paste montages together, etc.) instead of "straight" photography. I love watching the horror-filled faces of fellow photographers when they see me drop a negative onto the floor and proceed to stomp on it. I want to break out of this idea that a photo has to capture something "real".


haha, conversely, I was trained to do just that: to reject meticulous darkroom discipline. unfortunately, I think i'm not clever enough to really glean anything from this practice. so i'm trying to unteach myself and become more meticulous.

my photographic education largely encouraged high concept, and focused less on technical ability. not to say that i didn't have great darkroom mentors of course. i think it made me become bored with most photographic conventions very early on.

[E. von Hoegh]

I'd use 4x5 or 8x10 and do a close up study of the rocks on the breakwater. I loathe marinas as a general thing, and I especially detest power boats of any recent vintage.

[Peter De Smidt]

Obsessing about what one is trying to express could very well be counter-productive. It is taking photographic communication too literally. This type of thinking makes a lot of sense in advertizing photography, but does it in art photography? A picture isn't worth a 1000 words, it's worth something words can't express, or it isn't a very good photograph. Simply try to make pictures that are visually interesting to you. Don't worry about what they are expressing, or if something similar has been done before, or whatever. Leave those considerations to the art historians.

A similar thing can happen with writing. For example, back in college I had a history class in which the entire grade was based on a number of two page papers. Two pages? No problem! Well, the professor (Timothy Breen) gave us a 10 page handout on what not to do. For instance, we were not allowed to use any form of the verb to be, such as is, was.... Adverbs were also verbotten. "If you need an adverb, your verb is too weak!" "Pssst. Bill! He just used a form of "to be"!"

Ok. With this handout in mind, it was very hard to start writing. All the "don'ts" instilled quite a block. I quickly learned that the thing to do was simply to write, not worrying a thing about the rules. As a result, I'd very quickly come up with four or five pages. Once I had the material, I could then go back and start applying the rules and condensing the paper down to two pages full of active verbs and free of non-essential elements. It was a very useful class. Oops. Darn it. Passive voice. Professor Breen's class greatly improved my writing. Oh, no! An adverb!

Getting back to photography, we all must start somewhere, and the best place to start is what we find most visually interesting. After we get some experience, that can change to what will make the most visually interesting photograph. Reflect on whether the photos you made turned out as interesting as you thought they were. Consider how you could've made them more so, and how you might do so in the future. In addition, take the time to look at a lot of photos by others. Figure out which interest you visually the most, and reflect on why they do so and how to get that interest into your own work.

If you regularly and seriously engage in this activity, you will be able to make photographs that interest you more, and since no doubt there are some other people in the wide world that are interested in the same things you are, these people will find your photographs interesting. Don't worry at all about those who aren't interested in your photos, as they can take their own.

My daughter's cello teacher recently told her, "It takes about 10,000 hours of doing something to get really good at it, and so practice, practice, practice!"

[Steve M Hostetter]

Well said Peter! Glad I read all that..:)

[cyrus]

Obsessing about what one is trying to express could very well be counter-productive. It is taking photographic communication too literally. This type of thinking makes a lot of sense in advertizing photography, but does it in art photography? A picture isn't worth a 1000 words, it's worth something words can't express, or it isn't a very good photograph.

Well, when I say that I want my artwork to "say" something, I don't mean in words. I mean that it has to have some sort of meaning beyond "Oh what a pretty picture to hang over my sofa." What is that "something words can't express" in a photo of a marina, for example, or of some rocks, or of sailboats?


Simply try to make pictures that are visually interesting to you. Don't worry about what they are expressing, or if something similar has been done before, or whatever.

Yes but that's the whole question I'm dealing with: what is "interesting," visually or otherwise, and why is it "interesting" enough for me to spend the time to take a photo of it? Is yet another landscape really all that "interesting"? And why should we not consider what we're expressing? After all, we're all conscious, sentient beings...most of the time (Saturday nights don't count :p) and so naturally would/should be concerned about the 'meaning' of our artwork.

[Brian C. Miller]

A beer and a shot? There's nothing there to photograph.

There are similar marinas in Everett. I wouldn't bother with that exact position, myself. From that bank, the interesting perspective would be to get down as close to the water as possible. Ideally, I would put the tripod in the water, and bring the camera down close to the surface. The piling poles are interesting, and I'd use my 360mm telephoto lens. I'd do a couple of Fujiroids, but I'd want to come back when the light is different, like morning or evening.

Of course, this is just guessing that I could get down to the water. At the local marinas there is a bit of a blackberry briar barrier between me, the water, and the old pilings. And the land was dredged for commercial barges, so it's a very steep slope.

[Peter De Smidt]

Cyrus,

You are asking questions that can only be answered by you. If you don't find a given subject interesting, then move on. Find something that does interest you.

If you approach a subject with the attitude that you won't find anything of interest there, then you probably won't.

[cyrus]

Cyrus,

You are asking questions that can only be answered by you. If you don't find a given subject interesting, then move on. Find something that does interest you.

If you approach a subject with the attitude that you won't find anything of interest there, then you probably won't.

Which is why I replied as I did - i'd pack up and go home. Not being an elitist.