• About
  • Header
  • Destinations
  • Guest Posting
  • Blogroll
  • Recipes

1001 Scribbles

~ Random and Abstract Lines

1001 Scribbles

Tag Archives: art

Reconstructed Views

25 Wednesday May 2016

Posted by AnaLuciaSilva in Uncategorized

≈ 8 Comments

Tags

art, Travel

Today I am writing a different kind of post. This one isn’t about me or my attempts at interesting shots and nice views.

Today I am presenting you Pep Ventosa’s amazing and unique work. His clever use of photographs in order to create an improved multi-moment photograph is astonishing. Hope you enjoy!

.

Hoje escrevo-vos um post diferente. Este não é sobre mim ou as minhas tentativas de conseguir fotografias interessantes.

Hoje apresento-vos o fantástico e único trabalho de Pep Ventosa. A sua inteligente utilização de fotografias a fim de criar uma fotografia melhorada com múltiplos momentos é espantosa. Espero que gostem!

La Pedrera

La Tour Eiffel

La Tour Eiffel

Piazzetta San Marco

Piazzetta San Marco

Golden Gate Panoramic

Golden Gate Panoramic

Brooklyn Bridge Crossing

Brooklyn Bridge Crossing

Thursday Tips: The Aesthetic Triad

20 Thursday Nov 2014

Posted by kerryl29 in Guest Posting, Thursdays Tips

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

aesthetics, art, composition, light, Photography, subject, Tips

With my guest blogging installments here on 1001 Scribbles over the past couple of years, I’ve probably spent at least as much time and space covering technically related matters as aesthetic ones, which is completely out of proportion with how I like to think about photography. The technical points (e.g. exposure, depth of field, etc.) are necessary, but photography—at least the way I think of it and try to practice it—is an artistic endeavor. Technique is important, but it’s a means to an end. Creativity is the itch most of us are trying to scratch, presumably, when we pull out our cameras.

So let’s talk about aesthetics a bit, and let’s do so in a way that’s as practical and applicable as possible. (I could discuss the matter in ethereal terms, but that’s an approach that many—if not most—people find impenetrable.)

Nearly half of the time during my trip to the Canadian Rockies earlier this fall was spent on a photo tour. While this was a tour—with a particular emphasis on time in the field—and not a workshop, we did hold a few brief nighttime classroom sessions that were designed, more or less, as reminders of broad photographic principles. I was quite pleased to see the discussion about image making center around three broad concepts that I’ve long preached as the key elements of successful photographs: subject, light and composition.

Essentially, assuming good technique, when these three things come together in a single frame, a portfolio quality photograph ensues. It’s not that you can’t have a “successful” shot without all three, but for something really and truly special, you need to check off all the items on the list.

Subject, of course, is the tangible object or objects that make up the elements present in the photograph. What constitutes “interesting” subject matter can be quite subjective, of course.

Light is self-explanatory. What isn’t quite as obvious, however, is that what constitutes good light can vary depending on the subject. For instance, as I’ve said multiple times in this space in the past, the quality of light that is particularly flattering to a grand landscape scenic isn’t necessarily the light of choice for a waterfall or a forest composition.

Composition is the most subjective element of all and the one upon which the photographer can exercise the broadest control. The term refers to what is included in the frame and the perspective by which the subject is depicted. This is entirely up to the photographer.

Let’s look at an example, one in which I think the three broad concepts outlined above come together pretty well.

The subject here is pretty straight forward: we have a lake, lined by deciduous and coniferous trees on the left. It’s pretty clearly an autumn image, given the color of the foliage. We have a nice sunrise sky, reflected in the lake, and a backdrop of mountain peaks. There may be a few curmudgeons out there who would disagree, but I think it’s fair to say that most people would probably find this subject matter appealing.

The light is of the pre-sunrise variety. The sky is lit up beautifully while everything else is softly (and evenly) lit. Harsh contrast is avoided.

The composition was carefully determined. There’s a rocky meadow, filled with tall grasses, surrounding the side of the lake from which the image was made, and it was consciously decided to include the meadow and its components as foreground elements. The yellow aspens provide a clear sense of the season and complement the lake, rocks and mountains nicely. The mountains, as background objects, are perhaps the ultimate example of stopping the eye from wandering off into oblivion. The colorful sunrise sky (and its reflection in the lake) provides something of a “wow” element to an already compelling scene.

It’s a matter of opinion—it is art, after all—but I think all three of the aforementioned concepts come together quite nicely here.

Let’s take a look at one more image.

The subject matter is, at least superficially similar to the first image—though we have a foreground stream rather than a lake.

The light here is very different than in the first image, but the method of presentation is as well; this shot is depicted in black and white. The light here is far more contrasty than in the first photograph, but that’s far more suitable given the much more contrast-tolerant black and white medium.

The composition is fairly dynamic—as revealed by the rushing outlet stream—which complements the boldness of the high contrast black and white treatment, particularly as it’s rendered in the sky.

Again, I think the three principles come together quite well in this shot. It’s a very different combination than in the original image, but both photographs share a certain amount of success. This illustrates the point that there are different ways to fit the three concepts together; there’s no single recipe to success. (If there was, there would only be one kind of pleasing image, which is absurd.) The goal is to find different ways to make different subjects, qualities of light and compositions work together symbiotically. That’s the road map to successful image making.

Give it a try. Consciously question yourself—what light flatters this subject? How can I choose to frame this subject in this light to best express it? What subjects work best in this light? By asking—and answering—these questions and others like them, you can take your photography to the next level.

Thursday Tips is written by Kerry Mark Leibowitz, a guest blogger on 1001 Scribbles, and appears every other Thursday. To read more of his thoughts on photography, please visit his blog: Lightscapes Nature Photography.

Thursday Tips: Operationalization and Art

06 Thursday Feb 2014

Posted by kerryl29 in Guest Posting, Thursdays Tips

≈ 10 Comments

Tags

art, operationalization, Photography, social science, Tips

When people ask me what I do for a living, I tell them I’m a statistician.  Their eyes typically glaze over, but that’s because they can’t imagine anything more boring, not because they don’t understand what “statistician” means.  (Okay, most people don’t really understand what a statistician does, but they have an inkling.)  But “statistician” is only half the story.  The other half is “social science research methodologist,” but I don’t routinely impart that information because, if I do, people’s eyes glaze over because they don’t have a clue what a “social science research methodologist” is or does.

Without getting too esoteric, the research methodologist part of my job description deals with the design aspect of research projects–things like questionnaire design, survey sampling and project implementation.  This is a critical part of any type of research, because if the design and implementation parts of the process aren’t sound, the data that’s generated is worthless (or, in some cases, downright harmful).  And what’s more, it’s impossible to tell that your data is worthless after the fact.  It can be a real trap, and if you mess up in the first two stages of this three-step process, you’re sunk, no matter how good a data analyst (read: statistician) you are.  Basically, it’s a garbage in/garbage out sort of thing.

One of the key components to designing a well-crafted social science research project is what is known as “operationalization”—a never-ending stumbling block in the world of the social sciences.  Operationalization is essentially the process of turning “constructs” or concepts into concrete, tangible, measurable placeholders.  Clear as mud?  Perhaps an (admittedly oversimplified) example will help.

Say you’re interested in understanding what relationship, if any, exists between social class and education.  You might, for instance, posit that social class and educational attainment are positively related and you want to see if that supposition is true.  That’s a perfectly valid research goal.  So, how do you go about determining whether a relationship exists?  Among other things, you need to deal with the fact that “social class” and “education” are concepts (or constructs, if you prefer).  The only way to measure these things is to define them in a tangible way.  Social class might be operationalized by the real world concept of “annual household income.”  Educational attainment might be operationalized as “years of education completed.”  Now, just about any social scientist worth his/her salt would readily admit that these real world placeholders don’t fully capture the constructs that they represent.  Social class implies far more than household income.  Educational attainment is more than simply how many years of schooling someone has completed.  But it’s difficult, bordering on impossible, to completely flesh out concepts as elusive (not to mention politically charged) as social class and educational attainment.

The operationalizing process is, to a greater or lesser extent, necessarily a compromise and, in the end, frequently leads to complaints that any relationships between variables—in the case of the illustration above, social class and education—is unproven because the operationalization was incomplete or inadequate or, in certain cases, simply wrong.  It’s the bane of social science research because anyone with a bone to pick with the results can always say that the project was the victim of a poor design.  Ultimately, it’s the very subjectivity of operationalization—the fact that two different people can have very different ways of expressing an intangible construct—that makes social science research so “soft.”

At this point, you’re undoubtedly saying “that’s all very interesting,” while stifling an exceptionally large yawn, “but why are you telling us this?  I thought this was a column about photography.”

Well, bear with me and prepare for a tortured analogy.

When it comes to social science, a consensus can be reached in defining a construct.  The problem lies in the operationalizing process discussed above:  identifying a measurable real life placeholder for the definition.  But when it comes to art—including, but not limited to, photography—the very problem of reaching a consensus on a construct definition is where the process grinds to a halt.

Consider the terms by which we describe art:  beautiful, provocative, disturbing, emotion-laden and so forth.  Now try to devise a substantive, consensus-based definition for these terms without resorting to a meaning that is inherently subjective.  It’s virtually impossible…and there’s nothing wrong with that.

But this inherent subjectivity is what makes so much of the discussion and debate about art so superfluous—at least to me.  People have a tendency to toss their opinions about art around as though they’re really objective facts.  But they’re not.  So much of the discussion that I hear and read about art amounts to, when boiled down, an argument over whose opinion is “right”—basically an oxymoron.

There’s no more compelling reason to make your photography (or whatever form of art you choose to engage in) about yourself.  Art is, after all, about individual expression.  If your principal goal is to have others comprehend the meaning that infuses your art, you may feel the need to make some alterations to that expression, but you simply can’t expect everyone to understand what you’re saying, let alone to agree with or approve of your meaning.  To do so is a fool’s errand.

Thursday Tips is written by Kerry Mark Leibowitz, a guest blogger on 1001 Scribbles, and appears every other Thursday.  To read more of his thoughts on photography, please visit his blog:  Lightscapes Nature Photography.

1001 Scribbles

Ana Silva

Coimbra, Portugal

Email: 1001scribbles@gmail.com

New Project!

Crystal Ball Experiences

Links

  • Bloglovin'
  • Etsy Shop
  • Fotolia
  • Twitter
  • WordPress.com

Categories

  • Austria
  • Belgium
  • Czech Republic
  • France
  • Germany
  • Italy
  • Netherlands
  • Portugal
  • Slovakia
  • Slovenia
  • Spain
  • UK
  • I Wish
  • Uncategorized
  • Guest Posting
    • Adventures Abroad
    • Films of Meaning
    • Thursdays Tips
    • Tomasz Travels

Archives

Blog Stats

  • 351,735 hits
  • RSS - Posts
  • RSS - Comments

Indique o seu endereço de email para subscrever este blog e receber notificações de novos posts por email.

Join 13,313 other followers

Follow 1001 Scribbles on WordPress.com
Free counters!

Blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy