For my novel, another question

[RachelRose53]

I've posted here before and everyone has been incredibly helpful in giving me information. For those who don't already know, I am working on a novel in which one of the characters is a photographer. I have done and am doing a lot of research on my own, and I have a basic understanding of photography concepts, but sometimes there is just something too technical for me to figure out.

Here is what I am requesting. It's a question with a short answer, and no doubt very easy for you guys:

My protagonist (not a photographer) is at a gallery opening of a show (photographer's work, obviously), and she is standing in front of one of the photographs with someone who IS a photographer. The photographs are backstage shots of performers getting ready to go onstage (it's 1986, I am thinking they are going to be drag queens, but for the purpose of this query it's irrelevant who they are, only that these are backstage/dressing room photos, not formal portraits but taken in the middle of the natural action going on). The person who is the photographer says something about the photo they are standing in front of and it is of a technical nature. Something about the way it's lit, or wondering about the lens used or anything else. It could be an admiring comment. It could be a critical comment. It could be a something that she wonders whether it was done one way or another. It could be anything that someone who was a photographer might say in this situation, and it should be way over the head of someone who wasn't. 1986, so pre-digital, pre-Photoshop. Any ideas?

Any help would be much appreciated.

Robin

 

[The_Traveler]

Very nice,
Perfectly timed, nicely sharp.

 

[RachelRose53]

Thanks, but I need something more technical. Something that might include reference to equipment. It's got to be meaningless to the non-photographer.

 

[Designer]

If the photographer is talking,

O.K., never mind then.

 

[RachelRose53]

The person speaking is not the photographer (of the photo). Simply a photographer who has come to the opening. She is making an observation on a photograph she didn't personally take.

 

[cherylynne1]

They could say, "The wide aperture and leading lines make for good subject isolation, but it's not sharp enough for my tastes. He should have stopped down and perhaps switched out for a higher ISO film in order to use a faster shutter speed."

 

[The_Traveler]

What is the point of the statement?
What impression are you trying to convey?

 

[RachelRose53]

Cherylynne, this would work nicely. Thank you.

Traveler - the remark functions to make the other person (non-photographer), feel left out. The person making the remark is her husband's studio manager, and when she begins to talk about the photographs the protagonist is reminded of how much the two of them (husband and studio manager) share a world she isn't part of.

 

[Designer]

They could say, "The wide aperture and leading lines make for good subject isolation, but it's not sharp enough for my tastes. He should have stopped down and perhaps switched out for a higher ISO film in order to use a faster shutter speed."

I will disagree, cherylynne1. You seem to be mixing technical terminology within an artistic critique, which actually could be done, but you've made some technical errors.

 

[tirediron]

They could say, "The wide aperture and leading lines make for good subject isolation, but it's not sharp enough for my tastes. He should have stopped down and perhaps switched out for a higher ISO ASA film in order to use a faster shutter speed."

FTFY!

Seriously though; in those days we would simply have called it "faster film" or "400" instead of "100"... I don't ever remember saying or hearing any fellow photographers say "ASA" in normal discussion.

 

[cherylynne1]

Ah, thank you! I understand the concept behind film, but never actually had to do it....

If there were other errors, Designer, I apologize and am more than willing to be corrected. It just seemed like a comment we see often, with wide aperture and slow shutter speed being the most common culprits for softness.

 

[limr]

I agree that the details could be used, but it's unwieldy phrasing for dialogue. It also explains too much, and if the point is to use jargon that only other photographers would understand and leave others out of the conversation, then there needs to be much more shorthand.

"The depth of field works, but that's a soft lens wide open. He should have stopped down to get that queen nice and sharp. What film was he using? Did he think about pushing it?"

 

[manaheim]

BTW, and you may already know this, but how you choose to have the photographer/critic respond is a significant statement on the character of the photographer/critic.

A pure technical response means the person is focused very heavily on the technical aspects AND what does that say about the relationship between the photographer/critic and the person they are talking to?

Frankly, IMO, the photographers who do that are basically either a> just being obnoxious, b> trying to make the person they're with think they know COOL STUFF and should be WORSHIPPED.

As an example.

Something to consider.

 

[RachelRose53]

How about:


“Nicely framed,” ––––– said. “But a little soft, I think. I wonder why he didn’t stop down and shoot a bit faster.” She leaned in and examined the picture closely. “Tricky light. Maybe he could have bumped up the ASA. Although he might have been concerned about noise. As it is, it’s pretty clean.”

 

[tirediron]

How about:


“Nicely framed,” ––––– said. “But a little soft, I think. I wonder why he didn’t stop down and shoot a bit faster.” She leaned in and examined the picture closely. “Tricky light. Maybe he could have bumped up the ASA. Although he might have been concerned about noise. As it is, it’s pretty clean.”

You're mixing your metaphors (in a manner of speaking). You can't change film speed in mid-stream, and noise is a digital thing.

"Nicely framed, but it seems a bit soft on the edges; I wished he stopped down just a bit more".