Why I take photos.

[thedingo0099]

Right now, at this very moment, I want to demonstrate to others how an idea can be demonstrated with the use of a photograph.
It's a simple idea.


This is a man I met. He has a bike and lives in a green house.
The photograph can be taken as simply descriptive.
Many photos we take are like this. We communicate a description of what we saw to others.

 

[Derrel]

He has a really cool bicycle, and he lives in a House that has been painted green

To me, the most salient point of your photograph is that the bicycle is one of his most prized possessions.

I would agree that the photograph is highly documentary in nature.

 

[Derrel]

Thank you for your explanation into your process

 

[480sparky]

I doubt the 'selective coloring' is techinically 'documentary in nature'. Unless the b&w portions are actually that (lack of) color.

 

[thedingo0099]

I doubt the 'selective coloring' is techinically 'documentary in nature'. Unless the b&w portions are actually that (lack of) color.

Your doubts are well founded, sparky. I cannot guarantee my images are colour correct. I rely on my own judgement when deciding how the image will look.
I would assume that of you as well.
I’m not sure which areas are b&w, as you suggested.
In addition, you will find I said ‘descriptive’ not ‘documentary’.
That might make a difference to your thinking.

 

[thedingo0099]

Thank you for your explanation into your process

Hi Derrel.
I do to my hobby seriously.

 

[Dikkie]

I like the play with colours here. He has a green house, but wears clothes with green colours and rides a green bike.

Furthermore, I don't know where this topic is going to....

 

[thedingo0099]

I like the play with colours here. He has a green house, but wears clothes with green colours and rides a green bike.

Furthermore, I don't know where this topic is going to....

Take the conversation to any place you wish, Dikkie.

 

[Dikkie]

Take the conversation to any place you wish, Dikkie.

Certain conversations are not allowed here, alas:
Terms of Service and Rules | ThePhotoForum: Film & Digital Photography Forum

 

[Soocom1]

Personally I like it.

Having viewed many creative expression type photographs and looking at what is seemingly a non-subject, its not until one realizes that the image is designed to invoke a personal response rather than convey a highly specific notion, that the image starts to make sense.

However in this photo the intent is to portray the specific color.
That in of itself will invoke a response that is unique to the photographer, but will be entirely different to the observer because there is an intentional forcing of a specific color over B&W or full color.

For me it works. Others, will have a different response.

Each to their own.

 

[OldManJim]

I take photos 'cause my memory isn't as good as it used to be,

 

[Grandpa Ron]

Dingo,

I am afraid your "idea" is lost on me. A man, a house and a bicycle.

What I find unique are the selection of only greens and blues. Green house, blue drapes, blue bicycle, blue porch beam, coupled with turquoises wrap and sandals. Also interesting are the drape patterns, the full coverage bicycle chain guard and the fact that the widows are screened.

Unfortunately, when I see scenes like this, right or wrong, I think Photoshop; which moves it from "Look what I saw" to "Look what I created".

 

[thedingo0099]

Personally I like it.

Having viewed many creative expression type photographs and looking at what is seemingly a non-subject, its not until one realizes that the image is designed to invoke a personal response rather than convey a highly specific notion, that the image starts to make sense.

However in this photo the intent is to portray the specific color.
That in of itself will invoke a response that is unique to the photographer, but will be entirely different to the observer because there is an intentional forcing of a specific color over B&W or full color.

For me it works. Others, will have a different response.

Each to their own.

Nicely put point of view.
It’s a pleasure to read how another mind works.
My photo will invoke a response, even if it is to walk away after one glance.
The way photography does this is to present content, and context, along with the usual suspects Ike colour (or lack thereof), tone, form, texture, etc. all this is at the disposal and discretion of the photographer, of course.
The interpretation of such information is often forced by the purposeful selection of these characteristics in order to invoke a specific or at least general response, even if it it to acknowledge the photos existence.
But the gap between photographer and viewer is devastatingly wide. Some information is lost in translation, some misread, some not notices, some meaning ignored or contrary.
Agreeing or disagreeing with the structure of the image is superfluous to the purpose.
We spend a lot of time and effort taking pictures and not making them.
We spend even more time criticising images more than appreciating them.
No image is meaningless.
No image is wrong.
Images are just that. Pictures.

 

[thedingo0099]

Dingo,

I am afraid your "idea" is lost on me. A man, a house and a bicycle.

What I find unique are the selection of only greens and blues. Green house, blue drapes, blue bicycle, blue porch beam, coupled with turquoises wrap and sandals. Also interesting are the drape patterns, the full coverage bicycle chain guard and the fact that the widows are screened.

Unfortunately, when I see scenes like this, right or wrong, I think Photoshop; which moves it from "Look what I saw" to "Look what I created".

That sort of thinking is a product of our current sub-culture of amateur photographers.
We compare instead of just look.
We look for the how.

 

[Soocom1]

Personally I like it.

Having viewed many creative expression type photographs and looking at what is seemingly a non-subject, its not until one realizes that the image is designed to invoke a personal response rather than convey a highly specific notion, that the image starts to make sense.

However in this photo the intent is to portray the specific color.
That in of itself will invoke a response that is unique to the photographer, but will be entirely different to the observer because there is an intentional forcing of a specific color over B&W or full color.

For me it works. Others, will have a different response.

Each to their own.

Nicely put point of view.
It’s a pleasure to read how another mind works.
My photo will invoke a response, even if it is to walk away after one glance.
The way photography does this is to present content, and context, along with the usual suspects Ike colour (or lack thereof), tone, form, texture, etc. all this is at the disposal and discretion of the photographer, of course.
The interpretation of such information is often forced by the purposeful selection of these characteristics in order to invoke a specific or at least general response, even if it it to acknowledge the photos existence.
But the gap between photographer and viewer is devastatingly wide. Some information is lost in translation, some misread, some not notices, some meaning ignored or contrary.
Agreeing or disagreeing with the structure of the image is superfluous to the purpose.
We spend a lot of time and effort taking pictures and not making them.
We spend even more time criticising images more than appreciating them.
No image is meaningless.
No image is wrong.
Images are just that. Pictures.

Thank you.

I have grown a great deal more tolerant about things in life and to look past the initial impression given of something.
I have had too many experiences where the misleading dialog of left v right, ford, v Chevy, taste great v less filling BS is orchestrated to drive people to causes by those who like to manipulate has not only grown old, and tiresome, but stops people from exploring new possibilities.


Ill look at stuff others consider garbage any day of the week over the "pretty blonde in a red dress" crowd.