I've always been a frustrated photographer. Out of the thousands of pictures I've taken, there are only a half dozen or so that I really like. The rest don't measure up to the quality of the pro's. I took a fine arts photo class in school way back when. The guys to emulate then were Ansel Adams, Edward Weston and Minor White. I couldn't figure out what they were doing to get the quality they achieved so I dropped the class. It wasn't until years later that the light went on. (Pun intended). But by then I'd lost interest and I've never had the patience to stand around in a darkroom for long periods of time.
The objects d'art back then were mostly junk yards, old buildings and stuff with lots of texture. I remember seeing a photo of just grass, but the tonal depth and range made it look pretty good. So in an effort to create an artistic piece of the times of yesteryear, I found an old photo I took that I wasn't able to get up to the class standard then. I scanned and tweaked it in Photoshop to make it look similar to those I used to see. No more of this though. I'd rather draw.
2 comments:
Yes, that's almost a familiar image. Though very well done, to my untrained eye. It's funny, because the writing jobs I have almost always require photos, and I know nothing about photography. Still it all gets published. And almost every time I expect to get a reader's comment to the effect of, "You have a lot of nerve putting up the blurry blob." But so far, that hasn't happened.
I haven't seen anything I didn't like. Your photos are fine.
Post a Comment