nap_alcedo
09-19-2006, 07:56 PM
I really would want to go out and shoot to my heart's content but I really don't have the time to do this so what I do is to read as much as I can on anything about photography.
Now, I read somewhere that for us to really understand photography, we have to understand it's language. The best way that I can illustrate this is a sign in a foreign language which is well composed and well illustrated. For the uninitiated, what one will appreciate is the presentation of the foreign text, but for those who understand what it means, it transcends the physical presentation and gets the message across.
Now, how will this apply to us newbies? We usually appreciate photos for their initial impact. However, if we look closely, and we dissect the photo based on what we know about composition, meaning of lines, perspective, etc etc, we realize that it falls short of what a good photo should really be. They always say that rules were meant to be broken, but we can't deny it that most of the time, following the rules really matter.
So, what really matters? Is it the story that we can make up in our minds once we see the picture, like what we see in most documentary photos by photo journalist, or is it just the feeling that we get when we see photos of Ansel Adams for example which most of the time is an application of most of the rules that we encounter without any story behind it whatsoever?
Oh well, I think I just have to go out and shoot and stop all of these.
Now, I read somewhere that for us to really understand photography, we have to understand it's language. The best way that I can illustrate this is a sign in a foreign language which is well composed and well illustrated. For the uninitiated, what one will appreciate is the presentation of the foreign text, but for those who understand what it means, it transcends the physical presentation and gets the message across.
Now, how will this apply to us newbies? We usually appreciate photos for their initial impact. However, if we look closely, and we dissect the photo based on what we know about composition, meaning of lines, perspective, etc etc, we realize that it falls short of what a good photo should really be. They always say that rules were meant to be broken, but we can't deny it that most of the time, following the rules really matter.
So, what really matters? Is it the story that we can make up in our minds once we see the picture, like what we see in most documentary photos by photo journalist, or is it just the feeling that we get when we see photos of Ansel Adams for example which most of the time is an application of most of the rules that we encounter without any story behind it whatsoever?
Oh well, I think I just have to go out and shoot and stop all of these.