Troy Piggins wrote,on my timestamp of 19/04/2008 7:24 AM:
>
> It's funny how simple images evoke strong memories, isn't it? I
> have this photo of Kristy (fiance) from when she just came out of
> theatre for a shoulder operation. She's still half drugged,
> oxygen hose coming out of her nose, hair all over the place, eyes
> half closed and this big dopey grin on her face. It's by far my
> favourite photo of her because she looks so innocent and cute in
> it, and I was just so relieved she came out of the op fine.
Exactly! That is the whole point of taking photos:
keep those memories, of a person, face, moment,
landscape, whatever, that really touched us in some
form or other. Sure: if we can, do as much as possible
to convey the feeling in the photo itself, through the
composition, lighting, selective focusing, exposure,
and so on. But if not possible to do all that when
capturing the moment, then just register it!
It's then ours to recall. Just my view on this matter,
anyway.
>
> Thanks for that! Embarrassed now I have quite a few of those
> (puke) Burj-al-Arab photos. But... I am a structural engineer so
> the construction there is a big reason I was drawn to the city in
> the first place. :)
>
There you go,see: for you, they evoke a strong
memory and relate to what you do! Therefore,
they are not (puke). And that is precisely
how it should be, IMHO. The only reason I go
<yaaawn> when I see that type of photo is simple:
subject has been done to death, and no one has taken
the next logical step which is to show folks the
place is not just the Burj. You have made a start,
and that is why it is my preferred photo.
Never been there but I'm quite sure there is a *lot*
more about Dubhai city than that hotel. We rarely if
ever see that.
> Thanks for taking the time, mate.
>
Pleasure. Thought I'd provide a different
perspective - if you pardon the pun - than
the usual blurb about technique or whatever.
|
