GaliWalker
Trail Wise!
Have camera, will use.
Posts: 3,719 
|
Post by GaliWalker on Oct 21, 2018 17:24:19 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by autumnmist on Oct 22, 2018 8:43:07 GMT -8
Such beautiful combinations and contrasts. Each photo is a masterpiece in and of itself. (I'm going to have to get a Webster's dictionary to use when I describe photos as I'm running out of adjectives.)
Something I've just noticed with the moving water sections is that they could also appear to be clouds; there's that much smoothness and composition (not the best choice of words, but I think you know what I mean). |
|
GaliWalker
Trail Wise!
Have camera, will use.
Posts: 3,719
|
Post by GaliWalker on Oct 22, 2018 9:29:15 GMT -8
Something I've just noticed with the moving water sections is that they could also appear to be clouds; there's that much smoothness and composition (not the best choice of words, but I think you know what I mean). It's hard to photograph moving water with a still camera realistically. The eye seems to do something in between what a video and still camera does. I've spent a bit of effort trying to take multiple photos - one with a quick shutter speed to freeze spray, and one with a longer exposure time to capture form - and then blend these together. This seems to be the most realistic, but realists have objected to me about these. Here's an example of that approach:
The problem is that most people are so used to seeing normal/fast shutter speed photos of waterfalls that they do not notice that waterfalls do have what I call form, and which I think is what you describe as clouds. This is what spray distracts us from seeing. Having said that, you can sit beside a waterfall and if you try hard and block out all the distracting spray, you can perceive form.
One final comment, regarding my choice of using long exposures exclusively: I like to have a clean look to my photos. Long exposures allow me to do so. Even the hybrid approach in my example above doesn't entirely work, because the splash pool becomes distracting and cluttered, which is why I carefully kept it out of the photo.
|
|
|
|
Post by autumnmist on Oct 22, 2018 10:45:39 GMT -8
I consider photography not only to have realistic qualities, but to be art, more so than the work of some famous artists such as Picasso, although I understand that his work isn't purely representative or classic art in the sense of the work by those considered to be masters.
I think I understand what you're trying to do, and believe it's really a combination of two levels of art, of realism "frozen" in time for artistic purposes as well as to illustrate flow and especially beauty (that's not very clear; I'm not quite sure how to express it though.)
Perhaps what I'm trying to describe is realism at two different speeds and two different phases.
This is something I tried to capture when I took a lot of photos at air shows; I wanted the clear outline of the plane in motion, even though it was in the air.
As to blending two phases of motion in one photo (if I understand correctly), and experimentation in art, I think there are some similarities in some advances in quilting. (Oh, no, you might think - those boring old things with hundreds of pieces!). One of the most successful quilting artists is Hollis Chatelain, whose quilts are quite unique:
www.hollisart.com/gallery-1
Some of her art quilts are perfectly "still", yet others infer motion, or expression. First column, third photo, the blue Tuaregs. It's static, yet motion is inferred in the background as well as horizontal bands in back of and around the people and camels.
Right below is a quilt that is one of her environmental quilts. The circles convey a sense of motion, as does the water dripping from the bottle (left side of quilt) being fed to the child.
These aren't the same as your blending of two different phases, but I think the concept is similar - motion and motion stopped.
Another example is of Cynthia England's Tranquil Lake (www.akseams.com/module/class.htm?classId=189845). The water appears to be flowing quickly, surrounded by static mountains and trees. I see a similar effect in your photos.
There's another effect that I see in most of your photos, and is especially impressive: the contrast of the water held "still" against the dynamic backgrounds, still yet powerful and magnificent forests or mountains. The water softens the sharp and cragged peaks of other elements in the photos.
And to me, this kind of art is not only current (especially in terms of global warming) which I understand is a theme of Chatelain's Water quilt), but also beautiful, masterful, and a blend of the static as well as moving elements of any scene.
(I hope I'm making sense???)
|
|
GaliWalker
Trail Wise!
Have camera, will use.
Posts: 3,719
|
Post by GaliWalker on Oct 22, 2018 11:13:12 GMT -8
You are, and thanks for the thoughtful reply. I love art and the quilts are quite spectacular, so that was a unexpectedly interesting (and most welcome) analogy of someone else trying to blend art and realism. In fact, as I just typed this I think my personal preference is to bind, or underpin, realism in art and not necessarily give them equal billing. At this point, I personally much prefer an artistic treatment over a documentary one for landscape photography, as long as I'm not adding or removing anything from the scene in software; manipulating it, if you will.
|
|
echo
Trail Wise!
Posts: 3,334 
|
Post by echo on Oct 23, 2018 18:21:49 GMT -8
I think the one you called cucumber falls is the one I tried to paint years ago. I haven’t been back to that area since before this Grandma was even a mom so my memory may be skewed.  |
|
|
|
Post by comewithme on Oct 24, 2018 11:15:00 GMT -8
Yeah... Ive seen enough movies to know this is where ghost drag you into the water... Fog... cant fool me...
|
|
