Don't listen to Shel, Peter. Any bozo can take a pretty post card picture when the light is great.
However it takes a special kind of bozo to make a photo work when the light's a bit different.
I have no idea why I'm in such an irreverant mood tonight, so you'll all have to bear with me (more so than usual). And, of course, I'm just joking with Shel. You should always listen to Shel; even if one doesn't agree with him, he always has something of value to say. Well, mostly, anyway... <g>
But, I mean it when I say that I like the fact that you tried something different. You tried working with very difficult lighting. I think it worked. It sure doesn't look like most lighthouse shots. And, there's nothing wrong with avoiding cliches - especially if it works, as I (at least) think it did here.
I meant to ask you in my previous post, where exactly is this Saybrook Point? Is the Borough of Fenwick in Mass, or am I way off base, here?
cheers, frank
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PAW -- The Light at Saybrook Point (Burough of Fenwick) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 22:06:56 -0500
I have to agree with most of what you say. I did arrive late which leads to most of
the perceived problems. The water lacks life because most of it is frozen. Thanks
for the comments I've been thinking of going back and trying again.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Hello Peter,
I just logged on and was greeted by your PAW for this week. I'm not sure I'd have taken a picture of that scene as it
strikes me as rather "plain." However, there's a reason for
that ... the lighting. It seems that you missed "magic
hour" by a bit. The peak of magic hour is really only about
ten or fifteen minutes long, and there's about a half hour
or so before the peak when the light is great. It's warm,
it's bright enough to allow the rendering of shadow details
and provide for subtle color differences. I believe this
photo suffers from being shot too late.
The sky has no character, no luminescence, and the water appears murky, rather than alive and reflecting the colors of an earlier sky. There aren't enough lights on in the buildings to make up for that lack ... lights in windows around dusk can add a very warm and welcome feel to photos taken at such times.
Then there's that vertical object on the (viewer's) left. It's a distraction in such a scene. Here you are, making a
photo of a bucolic, traditional lighthouse scene, and
there's this obtrusive element in the way, vying for
attention, and, in this case, getting it.
The framing seems poor, but not knowing what's on the right, it may have been the best you could have done. Still, had there been some space along that side of the image such that the building wouldn't bleed off the edge, the composition may have been improved quite a bit. And, had it been possible to make that correction, the that other "thing" on the left may have been left outside the frame.
I give you credit for being able to hand hold a 400mm lens so well.
Shel
"Peter J. Alling" wrote:
Once again I'm opening myself to criticism comments and possible ridicule.
Taken at dusk a couple of weeks ago 400mm lens hand held. Forget the
shutter speed but it was long.
http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PAW_--_LightAtSaybrookPoint.html
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Premium: Up to 11 personalized e-mail addresses and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
