I agree with this, but when you find yourself feeling complacent about flower shots and want to see some real creativity applied to the subject, check out the flower shots by Irving Penn and Dain Tasker. These couldn't be more different. Tasker was a Los Angeles radiologist working in the 1930s. He had the idea of taking X-Ray flower shots. His work is very startling and different:
You can buy a book of Tasker's work (highly recommended) from Panopticon Gallery: http://www.panopt.com/ I forget how much these cost, but it's not too much.
Irving Penn, along with Avedon, is one of the two great American fashion photographers from the 50s and 60s who transcended their day jobs and became great all around photographers and artists.
Once again, this is sort of a book plug, but this book is out of print and a bit rare. Amazon has them used starting at $83. I know this is kind of a lot for a photography book, but it's a fraction of the cost of a new lens or something and might do more for your photography. In fact I feel that way about all the Irving Penn books.
We may not be as creative as these guys, but their work shows just how differently it is possible to see even flowers, one of the most "over exposed" areas of photography.
Hey Rutt,
That is a great idea! Every once in awhile we need something to reawake the creative juices. Thanks
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Definitely #1 for me, I like detail, and there's plenty of it there!
#3 is also nice, but I prefer simpler - there are too many elements for me, so it doesn't tell a single story. Just my preference, of course.
Mike
Hey Mike,
Thanks for your insights. Its always helpful to get someone else's eye on your work.
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
After looking at the photos again, Harry, I am going to go against the grain, with the minority, I think. I like the second one best.
For me it has a softer quality. (Maybe that is "lost detail", but I prefer it.)
ginger:D
Thanks Ginger. The idea behind the plug in is to simplify the shot and give it a painterly effect. I have found it to work better on landscapes and such better than flower shots. Here's a better example of it
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Comments
That is a great idea! Every once in awhile we need something to reawake the creative juices. Thanks
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Thanks for your insights. Its always helpful to get someone else's eye on your work.
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
For me it has a softer quality. (Maybe that is "lost detail", but I prefer it.)
ginger:D
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"