Was having a mooch around the Milestones in Photography section of the National Geographic website t’other day and spotted a “Photo Tips” link in the menu bar.
“Hmm”, thinks I, “let’s see what that’s all about”. Fully expecting, in my customary arrogant manner, that there won’t be anything I haven’t heard a thousand times before… and already decided whether or not it’s worth knowing. But never let it be said that I won’t listen to new ideas. I’ll always listen to ’em… before dismissing them. Especially if they come from something as mainstream as the Nat Geo. Ahem.
And after all, you never know when you’ll discover an occasionally useful little tidbit, do you?
Seems these have been penned (keyed?) by some bloke named Jim Richardson. Whose pics, I’ll grudgingly admit, I do quite like. And if style of writing conveys anything about someone’s personality I suspect I’d rather like him too. A suspicion reinforced by learning of his interest in “Scotland, his family’s native Cornwall, and the wider Celtic world”. Though that’s all by the by. Well, not quite… cos it sets up a sort of predisposition to be receptive to whatever he has to say.
In one of these “tips” (“Let There Be Light“) he says:
When I was converted to digital photography (sounds a bit evangelical, doesn’t it?) I quickly adopted one of the sacred orthodoxies of the creed: thou shalt not blow out highlights! No overexposing bright areas of the pictures. It was a given that no part of the image should go blank white. The histogram was my holy writ. Never, ever would I allow the dreaded black blinkies to flash on my screen, sure and certain signs of the sin of overexposure.
I have to admit this is one of the things I tend to get a bit paranoid about from time to time, and have discarded many a shot for little reason other than cos of those damned burned out highlights. (Ok, maybe they were crap shots as well, but let’s not get too pedantic.)
But occasionally, albeit not very often, I’ve taken something that I really really like, despite its “technical failings”. So much so in fact that I’ve thought “Oh, to hell with the rules” and marked it as a keeper… a “fave” no less! Here’s an example of the sort of thing I mean (and yes, I know I’ve posted this before)…
And here’s another one, that I’ve also posted previously (before anyone reminds me)…
In fact, come to think of it, I could come up with quite a few such examples. Maybe I’ve subconsciously been heading in this particular direction for some little while, and it’s only now beginning to intrude on my conscious thoughts.
Because for some completely unfathomable reason its been in my mind recently to start playing around with precisely this sort of “breaking the rules”. Only now intentionally rather than by apparently “lucky” chance. But were they just “lucky chances” or something more deeply buried, in that dark festering pit I call a mind, taking control and guiding my hand?
That thought takes us into real mystical or psychological type territory that gets far too close to other “interests” of mine, so best I don’t go there… not on this blog at least.
Anyway, see what I can come up with sort of thing. Not that I’ve done too much about it yet… but its been there, niggling away in the back of my mind.
So it was a bit serendipitous that I should come across this “tip” at this particular time and consequently I was probably more than normally receptive to Jim R’s take on it, especially where he goes on to say…
Like all photographic “mistakes,” it must be made boldly lest it look sloppy instead of intentional. When great jazz players hit the wrong note, they do it loudly and with style, like a challenge to our ears.
It turns out that overexposing a little looks bad, but overexposing a lot can look quite wonderful. Once large areas of the picture turn white the remaining areas take on an otherworldly softness and glow. You just start cranking down the shutter speed, making lighter and lighter pictures — far lighter than anything you have ever considered possible before. Keep going until you see hardly any detail at all. Then back off some. There is no right or wrong in this technique. There is only the image and how it speaks.
So dammit that’s what I’m gonna have a bash at. And it’d be totally consistent with my somewhat cavalier approach to so many “rules of photography” that are, in reality, nothing other than conventions… what’s regarded as “acceptable” at any given time (by, all too frequently, self-appointed arbiters of “acceptability”).
And you never know, one day I may actually produce something that looks quite good! But it’s more than equally possible that I won’t. Though no doubt I’ll have a lot of fun (and frustration) trying. Heh heh.
