 |
| Fleury Maple Farm - Richford, Vermont Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved |
WAY BACK in the early days of this blog, one of my first posts held the title: "If You Look Closer." In that post, I noted that one of my most frequent comments about an image (if asked) was to "get in tighter" with the shot.
[we] often get caught up in the overall scene (or something in it) and do not appreciate that the viewer doesn't automatically sort out all the extraneous things in an image and focus on our subject. That is our job. When on scene, we often see our subject and our very capable brain "filters" out distracting elements
READING BRENDA Tharp and Jed Manwaring's Book, "Extraordinary Everyday Photography," recently, one comment stood out. They noted that photographers often get caught up in the overall scene (or something in it) and do not appreciate that the viewer doesn't automatically sort out all the extraneous things in an image and focus on our subject. That is our job. When on scene, we often see our subject and our very capable brain "filters" out distracting elements. If we are not thinking about this in our composition, it is easy to end up with a photo that is really neither cohesive, nor representative of what our eyes were seeing. One of the "cures" for that is to get in much closer to the subject, isolating it from extranea and zeroing our viewer in on the subject. In other words: Get Closer. 😊
 |
| Fleury Maple Farm Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved (as revised by Janice Noyce) |
RECENTLY, A friend, photographer, reader and observer reminded me of my mantra. In addition to being flattered that anybody remembers that, it stimulated some thought and conversation. She offered a suggested (and certainly effective) edit to one of my recent images posted on line, in the same vein. Her comment was short and tactful, merely noting that she liked it better a bit tighter. I appreciate honest and thoughtful critique. I think it is how we learn as artists (and sometimes as technicians). And my friend knows how to do that right, perhaps stimulating discussion, but in a polite way that promotes openness. I think it is important both as the giver and the receiver of crique, that it isn't about "right or wrong," and there is plenty of room for variety of vision. So, as is my nature, I couldn't help engage in some commentary of my own. When we "worked" the scene, I made several different compositions, including some that were indeed much tighter, even than Janice's version (note that I exclude both the large maple tree on the right and part of the road). Looking at her crop, I might re-think my exclusion of part of the road.
 |
| Fleury Maple Farm - Richford, Vermont Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved |
MY OWN approach to composing an image that contains multiple elements is to ask myself what I am trying to do with a particular "take." Because there is a lot to work with here, I made different shots, each with a slightly different goal in mind. When I made the image, I gave some thought to composition, and shot it rather wide, purposefully leaving certain elements in the overall image. I particularly wanted the wider mountain range in the background, Some viewers would say it it means there is too much going on. Others would perhaps see my way of thinking. Neither is wrong. Neither is right. Or, to quote the lyrics of Dave Mason's biggest single hit: "there ain't no good guy, there ain't no bad guy . . . we just disagree." I know I am taking license with the precise meaning of the song, but I think it underscores my thinking about the approach to photographic composition.
TO ME, it is pretty obvious that the barns are the subject here. Given that, I want to draw the viewer's attention to those barns. There are several elements in the photograph that I though might work to do that. The road, of course, makes a nice leading line into the image, leading to, and beyond the buildings. But the other consideration is how to portray the farmstead. Our "tighter" views give a more intimate feel for the farmstead, as if we could almost step into the barnyard. The image below probably comes closest to her suggested crop, but it is made from a quite different viewpoint. In this case, the "in tighter" was done with my feet, rather than a crop or a zoom. I think that perspective is better.
 |
| Fleury Maple Farm - Richford, Vermont Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved |
THE OTHER approach, here would be to have the barn nestled into the scene, off in the distance a bit, but still close enough to give it appropriate weight in the image, while portraying it in the broader backdrop of the distant mountain range. The mountains say "Vermont" to me, and in the opening image, that started this conversation, I have tried to do that. What I also tried to do was render the image in black and white. The clouds held some detail and interest, but they were mostly grey. In pure black and white, I am afraid the barns blended in too much. I was looking for a way (maybe a gimmick) to bring the viewer's attention back to the barn, and my solution was to "colorize" just parts of the image. Looking at it more carefully, I also noted that there were some rather dramatic blue patches in the sky and I thought highlighting them would give more "life" to the image, and bringing out the red in the barn and yellow flowers in front of it would pull the viewer to the barn.
 |
| Fleury Maple Farm - Richford, Vermont Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved |
ANOTHER WAY to look at a scene like this and the application of the "get in tighter" thought, is a concept sometimes referred to as "the image within and image." What do I mean by that? When your survey a scene, sometimes you see just the "big picture," and can include all that (sometimes distracting) extranea that Tharp and Manwaring talk about. Sometimes we need to try to narrow our focus. What is really the subject? Which external elements detract from and which complement that subject? My goal as a photographer is (normally) to draw the viewer's attention to the subject I want them to look at. It is also true that sometimes, that picture within the picture may be one of 2 (or more) different images. I think this scene is one of those times.
No comments:
Post a Comment
PLEASE COMMENT