Bushfire - the new language of climate change

THis photo caught my attention straight away.... it has AMAZING impact!!! absolutely stunning!

Great shot! Ray of light gives me 3 dimensional feeling, this dark point on the trees is pulling me in.

I hope you were faster then the fire!:)

Best regards, Tomasz. 

Astonishing presentation!

Great shot Ford. Definitely an image with impact. Regards, Peter

Nicely done, a very exceptional photo! Love the blue filtering in at the top and the smoke and flames almost look like some rich fall colored foliage. 

Please note the following:

• This image has been selected for discussion. It is not necessarily the "best" picture the Elves have seen this week, nor is it a contest.
• Discussion of photo.net policy, including the choice of Photograph of the Week should not take place here, but in the Help & Questions Forum.
• The About Photograph of the Week page tells you more about this feature of photo.net.
• Before writing a contribution to this thread, please consider our reason for having this forum: to help people learn about photography. Visitors have browsed the gallery, found a few striking images and want to know things like why is it a good picture, why does it work? Or, indeed, why doesn't it work, or how could it be improved? Try to answer such questions with your contribution.

Delightful photograph; but, as an expression of an idea, this comes nowhere close to the ominous nature of a real forest fire. The intent may have been to show before and after, but the before weighs (too) heavily IMHO.

Delightful photograph; but, as an expression of an idea, this comes nowhere close to the ominous nature of a real forest fire. The intent may have been to show before and after, but the before weighs (too) heavily IMHO. There needs to be more raging hell.

I don't think it's appropriate to be suggesting what the photographer should have photographed, but rather we should offer our critique of this particular photograph as it was chosen by the photographer. Someone once told me that I was approaching and viewing cemeteries incorrectly, and that I should be seeing them in a different way. That's not right, and the same applies here.

What are most striking, of course, are the rays of light made visible by the smoke, the crepuscular rays or so-called God beams. With the amount of smoke in the air, they've filled the frame, and I find that appealing. I was initially thrown by the yellow and red toward the bottom of the frame, but that was before I read the title. Even without the title, I would have come to realize that was a fire and the source of the haze in the atmosphere. This is not an everyday occurrence, and Ford has taken advantage of the conditions to produce a striking landscape photograph. He has limited the sun to a very small point that didn't overwhelm the other colors but still allowed the sun in the frame and hence the radiating pattern. I think his overall composition was also very good. So if light rays made visible in a smoky woodland are your thing, this is an excellent example of the phenomenon. In the title, he's also linked it to a larger ecological issue, and this is but one example.

Thank you everyone for your generous comments. I appreciate it.
The intent of the image was to convey the dawning of a new environmental era. It will be an era of an intensifying fire regime that will force us to make serious changes in how we relate to fire.
I did not post a raging fire shot under this title because they are relatively common images in comparison to this one (and I have seen lots of them in my 30 years as a professional bushfire fighter). If you want more kilojoules - see http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=15132992&size=lg
Thanks again and thanks to the elves.

A very familiar scene. Bushfire is part of the Australian life. This image portrays it very well, sure it could have been at a more dramatic time so on so on. But what has been presented to us is in image of the bush fire well captured and still stites the emotions of what it can do. Having personly been affected by such fire (Canberra 2003) and having volenteered for the State Emergency Services, this image evokes those feelings. Well done.

Very good work, Ford. The spot on clarity, perpendicular lines being intersecting with the angles of the rays makes an interesting composition. If I had to nitpick, I would say the flames themselves look a bit air-brushed, but I'm guessing because the flames are blanketed by more smoke and foliage we see the diffused "glow".
Overall, the photograph is nicely done. My smoke detectors began chirping as soon as i opened the file! Just kidding.
Cheers. Mickey Anderson

I find it a very pleasing photo. One that has enough elements to hold the eye & let me roam around it. It's a good use of wide angle, though these tree shots are seen a great deal. The rays of light through the backlit trees offer a bit of a surreal feeling, which help set it apart from the norm

The rays look artificial. Is this nature or Photoshop? I have to ask, being completely (and thankfully) out of touch with bush fires. If this is what a bush fire really does I am awestruck imagining such beauty coming from such destruction.

This brings me to the artist's ecological message. I understand it scientifically. I do not see it aesthetically here. The reason is that the powerful rays and bright color overwhelm the terrible truth about the bush fire. I do not see the destruction and the horror. I only see beauty.

Though I have never imagined bush fires being like this, there is something familiar in this image. It is like a religious or otherwise inspirational image. Jesus has arisen. Hare Krishna. The divine empire has conquered. Like that.

I've said it before. Be careful with titles and messages about images. They can mislead the viewer and foster falal misinterpretation. "Bush Fire" would have been enough a title--to the point and understated enough so that the viewer could be awestruck and terrified on his or her own.

The overwhelming impression left by this image is one of tremendous beauty. The rays are magestic. The bush fire burning behind the trees is vivid.

I have never seen a bush fire but I know what they do. What they do is not beautiful.

The photograph is a paradox. There is aesthetic pleasure here but also knowledge that what is occurring is profoundly ugly.

This doesn't work for me for one simple reason. If the word "bushfire" wasn't in the title, I wouldn't know there's a fire in the photo. It would look like just another photograph of light shining through trees in a forest. Nice photograph? Yes, certainly. POTW? No.

The strengths of this photo for me are that it's a dramatic eye-catching photo that stands out from the crowd. I like the exposure - the silhouettes from the trees against the light, the great colors and the sharp detail. Looking at the bottom 75% of the photo, I have a vivid impression of the forest burning up before my eyes.
A weak point for me - as others have pointed out - is that the top 25% of the photo (especially the big splash of blue sky) tends to draw and hold my attention away from the bush fire. So I tend to forget about the fire and just think "Wow, what a great photo of the rays around the sun!". The strong lines radiating 360 degrees from the sun makes this area of the photo a focal point. So the rays (especially above the sun) and the fire compete for my attention.
I suspect that tighter cropping at the top would strengthen the image in relation to Ford's intention. Firstly by removing the big blue area of sky at the top and (at the same time) bringing the sun higher up in the photo to a position where it does not attract so much visual attention.
Good photo of the week!
Mike

Thanks for the detailed comments above. It is interesting that the recent posts debate the prominence, or lack thereof, of the fire. My intention was to make a an image that was subtle, one that could be explored and create questions in the viewer's mind. It was not intended to be a sledgehammer blow, inferno shot and a flat, two dimensional, statement of the bleeding obvious. It is also interesting that I did post a shot at around the same time of a bushfire whirlwind and it got far less attention.

The point is that fire in Australia is both good and bad. Many native vegetation communities need fire to rejuvenate and without it, species disappear. However, too frequent or intense fire regimes are destructive ecologically, socially and economically. The subdued presence of the fire in the image and the prominence of the crepuscular rays is intended to convey the duality of bushfire - a lurking menace, and simultaneously, a natural ecological driver that creates beauty and a healthy ecology. With climate change creating more frequent extremes of fire weather, Australians are going to have to develop a new relationship with fire - a new language will be required, hence the title. The phenomenon of bushfire will be much different than it has been historically because it will have greater impact on city dwellers. Their water quality, power transmission, food production and transport systems are all at higher risk.

So, the image has done it's job. People have asked questions. Some have looked at it superficially, some have looked deeper. An image can be eye candy or it can have meaning. The seeming contradiction induced by the title has generated a discussion. What more can you ask from an image?

It's easy for viewers to do a quick crop as Mike suggests by scrolling the image up on the monitor. I did that until the top edge was just above the tallest tree in the middle, and the difference is quite striking. Personally, I don't have a preference either way; the current version reveals a bit more of the beauty of this event, while the cropped version is darker and may simply convey the more damaging aspects of fire.

Ford has described the dual nature of fire very well, and one could see both a cropped version and an uncropped version of his photograph as illustrating his thoughts about fire. We've fought forest fires in the U.S. for many decades, and it's only in the last 20 years or so that we've come to appreciate the beneficial effects of frequent (and hence smaller) fires. We now see fire as a natural component of the ecosystem, but decades of fire suppression has set the stage for the more damaging effects of fire. In my own experience, the effects of fires on photography are indirect; they create an atmosphere that can have dramatic effects on the sun (one of which Ford has captured), and they create a rich habitat for early successional plant species following the fire (e.g., carpets of wildflowers). Having a POW that addresses an ecological issue has been a nice change of pace for me and I suspect many others. I think it's also a good illustration of the relationship between personal experience and what one sees and appreciates (or not) in a particular photograph, and this certainly holds true for most subjects that are photographed.

Extremely powerful photo and reflects the impact that a bushfire can produce on the land. Amazing smoke rays and makes me remember Black Saturday in Victoria. Truly magnificent photo.

Ford, Stephen,
Thanks for the extra information and perspective on this photo. It helps me view and understand the photo differently too. A good POW!
regards,
Mike

I think the image is a very striking. What first caught my eye was the intensity of the rays of light, which are far more intense than anything I had seen before. My mind went to "created" until I recognized the fire and realized there was smoke creating the effect. Whether processing has helped these along is hard to tell and maybe irrelevant.

I do have to agree with Alex here with regard to the effect of the "Supreme Being" sensibility. I don't feel that the title works with the image in any way. I don't particularly pay attention to titles but here, since it is essentially an editorial statement, I think it just doesn't fit. More below.

As an individual image, I think it is probably one most would expect to be made if they were there. It is an obvious pick but not many would venture into a forest with fire raging only meters ahead. Of course, looking at Ford's other work--website, flickr etc, you see more fire images and his occupation explains things a bit better.

While I don't think this image portrays the editorial title, I think it would be a good subject for a photo essay (although I was surprised at how many I have seen recently on this subject)--although it would still be a difficult idea to get across this early in the cycle we call global warming. I have grown up with frequent wildfires around where I have lived all my life, with houses and forest lost every year. As a lay person, I don't see it as any different than it has always been--yet.... although I do believe we are experiencing a climate change.

I have to admit that as I looked in the photo stream here, I was intrigued by the landscape images where it appears flash was used at night or at dusk. It appears maybe to be some new work and I think it would be interesting to see where it goes--if it is going anywhere. It is much different than the work that Misrach did back in the 70's/80's and an interesting twist on more common imagery.

I think John makes a good point about this photograph being most effective as part of a photo essay on global warming (or, as one political party has been advised to call it, "climate change"). It's really hard to depict an ecological issue in a single photograph, and often text has to accompany the photograph(s). The current POW is a good example: those radiant beams look like anything but a serious ecological issue.

I don't want to get sidetracked, but I'm not sure what to make of dusk or night photos in which a long exposure or external light has been used to turn night into day. This is especially true of long exposures where one would have no clue it was a nighttime shot except by being told. Flash or other light is another matter, because the distant background will remain dark. I'm trying to understand what is gained or what unique point of view is expressed by using artificial light in these situations. So far it's eluding me. I think it's a challenge to take a dusk or night photo, show something interesting, and still keep it looking like dusk or night. Painting with light is a compromise approach, but I find moonlight and/or the right exposure makes the most effective images, and successful efforts can be quite striking.

It's got an awful lot of wide-angle distortion, doesn't it, as in this picture of Ford's, although here the distortion is vertical: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=15219612

It's a nice picture, but it seems to me that it's not all that different than what you typically get when you point your camera up to the tree tops. It may be more aesthetically pleasing than the picture at the link above, but whereas that picture shouts out danger, this one does not.

A light marvel finely captured with very excellent silhouettes ,mostly all of the trees are included ,the colors of the BG are so amazing and are extra bonus to the looking eyes.
well deserved to be the subject of POW..