Jump to content

Dwelling on Ponta de Sao Lourenço


sambal

Artist: SAM BAL;
Exposure Date: 2012:05:12 16:17:41;
Make: Canon;
Model: Canon EOS 60D;
ExposureTime: 1/2000 s;
FNumber: f/8;
ISOSpeedRatings: 200;
ExposureProgram: Aperture priority;
ExposureBiasValue: -4/3;
MeteringMode: Pattern;
Flash: Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode;
FocalLength: 300 mm;
Software: PaintShop Photo Pro 13,00;


From the category:

Travel

· 82,420 images
  • 82,420 images
  • 218,336 image comments


Recommended Comments

Charming composition, Sal. You might adjust the tone a bit (there are so many different ways to do this), and find it packs more punch when the green of the palm trees and the stucco of the little house do not have an orange color cast. Or at least that's what I see - too much orange.

 

Again, lovely composition!

 

Cheers ~

 

Alberta

Link to comment

Hi Alberta,

thank you very much for your kind comments, thoughtful critique & suggestions.

I feel you've touched the essence of the old question what a photograph really presents. Is it mirroring 'reality' and if so, what kind of reality? Is it an 'artist's view' ? Is it a virtual construct or concept?

Literally translated, a photograph is something that has been written by light. That 'writing' usually needs an object, a lens, a storage medium, a dark-inside-box (aka called camera), a photographer & - last but not least - light.

For seeing the result an observer's eye needs a medium, be it either a matt glass pane, or some kind of paper or, these days a computer/TV monitor or a beamer screen.

The result is always manipulated: an image on emulsion film is treated with chemicals, digital data by software. The treatment is either done by the photographer himself - very common nowadays - or by specialised technicians, usually manipulating chemical treatments with their own hands or setting robot machines to do the job automatically.

I've started digital photographing not only because it became a possibility but also because I had become completely fed up with the results of photo developing by companies doing mass developing & printing work. The colors were never right. Once I managed to talk to one of those technical chaps who explained he could produce all sorts of colors, hues & shades, and that his machine was set at some 'average' color scheme.

When the photographer himself develops the photo s/he has taken, there's more to it than meets the eye. S/he remembers the ambience, smells, wind, sounds, the surroundings not shown on the photo, the comments of his/her companion and, most probably, unconsciously much more.

The development of the photo is also highly influenced by the software the camera maker has put into its product, the photo enhancing software on the computer, the computer's graphic card & monitor characteristics.

The final result, well-appreciated by the photographer as seen on his/her computer, may look rather different on someone else's computer, on an internet website, or a TV screen.(I once saw my photo.net pictures on the monitor of a simple internet café in a poor part of the world. Lo & behold! They had Newton rings on them.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_rings  )

Now, after this long-winded introduction, I'd like to get back to the photograph under consideration here. I'm adding a Google Earth image where you see the building & palm garden from a imaginary vertical distance of about 1 000 feet. The scene is located on a desertic peninsula of volcanic origin. Soil colors, depending on the angle of the sun & occurrence/types of clouds, are bright, dark or bleak, brownish, reddish, yellowish.

 When I took the photo, there was bright sunshine, barely any clouds. It was about three pm, the sun already over its highest point. On a second message hereunder, I've also added a photo showing the surroundings on a wider scale. The sunlight reflected from its environment shone on & (mis?)colored the house & garden.

Of course, I could have lessened the intensity of the orange-like hue. I didn't do it as I like it as it is shown here. In my humble opinion it dramatizes the rather kitschy, cheap Western & unreal Thieves & Indians Hollywood production aspects of this government-owned piece of real estate on an otherwise green & flowering island in the Atlantic Ocean.

Up to here I've used 574 words! As the saying goes: a picture is better than a thousand words, I think I've done my share of explaining, defending, enjoying our discussion & the photograph I took.

Thanks very much for reading this far ;-)

Cheers!

Sam

 

23827416.jpg
Link to comment

Long, well thought out reply. I admire that. But let's agree to disagree. I've been a graphic artist/professional photographer for many years now - both film and digital. My new 27" iMac is top of the line and properly calibrated. I see a color cast that I would want to remove. You believe it "speaks" of the environment. This isn't my photo. If you're happy, I'm happy.


Cheers ~

 

Alberta

Link to comment

Alberta,

I'm glad you're happy.

Next time I'll take my sunglasses off while I'm taking pictures. It might help to improve my impressions of the real world.

Cheers!

Sam

Link to comment

...came across this oasis-like settlement & shot it sort of from the hip.

Your comments are highly appreciated!

Link to comment

Hi Pierre,

it's a crop of a much larger image, that's why this scene has a somewhat tired, discolored look, but I agree, the spectacle is worth that view. It's nearly unreal & kind of kitsch as kitsch can be.

Thanks very much for your considerate comments.

cheers

Sam

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...