Can we photograph? To Photograph part 2
? - Yes it easily! Found nature, guided the camera, clicked. In total! The picture is ready!
Agree, in soul each of us quite so and argues. No, of course, we do the amendment on weather, on illumination, on the camera (in sense, the model that was more fancy that it is more functions; if there are a lot of functions, he for us thinks, practically - instead of us!) .
But I will object words from the famous movie: “ … and it, perhaps, not the main thing. Here the kombinatornost is important …! “ Look how we remove! Having selected some song (natural, architectural) instead of a background, we, rejoicing as children, often seldom we imagine how on this background the specific person will look.
I mean also color scale (that the dress or a shirt did not merge with a wall), and composition. Not always the background is combined with the foreground! The girl in itself in an easy summer dress most often in the photo looks well. But the same girl and in the same dress, but against a monument to the victims of repressions looks a little ridiculously. Of course, many can argue on it, but here it is about some internal culture more likely.
Other example. The photo of a dump in itself still does not speak about anything special. Perhaps you wanted to imprint some crying shame! Why not? But if you pose against the same dump, then it can suggest a strange idea. (For example: whether you did not suit all this?) Examples can be continued …
If behind the back of your friend or the girlfriend the column, a pattern on the building is, just the tree, at last, that at photography it can turn in certain “ " ornament; on the head of your victim. It is unlikely he (she) will be delighted to it. Do not forget, please, that the picture all the same will be flat, as if we did not try therefore it is very important that some details of a background did not turn (in a picture) into details of the person. Still nobody cancelled concept of prospect, and except visible reduction of more remote objects it is necessary to remember also that objects at the same time settle down one by one when transferring their image on the plane. Are practically imposed at each other.
Perhaps, it is quite difficult to very much to present that will get on a photo from surrounding and that is not present. Use old reception. Just put a frame from fingers and look through it at estimated object of shooting. What was seen was pleasant? Then you pass directly to shooting. If in a frame there is something superfluous, then, perhaps, it is enough to move only slightly aside.
As for a frame, one more interesting effect is connected with it. At the time of the film photo it was not so noticeable, with the advent of digital everything became complicated. It is about brightness and contrast. The matrix on which the image in the digital camera is projected very strongly differs from a photoemulsion on a film. Beginning from processes of obtaining the image and finishing with ways of transfer of this image as on a matrix, and further - on a photoprint.
Modern word “ tsentrovzveshenny “ causes a stupor therefore I will try to explain it on simple examples in newly appeared photographers.
While you look in a window (or on a screen) the camera, pay attention to what part from all shot is occupied with what actually you remove. The object, as a rule, has to occupy not less than two thirds of all space in any way. Only in this case it is possible to tell that you remove what turns out on a photo.
Today so many artists divorced from the vision of the world … For them shots of the " type; I against … “ - everyday occurrence. And so, a background to a background - discord! If it is too bright, then it will spoil all shot. Fancy “ brains “ the camera slightly will shade a picture. But if for the bright sky (for example) easy shading passes imperceptibly, then for other objects it threatens with the fact that in a picture you will see only a dark silhouette.
Finally one more detail of digital photography. In principle, I am familiar with it long ago, but it especially rezanut quite recently, in August. Just decided to photograph evening Moscow. In the summer here it is always full of visitors, and everyone tries to receive some effective picture for memory. On Okhotny Ryad to the people it is always a lot of. Does not become less in the evening. Probably, even on the contrary.
So, to nine begins to darken slowly. Night illumination of buildings joins. Of course - it is beautiful! And here the crowd of newly appeared pictorialists begins to click cameras and cellular. Actually, and I came for it. Here only many have the same mistake. When shooting remote objects at night and in the evening flash should be turned off!!
The matter is that at many on devices the automatic mode is exposed. At the same time in the dark flash - a commonplace. Trouble only that the endurance and a diaphragm at the device are calculated that flash will surely cover object and everything will be as it should be. But flash is for this purpose very weak and, naturally, cannot make it. The picture turns out awful. And paints not those, both clearness, and brightness. In a word - marriage. And here at the turned-off flash the device itself selects the necessary parameters.
Here, however, there is also other problem. The support (better - a support) for the camera is necessary. Otherwise everything is smeared. By the way, so to photograph people it will not turn out, only motionless objects.
There now, again it is impossible to tell about everything. Probably, it is necessary to continue. But it next time …