On 11/24/2010 10:22 AM, Jan Steinman wrote:
>> From: Bob Whitmire<bwhitmire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Typically, I avoid people.
> I hear you. I'm a bit of a hermit, myself. :-)
LOL
I was wondering if that wording would be misinterpreted. I think what Bob meant
to say was "Typically, I avoid people in
my photos."
At least my own experience is that Bob is at least fairly gregarious, not just
with us, but with staff at stores and
restaurants.
Bob, I wonder how much is shyness and/or reticence to intrude and how much may
be a sense that images without people are
selling and it's safer or easier to stick with what works?
I do know that on this list, Nathan and others have made me aware of the
potential value of people even in subjects that
are apparently only about the scenery. I am by no means convinced that it is
useful even a majority of the time, at
least in nature, but recognize that it often does improve an image.
I must give credit to my list experience for learning to shoot people. Before I
joined, I shot either nature/art shots
without people or shots of people at family gatherings, etc., hardly every
anything else. I think digital has made the
broadening easier, with the much lower marginal cost of taking (perceived)
risks with shots. Now my only book is half
images with people in them.
I not uncommonly shoot a given subject both ways, given the choice. I find it
easier to decide which I prefer of any
given subject later than at the time I'm shooting.
For example, I've shot the grotto at the top of the reflecting pool at Blake
House both ways. I generally prefer the
images I recently posted of the teenager and her younger charge sitting on the
edge of the grotto pool to the ones
without people.
Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|