April brings the sweet spring showers...

Flanders and Swanne have a great deal to answer for; and in the same breath, to be thanked for as well.



Here it is not so much sweet spring showers, as promised autumnal downpours. It is the continuing story of an La Nina summer; warm, wet and windy. Perhap that is what has gotten into the ol’ probligo brain and growed a fungus that has brought all of these together at the one time.



F’rinstance, the judging of set topic competitions. I eventually caved in to the pressure and posted a minor rant on the club Flikr page. There are no replies as yet, nor do expect that any will take up the glove.



CT was very fair on my two efforts. I got the HC and M that I expected; merit for the wave, HC for the cold morning. The interesting things came out of his comments.



For example, he saw the wavebreak as including quite a bit more than it needed. The before and his idea of what it should have been cropped to is shown. In view of the Merit score, I am not going to argue that one.







The Taupo cold morning went the same way. Before and after are below. Perception is a deceptive rather than constructive mental force. There is recent research reinforcing the idea that the normal brain spends a good deal of its time telling fibs to the rest of itself; this most particularly through memory and recall. The idea behind the original frame was to push the depth of field to the limit by getting the rock (bottom left) and boats in focus. I reckon that was achieved, so I am fairly happy on that score. I don’t think that the image lies entirely with the boats. It is the relationships; boats, distance from shore, coming fog… But, as I said, perception is a cruel mistress.














Set topic this month is “reflections”; some very good efforts were presented in Prints Monday night. I spent some time over the weekend seeking out the reflection of trees in a mud puddle taken down Whangamata way last spring. It was a vague attempt to replicate the Escher drawing of a puddle with tyre tracks and footprints. Very poor in that light and the more I look at the original frame, the less that survives the crop tool.



There was a series of images that I took some years back in Cornwall Park; autumn leaves sitting in the road channel with water. One or two of those would go close so I am going to try and get out there in two weeks to repeat the exercise. Not sure that SWMBO would appreciate sitting around whilst I go puddle jumping. But there y’go.



I think this month is when I shall submit the “Buddha brings Enlightenment to Chaos”. Time I got that one off my chest. That kind of implies that I expect my reflections image to be weak. I hope not.

... and go March-ing on.

The set topic for March is "Seascape/Coastal". One would imagine (well this one certainly did) that the topic would draw comments like "too much sunset, not enough coastal" from the judges.

Well, I went to prints night to find out. Judge was one of the seniors, a member of the team that took the (very good) course I attended last year. The extreme (in my book) was three images (one in each of the grades) all of the same marram seed - the kind of thing that blows though wild-west ghost towns, a tumble-weed. Yea, I guess that it was coastal to the extent that there was sand, and some evidence of water that may have been salty. That left me with the problem of trying hard to find something from the past twelve months or so that would fit the bill.


First selection was a b&w version I had put together when it was taken last year. Oh, there are five frames in that stitch. There is a sixth frame that does not quite fit on the left; it is about 10* too far to the left. I reshot that frame after the first pan, and the sky had changed so much that it looks like it had been taken half an hour earlier - or later for that matter.

There is also a series of frames taken in January.





Not really what I was wanting...












This is the best of the bunch so far. It needs a crop, but the right elements are there. Oh, I had stacked up every ND filter I have, total about ND9, and the exposure time was 1.5sec to film. I have learned enough that the Lumix just does not like 1.5 secs. And the horizon is a bit on the tipsy side.






This looks the same, it was the same set-up, but I tried something just a bit different. It is in fact three 0.5sec exposures. Being film one can do these things.

It has interesting possibilities, and next time we go north I will have a film ready for the job. For this competition? No.




The other possibility twists the rules just a bit - like with this one from Taupo. Not that I am overly happy with the frame; it does have its defects.












So, there it is. What to put in for open? No idea at the moment. Perhaps one of the "failures" from the above. I want to keep the "Indecision" frame for later.

One of the set topics for later in the year is "Reflections". It is raining at the moment, and I doubt that we will have a six-month drought through winter. I would like to go back to the Viaduct and play with the lines and colours with some water on them. That might have possibilities. There is also "Night Life" and "Traffic" to consider. Might be able to combine all three...

In the meantime, it will be interesting to see what the projected images judge makes of the entries he has to consider. I am also interested to hear if he has any comment on the latitude adopted by the prints judge. Both are topics that can not be debated on the club site because of the fact that the judge is ctphotography himself.


UPDATE...

Well the decision is made -

The Taupo frame goes to Open, the long "rock" frame goes to Set. Might score a HC for one, both is a long shot...

Went to the Pacific Festival today - very tiring. Best we saw was De La Salle College Niue kapa. VERY energetic...

As we leap into March...

It was interesting at club Monday. My prediction of a fairly low score was fully borne out by a HC in Set and Merit in Open.

The judge’s reaction to both was interesting; indeed her reaction to many of the images could be described thus.

She “did not understand” the Set entry. The shadow met with approval, but there was nothing in “her story” to explain the sharpness of the left side of the image. So, let me explain. Reading from left to right – which is why I rotated the image 90* left – there is the very sharp, and threatening, claw shape that grows out of the “background”. The shadow that it casts is of a fern – exactly as the sculptor intended – a gentle and soft plant that grows in the shade of others. To the right there is the series of diagonal parallel shadows which introduce a sense of instability. Those same lines create a barrier to the right, visually pinning the fern in the middle of the frame. The base of the claw and the fern are joined at the edge of the frame, indicating their direct connection.

I have no idea if the story I have read into the sculpture was intended by its maker but the image for me is direct and powerful. There is a danger in beauty; there is often a very visible but unrecognised cause to both. It might be surf and rocks, such as at Piha or Muriwai; it might be calm water and powerful currents, such as Tory Channel or the entrance to Hokianga, or a deep hole in a river. If you want you could even put a political slant on it; if that rings your bell then go for it.

The reflection was even worse. I think she recognised the image as being a reflection. It was not in her story that the people were looking at the objects floating there. The fact that they were created to look like flowers was missed. There was just no recognition at all. So between me and the person who made the sculpture we completely lost the judge. There was just no connection. The puns are almost multitude: reflection; it is, the three people in the reflection are reflecting on the “meaning” of the flowers in the water; flowers; artificial or not, flow-ers; flowers grow in a garden; is this a water garden, it is also the Botanical Gardens; and so it goes.

Or is my mind just too far bent for others to pick these things up?

I have to credit the judge with making the distinction between an “impressionist” image and a plain bad frame. In question was a picture of a family picnicking under a very large tree. As you can imagine, there was lack of focus and/or presence of movement. There was also a measure of manipulation in the image as well to burn out other detail. Not well enough burnt out in the judge’s opinion. It would have been better had the frame been deeper exposed in order to take out the houses etc in the background. I agree. It is a matter of how you do it; in camera, or in computer is the question.

One thing I have learned, and must remember, is the use of “Vaseline filters”. Good thing with which to play around. Also coming out of the comments last night is the difference between “form” and “texture” and “intensity”. This latter came from an image which, in the opinion of the judge, would have been better in black and white rather than colour. It was a very wide angle of a room in a photo exhibition. It was blurred and swept as one might expect.

One last comment. One of the images presented by an A Grader was of two surfers on a wave. Time of day appeared to be dusk. The image was manipulated by the addition of gold light on the crests of the two waves. This met with warm approbation by the judge. There was one problem. The light was – quite obviously too – from behind the surfers and the waves, as the front of the surfers was not similarly coloured but were in shadow. How come then that the front of both waves carried that gold light. The intensity of the colour was too deep as well. There was no blue, emerald, gold fade in though the blue-yellow boundary had been feathered. Sometimes judges can be as imperfect as can I.

Also out of the same evening comes the question, "Is this a competition on image manipulation, or expertise in obtaining and presenting photographic images?".

...mber

And so another month drifts quietly to a close. Actually, I have to admit, it turned out to be not half bad in some respects. Primary among the reasons for the good part was the birth of Kath’s twins. That resulted in yt having the house to himself for about 8 days of total self-determination. That status started with the drive back from New Plymouth, which was interrupted along the way by a number of “unscheduled” stops. The remainder of the week was accompanied by watching a bit of rugby. One of the highlights was the U20 and NRL second Minor Finals with Old Dark in one hand and rum in the other. The Sydney league semi was not broadcast or nothing would have got done on Sunday either.



The Awakino Head was probably the highlight of the trip back. There is potential there for some spectacular coast scenery – but very little else truth be told. The beach at Mokau similarly.



Thought about heading up the old timber road from Mokau to Kawhia and Raglan. Dropped the idea when leaving Mokau as the belly was calling for lunch. Tried The Fat Pigeon in Piopio – it was OK but Bosco’s in Te Kuiti is better.



The last Sunday of freedom was mis-spent on re-shooting some of the old attempts at art. I now have a 3m x 1.2m “infinity sheet” in the form of a very nice piece of cotton duck. Next thing to purchase is a 1.2m rod on which to roll it so I do not have to borrow the SWMBO’s flatteninghotter. I used only natural light in the family room.



Which leads into the competition for this month. Judge was another of the senior members – I will stay with my protocol of “No names…”. I had to try and find out just where he was coming from before I started writing this. Interesting cove he is; high-powered member of the club, and in the IT world as well. He is a very respectable photographer as one might imagine.



The pyramid was given “acceptance”, mainly because it did not grab him. He was very up-front; the type of image that it is lies completely outside of his personal taste. Can’t argue with that.

Poor Leo. He was recognised as “large”. The wording fitted the image. The very big defect was that the back of the chair was in focus. Never mind… not all of us have studio soft-boxes that we can trot out at a moment’s notice for that perfect candid shot of a comparatively bad-tempered cat.

The evening ended with a totally unexpected and very unusual experience. I got “chatted up” by a 60-something lady (a member). It was quite un-nerving in some respects. Oh, there was never a hint of anything untoward but the flirting was apparent; even to this old numbskull. Sadly, she is not really my type.


Going back to the pyramid and the mask for a bit, and my re-shoot of the mask.

The image out left is (from top to bottom); test and control for print, f5.6, 1/10; f5.6, 1/20; f5.6, 1/45. This was shot indoors, ambient light only. The three frames are on a single scan, no modification or treatment.

First thing to note is that there is not enough difference between background and object. Simple solution to that is to add light. That will be the next attempt. That will also take out the fold shadows that are all too obvious.

The other thing is the lack of difference between frames 2 and 3. This points up something I have battled for years. If you understand your digital camera you will know that it will - if set on auto - do its utmost to turn everything it sees to an average muddy grey. Commercial printers are no different. They can take a mediocre image and make something out of it. I know. Been there...

Some many years back - over 15 years back - I spent some six months cultivating a (strictly professional) relationship with a lass in the local pharmacy who had been given the job of running the automatic film processing part of the business. We both learned a heck of a lot about how that machine worked.

I know that those three frames (and sadly the rest of the film) can not be rescued.

But ... they can be re-taken.