Padlock, Upland Santa Cruz

[pecunium]

Padlock, Upland Santa Cruz, originally uploaded by pecunium.

We were walking back from a trip up to the lava tubes in the highlands of Santa Cruz. We took a cab up, and walked back.

It's an exercise in how the camera can lie. What does the entire gate look like? What's the gate protecting? Ignoring the, apparent, condition of the wood (which is at a moderate premium on the islands) how secure is the area behind the gate?

The answers are: the gate is low (not quite four feet, as I recall), what's behind it is a yard, with some children's toys. Just down the way was an entrance to the yard, with no gate.

But it's still a nice photograph. I particularly like the way the wear from the chain is apparent

Comments

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Photography lives in the odd world between craft and art.

I say that being a huge fan of craft. I forget who it was (Haifitz?) who said he'd be a really good violinist if he'd only practice. A lot of what I write on Photography, is actually about craft.

Without craft, one can't make art. It can happen, but the intentional creation isn't there.

That said, a lot of my "art" is the intersection of talent and chance. I see something and decide to take a picture (or ten).

I do get testy when someone says, "If I had your gear I could take pictures as well as you do." That's like saying someone who speaks English well can write good fiction.

Yes, there are things which my gear made possible. This shot and this one wouldn't look as they do without the lenses (and tripods). But that's the details. The first one, no bellows, no picture. Would the latter be as pretty with a different bokeh? No. But it would still be an arresting picture.

So, when someone gives me that line of stuff, I've been known to say, "Here you go, use my camera."

But I digress.

[shunra.livejournal.com]

Art comes from two places: the artist's mind and the artist's implementation of that idea.

The craft is lovely, and yes, it's tool-dependent. But that's not the story I was complimenting you for. That - that was the art.

It is possible to look at cameras as a much easier tool than, say, paint brushes, for visual expression. I've hear people say that. In my view, word processors are just as much a tool for writers as cameras are for artists.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

I explained myself poorly. I ought to have thanked you up front, and then made my digressive disquisition. The art is craft dependant.

Too many people see the gear as the provider of craft. I see lots of shooters who do that, "If only I had "x", my pictures would be as good as "Y's". It's nonsense (much as I'm faunching for a D3). The equipment will improve the technical aspects of the photo. Clearer lenses mean cleaner shots, but the content, that's all the shooter.

The groups on flickr which are about holga, or diana, or pinhole photography (hrmn... I think I ought to make a pinhole for my digital. Time to buy some more body caps and a small sheet of .015 titanium), prove that it's not the top of the line which makes art possible.

But the people who think it is, will say, "yes, but think of what they could do with better gear,". At which point you have to just wash your hands. They'll get it, or they won't. When they do, they will have a lot more money to spend on going to places they can take good pictures.

[shunra.livejournal.com]

Looking at the bright side... that would leave us with reliably clean hands, much of the time.