The LAPC theme #385 is ‘unusual crop’. Station Den Haag – Laan van Nieuw Oost-Indië (that is a throat breaker for most of you non-Dutch speakers). Tracking the tracks.
The LAPC theme #385 is ‘unusual crop’. It is about cropping (re-framing an existing image) for effect. I used an old photo from March 2018 to play with for this theme. I cropped it to get rid of some elements that I kept in the original shot. This theme makes me think about how I shoot and the principles I learned in the past.
I am not sure I fully understand the essence of the brief. I only understand it if I take it literally: how it is unusual for me to use cropping while editing. Let me try to explain. Cropping afterwards is to re-frame a shot. My aim is to frame a desired photo at the shoot on the camera. That is a principal I learned long ago. Modern technology helps. You can see the result of a shot right away on the camera. And zoom lenses give you the flexibility to decide about the framing. Long ago, all I shot was on a 50 mm lens on film. Then sometimes I deliberately shot to ‘crop’ the result. E.g. when I was unable to get close enough. In the darkroom, you enlarged the picture (blow up), and then decided the result of the frame. Nevertheless, this often resulted in a loss of quality (grain, sharpness). So I learned to frame from the start, long ago.
But even in those analogue days, blowing up negatives was creative, it added to the texture of a photo. Nowadays it is easier to be playful using better technology. Camera’s, phones, software, monitors, computers all contribute to more agility in the editing process.
I am curious about the perspective of other ‘old school’ photographers. The ones who used film and a darkroom in the past before the digital age. How do they view this challenge?
Lens-artists Photo Challenge #382 is about rejected photos. What do you do with photos you do not like? You can throw them away, or you can keep them. And if you keep them what can you do with them? First a story of myself, how I work. And in the end an example.
I am a snap shooter for a long time. When looking at this question for myself, I have to distinguish between the analog age and the digital age. But in both ages it is about quality, how you can assess that and what instruments are available after shooting. And above all: how can you be creative, and how much room is there to experiment?
The analog age was expensive: film was expensive, darkroom materials were expensive too. And being a poor student I shot as efficient as possible. You had to be patient while shooting, and selective. You also needed to trust your skills. Experience was essential to figure out what worked and what not. To produce good prints you needed to develop darkroom skills. And some negatives were impossible to print. But you kept them all. I never threw away negatives. That decision was beneficial in the digital age. After scanning my negatives, I properly made them look like what I had in mind when shooting them. What the darkroom did not deliver, software did.
In the digital age the cost of a photo is nearly non existent. The original photo (the former negative) can be copied lots of times. From the start technology offers instruments to oversee the quality of the photos. What you shoot is instantly visible on the camera. You can try different changes in the photo. Adjustments like shutter time, focus, and shutter opening can be tested most of the time. The RAW format offers flexibility for editing the ‘negative’ after the shoot. Software offers lots of creative tools to change the photo, or create new images.
So, do you keep rejected (bad) photos or not? I do reject photos, overseeing the result on my camera. I keep photos that can come to a good result after editing. The rest I remove straight away (e.g. bracketing shots).What I keep is stored on my NAS, where I use Lightroom as my archiving tool. I use editing tools to tweak a photo slightly. My favorite is Snapseed for web and social media publication. And Lightroom and Photoshop for prints.
The Lens-Artists Photo Challenge #374 is ‘on the move’. Most of what is on these photos has not moved in a long time. However, the machines they got moving again are brilliant. It is a place where they try to keep history alive and accessible, touchable and usable.
The Steamtrain Museum Katwijk Leiden is run by volunteers. It offers the history of steam trains and their use on narrow gauge tracks. And the volunteers fix up and restore old locomotives, carriages and other cars. They have a big storage full of old parts and rusty machines.
Every big city has its own mall, a big shopping center. Most of the times the shops and brands are the same as in the mall next to where you live. And the food court can be slightly different. The Mall of Berlin is no exception to that rule. The location (Leipziger Platz) makes it interesting, as does the architecture.
Human measure on Potsdamer Platz. During the time of the Berlin Wall people were a spic in a vast open space. Now they are a spic being over towered by high rising.
A more detailed view of the photo I published yesterday of Leiden. Leiden used to be famous for fabrics, and canals provided the infrastructure for the logistics. Some of the canals were filled up in the second half of the 20th century. However, there are debates about opening a few of them again. These discussions focus on sustainability and environmental quality.
Detail from a front in the Breestraat in Leiden. In den vergulden Turk used to be a restaurant. It moved decades ago to a different spot in town. It then changed its name to Wienerwald. The top of the original front is still there, and recently brought back to its old splendor.
This week’s Lens-Artists Photo Challenge #361 is ‘Doors revisited’. That theme was also the brief for LAPC #20. A door is a pass way to another space behind it. That space can be something we know already. Or something we like to imagine to see there when we go through. And in books you can end up in another world. In this post a few doors I met in my life. One I used for a long time, most I just passed by or passed through on holidays.
The word ‘doors’ for me is also linked to the band The Doors. The name of the band came from a book by Aldous Huxley, The doors of perception. And Huxley took it from William Blake, who used it as a metaphor:
“If the doors of perception were cleansed every thing would appear to man as it is, Infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all things thro’ narrow chinks of his cavern . Doors lead you to another side or space, break on through to the other side.”
So a lot can be said about doors. Luckily, we still have the photos. Here are a few from my conscious memory.
The Netherlands, Oegstgeest – November 1991
This is the front door to the house I was born and lived in for 25 years. The photo is shot on Ilford XP with a Pentax K1000.
France, Caylus – September 2005
This door in Caylus is ready to be knocked. Shot on Nikon D70.
Greece, Karpathos – September 2009
I looked through my archive. It struck me that lots of the doors I saw there are doors of small or bigger churches. This one is on Karpathos. Shot on Nikon D70.
The B4 retouch series I browsed my archive for pictures to publish. All of them are not completely retouched yet. Scratches, dust and stains are not removed.
Shot with Nikon F90 on KodakTriX, scanned from film and edited using Snapseed and Marksta. Click the picture for a bigger version.
LAPC 309 is about balconies. I have to admit that I do not pay special attention to balconies, unless they trigger me as I look around and they catch my eye. This in Rethymnon on Crete. A bit of a messy shot, but I spotted the sign of the night club (does one have to be envious to visit?) and the adjacent balconies and roof, mimicking the eye lashes of the club sign. A kind of eyebrows raised photo.
LAPC 309 is about balconies. I have to admit that I do not pay special attention to balconies, unless they trigger me as I look around and they catch my eye. This in Rethymnon on Crete. My first entry was an original monochrome on film. With this one I could not decide between the original and the edited monochrome version. Hence you see them both. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
LAPC 309 is about balconies. I have to admit that I do not pay special attention to balconies, unless they trigger me as I look around and they catch my eye. This in Antwerp. My previous entry was an original monochrome on film. With this one I could not decide between the original and the edited monochrome version. Hence you see them both. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Lines in the sky seen from one of the most beautiful frames for pictures in The Netherlands: a train window offering a beautiful frame with always changing content in it.
Architecture can be beautiful in full color as well in monochrome. In ‘twins’ I show the monochrome twin of the color shot at the Kop van Zuid in Rotterdam. The fourth set is New Orleans.
Architecture can be beautiful in full color as well in monochrome. In ‘twins’ I show the monochrome twin of the color shot at the Kop van Zuid in Rotterdam. The third set is the Montevideo.
Architecture can be beautiful in full color as well in monochrome. In ‘twins’ I show the monochrome twin of the color shot at the Kop van Zuid in Rotterdam. The second set is an old elevator at the Rijnhaven.
Architecture can be beautiful in full color as well in monochrome. In ‘twins’ I show the monochrome twin of the color shot of the high risings in Rotterdam on the Kop van Zuid in Rotterdam. The first set is De Rotterdam by Rem Koolhaas.
LAPC challenge #305 is about composition: two rectangles as a play tool to frame a photo. Sometimes you get lots more than two, which adds to another aspect of composition: repetition. Not sure if this qualifies as a valid entry, but I do like the building. This is De Rotterdam by Rem Koolhaas.