Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forum Rules
What are the criteria?

FM Forums \| Photo Critique \| Join Upload & Sell
end

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

OK, I'll play, at least here on Critique.
I think the textures are there. But feel free to tell me otherwise.
But do any of these comps hold enough interest?

Scott


	GoetzPhotoz 2012

Canon EOS 5D Mark II 100 mm f/9.5 1/45 sec 1600 ISO 0.0 EV


	GoetzPhotoz 2012

Canon EOS 5D Mark II 100 mm f/16.0 1/500 sec 1600 ISO 0.0 EV


	GoetzPhotoz 2012

Canon EOS 5D Mark II 100 mm f/16.0 1/500 sec 1600 ISO 0.0 EV

Jan 22, 2013 at 02:01 AM

oldrattler 2-time assignment winner

Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

Sorry Scott, I am not dazzled by any of these. I am currently on a non-color calibrated monitor so that is not helping. Jim

Jan 22, 2013 at 12:48 PM

cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

I'm not "feeling" them... in the tactile sense of imagining touching them. In the first shot the "head on" camera angle isn't revealing many 3D shape / texture clues and in the others my memory of lichen is that when you touch it feels rubbery and that doesn't trigger a strong or "rough" impression of texture in my mind. 40 grit sandpaper, broken glass, the bristles of a scrub brush, etc would work better trigger a memory of touching a rough textured object.

Touch is a close-in (less than arm's length) experience in person so a close up of a rough texture of a commonly handled object with cross lighting to reveal the texture will be more likely to trigger the same emotional reaction. The key is getting an emotional reaction in the brain of the viewer is to get it to make the connection between the VISUAL clues and the TACTILE memories of handling the object. Without that connection the reaction is that it's just a pretty flat photograph.

The "magic" in a still photo is when it triggers a sensation of 3D shape, depth perception, movement, etc. from memory of seeing similar scenes in person. The goal in this assignment seems to be to get you out of thinking in that entirely "visual" box to consider how to trigger other non-visual impressions such as touch. Other "out of the visual box" examples would be assignments titled "tasty" or "loud".

Loud would be pretty easy. A clever visual pun would be a shot of a falling tree in a forest. For tasty you'd need to find a subject that everyone thinks tastes good , or everyone hates, to trigger a strong emotional reaction. Don't pick pretzels

Jan 22, 2013 at 01:21 PM

RustyBug

Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

Hey Scott ... I think I'm "lichen" the comp of the first one best. I"m jonsing for some stronger sidelighting to bring it out more. I kinda dig the last one, but it doesn't hit me with strong recognition like the first one does, so I have to "think" about it more to assess what it is. But, I don't have to think about it to enjoy the tones & textures.

For the comp ... the recognition of the first one. For the wall, the last one.

BTW ... I'm lichen your pun.

Jan 22, 2013 at 02:11 PM

Bob Jarman
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

Scott,

When I think of texture, I see powdery snow, sugar, sand, a soft fabric, etc. - something fine and granular. Obviously these do not fit that mental image - too coarse and rough - although certainly a texture is in play. Too, I agree with Chuck about the 2- versus 3-D perspective.

Good luck,

Bob

Jan 22, 2013 at 03:33 PM

cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

Bob Jarman wrote:
Scott,

When I think of texture, I see powdery snow, sugar, sand, a soft fabric, etc. - something fine and granular. Obviously these do not fit that mental image - too coarse and rough - although certainly a texture is in play.
Bob

Of course textures come in smooth and rough. But it's far more difficult to convey the message "texture" if all that is seen in an image is smooth or fine textured stuff. As you say the point of the exercise is creating that "mental image" i.e., some conscious tactile-like emotional reaction. I'm suggesting taking the idea of rendering texture to the next level where the texture is also felt as if touched and find familiar rough objects are better for that.

How would you react to a shot of a teacher at a blackboard writing but breaking the chalk? If you ever sat in a classroom and heard the screeching noise that creates you might cringe when you see that image. The visual in that case creates an association with an auditory memory and the reaction it causes. If you had never experienced chalk making that awful sound you'd ask what's so interesting about a teacher breaking chalk and not get the intended message.

Theme based competitions / captions set-up your brain to look for whatever the theme is so regardless of what you put in the shot texture will be seen. If you took 10 random shots and asked a viewer to say which best delivered the message of "texture" which do you think they'd pick, the pile of talcum powder or the pile of broken glass? Ask 100 viewer and you'd have some that said the talcum and others the glass but the distribution would probably be skewed strongly towards the rougher one.

With "rough" objects the message "texture" translates better photographically because clues to 3D shape and texture come from the contrast the lighting creates and why low angle cross light works best to reveal it. But like the chalk example it only works if there are personal experiences in memory to connect the visual depiction to. Personal experience is subjective so to get the desired reaction in as many different people as possible I'd want to use a object they would have touched in person, or create a visual contrast of smooth and rough in the image as part of the message.

The pretzel image did that the best of any I've seen so far at delivering the message of texture by way of contrasting smooth and rough texture in the same image. But the "creative" way it's rendered just showing part of a stick and adding the visually confusing "reflection" that's not a reflection would distracts conscious thought about the texture if not captioned as a texture competition entry.

The reason something like 40 grit sandpaper comes to mind is like the pretzel that the widely spaced grit on the paper creates both a tactile associate and visual contrast between it's rough and smooth areas visually even if you've never held a piece of it in your hands. Broken glass is similar in that respect; normally very smooth, but made rough by breaking into small sharp edged pieces visually and more likely to have been experienced in person. Both create a contrast of smooth vs. rough in the image but the broken glass is more likely to trigger the next level tactile reaction once the clues about shape and texture are processed.

It's really more of an exercise in the psychology of perception than a purely photographic one as I see it.

Edited on Jan 22, 2013 at 05:18 PM · View previous versions

Jan 22, 2013 at 04:36 PM

RustyBug

Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

cgardner wrote:

It's really more of an exercise in the psychology of perception than a photographic one as I see it.

I'm inclined to find this really quite true of most all photographic endeavors, in many regards. Imo, all photographs are a representation intended to invoke a mental perception (mood, message, modeling, memory, etc) via the visual sensory mode. Even if they are "merely" a recording, they serve as a memory to a place and/or point in time. Same goes for all 2D visual mediums @ drawing, painting, etc. if you really think about it. Imo, the "mastery" is to garner a degree of command and control over the medium to yield such perceptions as we intend for our audience (self or others).

I realize we start with a different set of tools, rather than pencils and brushes (pp understood), with our camera & lenses. The more we understand how the viewer perceives the various aspects of an image, the more we can decide how we want to approach those aspects, i.e. sharp/blur, warm/cool, sat/desat, dark/light, compression/foreshortening, leading lines/negative space, neutral/toned etc.

Sometimes I think I'd like to make a "checklist" of all those things to make sure I've considered them all as I work an image. But, I haven't yet so that I don't get too "rigid" in my approach (although my attention to WB is on the cusp of such rigidity at times).

Imo, everything has it's inverse and the two combine to yield a variability in cause & effect for our image making and the subsequent viewer response. Granted, this is also predicated upon the frame of reference our viewer brings at the time of viewing, for which we have no direct control.

However, the universality (latitudes noted) of human psychological perception remains in play all the time. How much credence / difference / effort it warrants infusing into our image is variable to our objectives and our audience. But, whether or not we choose to use or lose them in application, it is good to consider / understand their contribution to our (non-verbal) communicative image making efforts ... similarly to how we choose our words (also relative to their psychological perceptions) in verbal communication.

Jan 22, 2013 at 05:09 PM

cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

Temperament is reflected in everything we do. Those with with intuitive-feeling temperament are more likely to "get" that the real goal of the photographic exercise is triggering real life emotional reactions and be less concerned with technical perfection in the photos they take. The "comfort zone" of intuitive-thinking "engineer" types who don't react as sensitively to emotional clues in general is getting the technical stuff right. They are slower to see how to use technique to create emotional reactions in images.

I'm by nature an INTP and in my 20s was was extreme in most of those traits. But work experiences and personal relationships tempered the Introversion, Thinking and Perceptive traits to make me more outgoing, considerate of the feelings of others and more organized, balancing the Introversion / Thinking/Perceptive (spur of the moment).

The shift overall change in temperament also changed how I approach photography. Early on working for Zucker and observing his over the top extroversion/feeling temperament helped be better understand how to deal with and manipulate people. Getting people to cooperate for a wedding reception shot was simply a matter of smiling and saying, "I want to make you look your best in the wedding album so could you please .... " The button that presses is vanity; people given a choice want to look good and will cooperate. College teaching and being a manager also forced me to become more extroverted and organized.

I still don't take images "artistically" in the sense of "making art" to convey my interpretation of the world around me to others, but I put more thought into, and understand better, how others will react to the photos I take on a perceptual and emotional level because I think about how they are likely to feel when they see them. It's an intuitive logical process for me, because my genetically inherited NT traits (Intuition and Thinking) define my temperament.

Jan 22, 2013 at 05:50 PM

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

I am in agreement with everything said here.
I am glad that several of my middling images triggered off a high level discussion.
So thanks to all of you.
I will not place any of these images into the WA. They are not strong enough. But the explanations above are plenty strong.

Scott

Jan 22, 2013 at 06:27 PM

RustyBug

Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #10 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

cgardner wrote: use technique to create emotional reactions in images.

+1

As noted by my "What's the point?" "What is the message that you want to convey to your viewer?" ... I often use a similar INTP in combination with an algebraic or Stephen Covey approach @ start with the end in mind. Not particularly well suited toward spontaneity in that manner.

I can "shift" to a more spontaneous mode, it just takes me some time to make the transition initially. Kinda like doing weddings ... I gotta put my "warm, fuzzy & visceral" mode into action, while temporarily "abandoning" my INTP self. But, at this stage I'm starting to "go with my strength" of INTP a bit more in my photographic endeavors ... i.e. to thine own self be true (with a dose of awareness to the "other side" ... if that makes any sense.

Jan 22, 2013 at 06:31 PM

cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

I did a temperament survey of photographers on another forum most tested and self-identified as introverts. Not really surprising to me since the extroverts are the ones wanting to be in front of the lens and the photographer, by choice, hangs back and observes the action. That's what attracted me to photojournalism when I was getting started. I never considered using a camera for "fine arts" photography.

Jan 22, 2013 at 10:44 PM

sbeme

Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

Count me in on the introverted end of the spectrum. Although my passion for photography has given me a vehicle and comfort to connect different ways with friends, coworkers, neighbors as well as other photographers.
But I wonder if successful wedding photographers and perhaps fashion photographers are on the more extroverted side. Certainly been my experience and it takes a certain comfort to sell, to pose others, to engage strangers for portrait, group shots and photoshoots.
Might also be a different mix of temperaments on a web-based forum where one can be invisible in some sense, control one's presentation, pick and choose if when and how to directly engage.

Scott

Jan 23, 2013 at 12:33 AM

RustyBug

Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

+1 @ "innies" vs. "outies"

Imo, if you're gonna be dealing with people as photographic subjects ... probably better suited for an "outie" as a general rule. There was a time when I was more of an "outie" than I am at this phase of my life. These days, I've pretty much abandoned the "outie" ... but recognize the need to resurrect the "outie" for some (future) purposes.

With a bit of effort, "outie" can be learned to a degree. Maybe not to become a natural "charm magnet", but at least some to help facilitate a better comfort zone with people so that people can be more comfortable with you.

Jan 23, 2013 at 01:09 AM

cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

sbeme wrote:

But I wonder if successful wedding photographers and perhaps fashion photographers are on the more extroverted side. Certainly been my experience and it takes a certain comfort to sell, to pose others, to engage strangers for portrait, group shots and photoshoots.
Scott

When I worked for Zucker he did three-day master classes for other wedding pros. I observed the most successful ones attending were husband/wife teams with wife often being the extrovert/feeler handling the bookings, sales, people wrangling at the wedding, etc. Zucker was a husband / wife team. His wife Sandi, an introverted / thinking / sensing type handled the business side like a field marshal. He was an extreme extrovert/feeler type but with great intuition, a combination that made him great with people both when shooting and with marketing / sales.

Zucker lasted in the business over the long haul because his "batteries were charged" by dealing with people, making the big sale, writing columns and teaching; not by taking creative photos. That was like bricklaying different heads on the same poses for 40 years. He would have been equally happy and successful selling cars, clothing, etc. Some of the intuitive marketing and sales stuff he used was brilliant. His father ran a clothing store in DC and that "salesman / shopkeeper" temperament was hardwired in his DNA. He started taking photos for friends in high school who grew, got married and became doctors, lawyers and real estate tycoons. His fortunes grew with theirs via an extensive network of business and social contacts in a small niche market of affluent Jews in the DC area. Everyone automatically assumed I was a member of the tribe... a little Yiddish goes a long way

Running a one-person business well requires a range of temperaments and not many are balanced enough to be good at and enjoy all the tasks. Speaking from personal experience and observation I think what happens with a lot of photographers is they start off attracted to photography part and wind up hating the other 90% of running the business, getting burned-out and quitting after 5 years. Not necessarily creatively or because they weren't good at the business side, more often I think it's due to being introverted and not liking dealing with the people and selling.

Working for Zucker helped me see that about myself in about a year. That's when shooting weddings started to get repetitive and boring and I started looking for the next new opportunity to cross my path. He saved me the 5-10 year others I know spent building then bailing out of their own photography business. Five years years later I was a production manager at a magazine printer and starting to design database applications, moonlighting in the evening as a college instructor; enjoying those things much than working behind a camera because they better suited my temperament.

Edited on Jan 23, 2013 at 03:31 AM · View previous versions

Jan 23, 2013 at 03:17 AM

cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · Texture comps. Are you lichen any of these?

sbeme wrote:
Might also be a different mix of temperaments on a web-based forum where one can be invisible in some sense, control one's presentation, pick and choose if when and how to directly engage.
Scott

In the 90s there was great cartoon in the New Yorker. Two dogs are sitting in front of a computer and one says. "And the great thing about the Internet is nobody knows you are a dog."

Jan 23, 2013 at 03:23 AM

end
FM Forums \| Photo Critique \| Join Upload & Sell end