beanpkk Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Thanks all for looking for the comments which for me, illustrate the large chasm of difference in perception between a photographer, i.e. the one who was there and saw the scene, experienced the wind, the temperature, the people, other surroundings, and those who see an image as just an image divorced from any of that. Indeed, all of the experiential stuff can and often does color my perception to the point that my opinions of my own photos become quite unreliable. People who see the image as just an image react in ways I would never have thought of. I often feel like a blind man suddenly given sight through the eyes of others into a whole alternate reality. None of this invalidates my opinions of my own photos, but if I desire, as most do I think, to create images that people like, I need to try to understand and take people's observations to heart in the possibly vain hope that I will learn to bridge the gap between what I see in an image and what they see.
In this image I saw people walk out onto that point, walk back away from it, run along it, etc, and I have images with no people, with one person, and a couple with three or four. Since I know what I'm looking at, I never noticed any size illusions, but for those who weren't there (i.e. everyone else!) such things are quite real.
As far as having humanity in a landscape image, I have always steadfastly avoided it. But I'm told by more than one professional photographer that an image with people in it sells better than an equivalent one that does not. So I'm just putting my toe into an ocean where people appear in images.
Having said all of this, I really appreciate all of your eye-opening comments -- thanks a bunch.
keith
|