What are techniques used in Photographs (1 Viewer)

[KilledInAction]

Hey all...

I know how important techniques are and one of my supplementary text for my focus on Changing Perspectives, is a photograph from a newspaper, but I'm no expert in art or photography so I'm wondering what kind of
techniques I should be mentioning for a photograph.

Thanks

 

[BlackJack]

Lighting... very important, people in shadow?? Why???
Positioning, who's in the middle, who stands out, etc... distances.
Layout, similar to position, but slightly different
Focus, if ther is something blurred...
Colour scheme... if everyone's wearing blue...
Angle... is it a bird's eye? Level? etc...

However, I don't do photography at all.

 

[SkAnDi]

Composition, Lighting, Angle.

If you're on a technical point of view.. talk about like DOF, film used, grain, ASA/ISO etc.

From an artistic point of view, it's more the composition, use of negative and positive space.

Photography : The Art of Light

 

[BlackJack]

Any way... what's the photo like? Try to pick out every detail... We could then give a detailed analysis on why it's there and not here..

 

[KilledInAction]

Wow thanks for all that...but I still have a few questions:

Skandi when u said:

If you're on a technical point of view.. talk about like DOF, film used, grain, ASA/ISO etc.
From an artistic point of view, it's more the composition, use of negative and positive space.

what do you mean by DOF, grain, ASA/ISO?
and I'm not understanding this 'negative positive space' thing...

And would the examiners be looking for the technical point of view or the artistic point of view or both? Cos I can talk about lighting, layout, focus etc but its worth mentioning more 'artistic interpertations' like the symbolism of something and its significance to change right?

Thanks again!

 

[SkAnDi]

It's probably more the layout, and "symbolism" behing it.

The way i see it is that... art is pretty things with a message. Well doesn't really have to be pretty really.

DOF = Depth of Field.

Like when you focus on something in the foreground, if you have low DOF the background is thrown out of focus. Alternatively, high DOF = background in focus.

DOF indicates how much is in focus.. and how far back it extends.

This relates to english.. because you can say like the photo "emphasises" on what ever is in focus?

ASA/ISO is how much grain is present in the film. A high number (400, 800, 1600) means that more light is captured on the film, which means you can make photos in low light.

This also translate to like, photos looking "grainy" which you can comment that they were made to look old or antique.

Positive space is what's there.. and negative space is what isn't there. It's usually just used to emphasise something. Say perspective, or length... key word is on the emphasis.

Sorry about the haphazard reply, just trying to get all my thoughts out!

 

[stuffed4exams]

That last message made my head spin...and i'm into photography (no offence whoever wrote it)

you could just stick to the simpler,

foreground, background, framing, lighting, focus, black white vs colour etc.

 

[SkAnDi]

Originally posted by stuffed4exams
That last message made my head spin...and i'm into photography (no offence whoever wrote it)

you could just stick to the simpler,

foreground, background, framing, lighting, focus, black white vs colour etc.

No harm, no foul

Yerr.... feeling STRESSED beyond belief!

 

[Weisy]

actually, SkAnDi's explanation made a whole lot of sense. I also know nothing about photography, so thanks. I think that although talking about that stuff alone doesn't relate to change, you can make it relate to change easily, eg. comparing different depth of field in photographs can show a change in emphasis by the photographer.

I just have one question: it is only possble to talk about framing and positioning when the photograph is posed, right? Otherwise (in random shots) the composer/photographer has no control over the placement and therefore it can't be concluded that it was intentional?

I was just confused, because I am of the opinion that angles, etc. in random photographs are chosen for a reason, even though they have not been posed.

 

[stuffed4exams]

Originally posted by Weisy


I just have one question: it is only possble to talk about framing and positioning when the photograph is posed, right? Otherwise (in random shots) the composer/photographer has no control over the placement and therefore it can't be concluded that it was intentional?

I was just confused, because I am of the opinion that angles, etc. in random photographs are chosen for a reason, even though they have not been posed.

The photographer always has choices about framing and positioning posed or not.

 

[Weisy]

yeah, that's what I thought, but I got zero for saying that in my half-yearlies.