[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
because I cannot be sure that the flux of movement will be arrested at exactly the right
moment. Only on the contact sheet can I see the one frame where all the elements
work together.
In this case the key foreground elements were not moving so I had the luxury of
concentrating on the sub-elements.
Then let us take an example in which every element is moving: Miners Week, Barry Island,
where the foreground depicts a father and child playing at the sea edge but the background
beach is a patchwork quilt of moving elements.
Let me first say that this image is part of a major series on the changing culture of Wales.
A section of the Wales project is on coal mining. A subsection of coal mining is the one
time of year when all the mines close together for the annual summer holiday. I was at the
beach for a specific purpose: to depict a miner at play with his child during his vacation
at the seaside. Everyone on that beach was a miner or a member of a miner s family. So I
already knew what I was looking for. That s important.
Having seen this miner with his daughter I was struck by the warm relationship between
them. My initial reaction was to choose an angle of approach, to move into position from
which I could clearly see the relationship isolated from the confusing background, lit
effectively so that the faces were revealed, and forming an interesting shape in and of
itself. The next decision was: how far should I move towards or away from them? Too
close and I would eliminate the idea that they were playing on a crowded beach; too far
away and they would lose dominance and become just another small element. So the
correct distance was quite precise.
Then I looked for another element in the background which I would call a significant
other ; some small object or person or something, anything, which had visual appeal.
I am now watching the relationship between father and daughter, and at the same time
keeping an eye on the background element. I shoot pictures when a gesture, expression
or whatever in the foreground is balanced by a shape in the background. I can barely
control these two factors, especially if the secondary element is moving. I might have
to shift six inches sideways or back and forth, shooting several frames in order to keep
the elements in balance.
What I cannot do is keep track of every element in the background. My eye is making
rapid flips across all these details to check on the overall pattern but basically I m centered
on the foreground/background element relationship. I have to see the contact sheet to
know what has happened. I know that the foreground is fine because that is what I have
SHOOTING THE SINGLE PICTURE " 43
concentrated on but my choice of image to enlarge will depend on the geometry or pattern
of the general background, which I cannot predict.
A painter can compose the main elements and then add the significant details in
precisely the right places. In photography, you cannot do that. You are hoping, almost
by instinct, that the small details which make or break the picture are going to be in
the right positions.
How many frames would you shoot of such a situation?
It depends. Half a dozen frames would be the average, on a complex scene such as the
beach. Paradoxically, the more static the scene the more images I tend to shoot. When
there is only one moving element, say the hand of the person you are photographing,
it is very, very difficult to decide which gesture, which position of the wrist or fingers
is going to be the most significant.
And now we have traced a pretty circle back to the idea that the more static the picture,
the more emphasis will be placed on details. So here is another issue: While you have been
talking, an incessant little voice in the back of my head has been prodding me to raise the, to
some, contentious ideas implied by good design, geometry, composition. These notions
of harmony and beauty are antithetical to many contemporary attitudes to street photography,
especially in academia. Let s clear the air.
I hope we have not implied that there are rules of good design or that we are advocating
composition based on drawing lines over the image! Nor am I very interested in design
where the sole purpose of the picture is to demonstrate the cleverness of the photographer
in finding patterns in peeling paint or shadow shapes. Pictures which are solely about
pattern-making are pretty boring.
However, I do believe that good design is essential when its purpose is the clear projection
of the subject matter, that is, when design is the vehicle not the destination. If you
like, function produces form. When you have most clearly revealed the essence of the
subject, the chances are you have produced a good design, at least in my defi
nition
of the term. The design, though, has come second; it has followed the first priority,
to reveal the subject.
The issue of whether or not the image should be carefully composed is self-evident as far as
I m concerned. If the image is well designed, you want to look at it; if it is poorly structured,
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]