So something extra came along. There are things I like about both versions of this and I'm not really sure which one I prefer.
6 comments:
RichardPLondon
said...
For me, the one without the SUV works better overall - richer and stranger somehow. The central post's lean gives an intriguing skewed "hinge". But, adding the SUV made me notice that thin pole(?) resting against the left side building, and its inadequacy to balance opposite the heavy yellow. A completely different little visual drama.
Thanks for the input. The pole by the brick wall is actually a stop sign, but we're edge-on to the disk. That it can read as "against" the building rather than free standing is another interesting look at how subjective our interpretation of pictures is.
For me the two belong together. The added tension of the moving vehicle, the triangle of thin pole, thick pole, car gets a bit of its power through the empty space in the earlier image. Yes - together they work for me in a convincing manner. But then, maybe I just have an inclination for those 'tychs.
Markus, that's a fascinating suggestion. I have nothing against multiples--'tychs--but I just never think of them. Your idea is interesting enough, when I get a chance I'll pop the files into a page layout program and play around with treating them as a pair.
It looks like the SUV's appearance caught you a little bit by surprise. You have posted multiples with exact preservation of alignment, but this time one of the white-boarded windows popped into view behind the telephone pole when the SUV arrived.
Good close reading, Scott. My memory was that it was actually delay, rather than surprise, and that I'd consciously played with that intersection of forms, so I went downstairs and checked out the original folder. The shot in the earlier post was made at 1:54:42. I moved about a half a step to the left and made an exposure at 1:54:47, with the slice of window showing past the pole. Then the SUV arrived and I made the shot in the second post at 1:54:50. As I mentioned to Markus, I wasn't planning a pair of shots, so I guess being surprised by the immediate arrival of a moving element would make it more likely for the overall framing to remain stable.
6 comments:
For me, the one without the SUV works better overall - richer and stranger somehow. The central post's lean gives an intriguing skewed "hinge". But, adding the SUV made me notice that thin pole(?) resting against the left side building, and its inadequacy to balance opposite the heavy yellow. A completely different little visual drama.
Richard,
Thanks for the input. The pole by the brick wall is actually a stop sign, but we're edge-on to the disk. That it can read as "against" the building rather than free standing is another interesting look at how subjective our interpretation of pictures is.
For me the two belong together. The added tension of the moving vehicle, the triangle of thin pole, thick pole, car gets a bit of its power through the empty space in the earlier image.
Yes - together they work for me in a convincing manner. But then, maybe I just have an inclination for those 'tychs.
Markus, that's a fascinating suggestion. I have nothing against multiples--'tychs--but I just never think of them. Your idea is interesting enough, when I get a chance I'll pop the files into a page layout program and play around with treating them as a pair.
It looks like the SUV's appearance caught you a little bit by surprise. You have posted multiples with exact preservation of alignment, but this time one of the white-boarded windows popped into view behind the telephone pole when the SUV arrived.
scott
Good close reading, Scott. My memory was that it was actually delay, rather than surprise, and that I'd consciously played with that intersection of forms, so I went downstairs and checked out the original folder. The shot in the earlier post was made at 1:54:42. I moved about a half a step to the left and made an exposure at 1:54:47, with the slice of window showing past the pole. Then the SUV arrived and I made the shot in the second post at 1:54:50. As I mentioned to Markus, I wasn't planning a pair of shots, so I guess being surprised by the immediate arrival of a moving element would make it more likely for the overall framing to remain stable.
Post a Comment