how can one use color and contrast to their advantage?
it definitely all depends on the scene, but that doesn't mean you're only constrained to do specific things in specific lighting.
a day photo can have high contrast, a night photo can have low contrast, and it can still look great.
what matters is if it works for the current composition.
take a look at this shot from grainydays.
would it have looked better if he exposed for longer and have revealed the street in full detail? i don't think so.
the high contrast scene works here because the main subject is the only thing that matters here.
having it be surrounded by anything other than inky blackness would just look distracting.
this post was a bit directionless, so i'll just send the photos before it gets too rambly.
here are the posts for today.
a lot of people in the film photography community argue that editing your scans, especially in regard to color negative film, undermines the point of the medium.
while i do understand why people say this, most scanners interpret the negative in different ways, making it futile to envision a true version of how it was intended to look.
the prospect of not tweaking your scans is very noble, but film has a factor of unpredictability that digital doesn't. i've rarely had to edit my digital photos. it's very commonplace with my film work.
often, it saves what would have been a scrapped photo.
for example, this is what 7goldenHourBench.jpg looked like before any adjustments.
the hazy underexposure is overwhelming. this was partially due to user error (the minolta sr-t 201 meter did me dirty), but that's not my point.
with one slider in lightroom i can instantly restore this to what i intended it to look like when i took the photo initially.
that's why i think it's just a sort of immature thing to say.
however, the argument holds very well for people that do nothing but pour warmth into every photo and expect it to fix everything. it wont.
here is the post for today.
my original plan was to post a single photo a day.
that way, it would conserve the little quantity of things i have to post in the first place. i don't really have a backlog yet.
while it can be argued that posting multiple photos would give people more of an incentive to look at a new post, i think the opposite is also true.
in the meantime, i'll try sending 1-2 photos each post to see what the reception is like. personally, any more than 2 a day seems like it'd give diminishing returns.
here are the posts for today.
i start by putting a number at the start. the digit correlates to the chronological order of when i've taken the shot, and will always begins with a 0, like a computer program.
then, a brief camelcase title is used, which is then followed by a file extension.
here's an example:
