|
|
| Author |
Message |
denise
|
|
Creativity
|
Jul 31 22:56 UTC 1996 |
I know that with creativity, usually you have it or you don't.. [or so I
remember being told as much in a grade school art class]. I wasn't
that good in art classes but I've been taking pictures ever since I was
in grade school...
Right now, though, I feel like I'm in a rut and want to try something
different... am not sure what, though. Suggestions?
and what does creativity mean to you?
|
| 28 responses total. |
mcpoz
|
|
response 1 of 28:
|
Aug 1 01:40 UTC 1996 |
Denise, do you do Black and White Photography? If so, there are lots of
things which could be challenging for your creative side. Super high contrast
shots (which resemble india ink drawings), Solarization, Portraits, super fast
shots at night (I have shot at 12,000 ASA - makes a cheap telephoto work
well), Oil coloring of B&W shots, antiquing using bromide papers & selenium
toning.
I haven't done much more than snapshot stuff in color, but double negative
prints could be fun. Double exposures - #1=moon at tele, #2=landscape at WA.
Unusual angle shots (camera on floor, etc)
Have you ever entered photo contests? That brings out a lot of creativity
and is a lot of fun.
Back to B&W - special filters are fun - I made some great photos of weathered
doors and windows using a deep red lens.
How about infrared B&W film. I shot a roll of it once and had good results
and I saw one booth of mostly infrared B&W prints at the Art Fair.
Projecting color slides onto B&W sheet film and then making contact prints
gives stunning results, also.
|
rickyb
|
|
response 2 of 28:
|
Aug 1 17:31 UTC 1996 |
Well, to me, creativity is less of a technical thing and more a
point-of-vision thing. If you look at something, and perhaps see something
else in it...something you'd like to explain to your best friend as a "cool
thing" tyhat isn't otherwise obvious...creativity is the act of getting that
point of view across.
There's an infinite number of ways to do so. for the most part, in general,
the more simple the technique, the more powerful the statement.
Without knowing what kinds of things you've been doing all along, I wouldn't
know where to begin to suggest you look for something different. Perhaps you
should just stand on your head and look at the world upside-down for awhile...
that would be different (or _would_ it?) ,-}
But seriously, if you see things in large scale (landscapes, buildings, full
bodies, flower gardens, etc), try to look deeper into the micro world of
insects, flower petals, grain in wood, those little holes in leaves (used for
plant respiration), etc. OR, get even _more_ macro... tie your subjects into
continental, oceanic, planetary or solar-system/universal themes. In short...
shake up your own view of existence and see things you don't see now.
Hope that dribble helps.
|
denise
|
|
response 3 of 28:
|
Aug 14 11:50 UTC 1996 |
Hey... I know I haven't checked here in a couple weeks or so... The same
evening that I entered this item, my computer crashed--and I lost the
HD and everything on it... :-( Just got the computer back yesterday
and am still trying to reinstall everything!
Anyway, I've done a little bit with B&W though its been awhile./ Once
I get my "good" camera back out again [the pntax with all of my
variuos lenses], then I'll see about trying newlenses, colors,
whatever.
Overall, with either of my cameras, I tend to just take pictures--of
candids, general nature things [some closeup but usually not], and have
done a few sporting events. A couple times, when out on trips, I've
come up with various 'themes'--like one trip, I took a lot of pictures
of interesting fences--wood fences, rock fences, etc.
I guess I'm primarily looking for ways of getting out of my rut!
|
omni
|
|
response 4 of 28:
|
Aug 14 20:26 UTC 1996 |
I'm planning on yet another 10-roll photo shoot throughout 4 states. I'm
starting in Charleston WV with the state capitol building as my primary
target. I want to shoot it from a mountain with the sunrise, and then some
interior shots of the building. I'm planning to use ISO 200 with hopefully
good results.
BTW, does anyone have any tips on how to shoot into the sun with a cheapie
camera? I don't want direct shots into the sun, but just where the sun is
aiding the lighting.
I'm ending my photo shoot with scenes of Detroit. A lot of things are
disappearing, and I want to get a record of thier existance. I was too late
for the 7 sisters, but I won't be for old Hudsons. I hope to capture a
freighter as it passes Hart Plaza.
|
mcpoz
|
|
response 5 of 28:
|
Aug 14 22:40 UTC 1996 |
#3 - One of my constant theme has been interesting doors, arches, and windows.
This subject still intrigues me and has endless possibilities. Especially
when taken from unusual angles. I have one of the cascading arches under the
Broadway street bridge in A^2 (by the Gandy Dancer) that I am particularly
fond of. Others are collages of doors with cactii next to them in Tucson,
Old weathered paint peeling doors, etc.
#4. I am going to Hungary and will sneak time for a lot of film. I also am
going to as many sights as I can accomplish in Utah, Nevada, Southern Calif,
Arizona, New Mexico, and possibly West Texas in October.
Perhaps we could get a group together for a dinner one night and each of us
show our 10 best snapshots (or enlargements, or whatever). If we discussed
why we like others' pictures, how they were composed, etc. it may be a
learning experience.
??
|
omni
|
|
response 6 of 28:
|
Aug 15 03:20 UTC 1996 |
We should have a pot luck soon, maybe when I get my pics back from my second
foray into the Mountain State.
|
rickyb
|
|
response 7 of 28:
|
Aug 15 20:35 UTC 1996 |
#4: If shooting toward the sun, try to compose your shot so that something
blocks the actual ball of light from directly hitting your lens...a
tree, bush, leaves, bldg, cloud, etc. If you can set exposure
manually, set it with the sun blocked from the camera, even if the
object blocking it is in the shot, then recompose the shot and use
the exposure you just took. If a little light gets directly into
your lens you might get a halo effect which you could use as a
compositional element as well.
If the sun is high enough, or to one side far enough to be out of the
shot, use a cardboard, hat or even an umbrella to shadow your lens
as you take the shot.
|
omni
|
|
response 8 of 28:
|
Aug 16 05:35 UTC 1996 |
Thanks. I'll keep that in mind.
|
denise
|
|
response 9 of 28:
|
Aug 18 00:56 UTC 1996 |
I like the idea of getting together sometime to show off our best
photos and perhaps a critique session--I'm sure we can learn from
each other! Though I'm sure y'all won't necessarily want to wait
for my next trip to MI--since I haven't a clue as to when that
will be! Though if any of you are ever passing through NC,
do let me know!
MArc, I bet some of your window/archays/etc photos ARE interesting!
Omni, I have a couple interesting photos with the sun... One of which
I used a tree--in the wintertime [with no leaves...] to block the
sun itself but had the interesting lighting effects... [And I think
I might have one of them witha lake in the background. I'll have
to go through those photos again sometime!]
|
denisern
|
|
response 10 of 28:
|
May 29 18:55 UTC 1998 |
Hey, y'all! Greetings from NCarolina... I haven't been online in
ages and ages.
So what's new in the creativity department?? For me, since I'm always
looking for new ideas, I'm taking some photo classes this summer at the
Durham Arts Council. One's on "Nature and Photography", another one is
"intamacy and photography" [one of these classes is 6 weeks, the other is
8 weeks, meeting one night each week]. Then I also signed up for a one
time class in coloring of b&w photography. Hopefully I'll get some new
ideas!
|
rickyb
|
|
response 11 of 28:
|
Oct 16 17:46 UTC 1998 |
been awhile since anythings been entered here...so here goes...
Lately, with the expolsion of fall colors, I've been doing some
landscape/nature photos. Last week (or so) I happened to be driving eastbound
on Plymouth road at about 8+pm and was inspired by the view of a huge, orange,
full moon rising just above the horizon. Naturally I didn't have my camera
with me, so I rushed home, got the camera and raced to Gallup Park to try and
catch that moon with some trees/water in the compositions.
I used a tripod (d'uh) with 100ASA Kodak gold, and varied both wide and narrow
f stops as well as timing. I also used the full range of camera meter
settings (average, center weighted, spot). within about 45 minutes I shot
most of a 24 exp roll.
A couple of shots came out well enough to tell what i was trying to do, but
most look like a sunrise or sunset, with dark backgrounds. I even did a few
with forced flash to illuminate trees/leaves in the foreground but to no real
avail.
anyone have thoughts on how to capture that erie full moon glow, and even some
of the details of the craters, etc, while still getting a silouette (at least)
of background for composition (I can get decent pics of the moon only, but
they're not visually appealing without taking them through a telescope)?
(btw - my next roll, not yet developed, is early morning and late evening
close-ups of unique flowers, weeds, grasses, leaves, etc. The colors should
be great, and close focus with narrow depth of field usually helps me in
making appealing compositions).
|
scott
|
|
response 12 of 28:
|
Oct 16 21:24 UTC 1998 |
Hmmm... at really slow shutter speeds, you could try waving something in
between the camera and the moon, reducing its light falling on the film.
Maybe 5 seconds exposure, a quick rieach in with a black disk?
|
rickyb
|
|
response 13 of 28:
|
Oct 20 01:26 UTC 1998 |
Yeah, I thought of 'dodging' out the moonlight, but, I was rushing to get my
camera and still catching the moonrise before it got too high in the sky (and
too small to tell it is the moon). I think if I were to plan the dodging
method I might use a pane of glass with an opaque circle (or irregular round
shape) painted on it.
The other idea I had was to do a double exposure on one frame, one of which
with the moon blocked by some device similar to the above.
|
eprom
|
|
response 14 of 28:
|
Apr 27 04:39 UTC 2004 |
I took a high-speed photo of a drip of water from my faucet. I think it looks
cool because the flash wasn't pointed directly at the waterdrop, but instead
at the ceiling to make the lighting more realistic.
http://memember.triton.net/eprom/LJ/drip.jpg
I'm thinking of doing a long exposure of the stars rotating around polaris,
but that means driving a few miles out of town. and i'm not sure if I have
the patience to wait 5+ hours.
I also want to do some lightning pics, but we haven't had any thunderstorms
in the kzoo area yet.
|
gull
|
|
response 15 of 28:
|
Apr 27 14:53 UTC 2004 |
There's something wrong with your URL. I'm getting 'the domain name
does not exist.'
|
eprom
|
|
response 16 of 28:
|
Apr 27 16:13 UTC 2004 |
opps! it's suppose to be http://members.triton.net/eprom/LJ/drip.jpg
|
gull
|
|
response 17 of 28:
|
Apr 27 19:06 UTC 2004 |
Cool.
|
eprom
|
|
response 18 of 28:
|
May 11 18:00 UTC 2004 |
My roommate brought home some flowers from Holland, MI.
http://members.triton.net/eprom/flowers.jpg
I set my external flash on a tripod to the left of the flowers. Then set
my camera to macro mode and used the highest shutter speed (1/1000th)
and the smallest aperture (f8.0). I also had the room light on which
gave me just enough light to autofocus. Then I went into Photoshop to
increase the contrast, saturation and added a little gaussian blur to a
duplicate layer with the opacity set at around 40%.
|
eprom
|
|
response 19 of 28:
|
Jun 21 04:04 UTC 2004 |
I recently found out about cross-processing slide film (E-6) as color
negative (C-41). The lab technican at Rite-aid refused to process it.
I doubt a single roll of film is going to "ruin your film and ruin
our chemicals" as she claimed. So anyways, I went to Walgreens and
they processed it.
Heres a link to some of the pictures (the bottom 5 pictures).
http://www.livejournal.com/users/eprom/7864.html
|
eprom
|
|
response 20 of 28:
|
Mar 3 05:12 UTC 2006 |
Awhile back, I saw in a book a portrait photograph of some dude. It was
pretty creative since it was cross-processed Fuji Astia film. If I
remember correctly, he shot it 2 stops over exposed. So I figured i'd
try the same.
Anywho I just got the roll of Astia 100F back from the lab, and it looks
like poop. The film's base turns green, so when viewed as a positive,
all the pictures have an over-powering magenta cast, that drowns out any
of the other colors.
All the pictures I took using natural outdoor lighting (both sunny and
overcast) turned out poorly. Only the photos that I took indoors under
fluorescent lighting turned out decent.
link: http://homepages.wmich.edu/~j4castee/ivana.jpg
[a picture of my electronics lab partner]
So I think the only way to get cross-processed Astia looking decent is
by using controlled lighting. Which is what the photographer in the book
most likely used.
|
gull
|
|
response 21 of 28:
|
Mar 3 22:19 UTC 2006 |
That makes sense, since fluorescent has a green tint. You could
probably get the same effect outdoors with a filter.
|
denise
|
|
response 22 of 28:
|
Dec 1 19:06 UTC 2006 |
I've spent years and years taking photos but in the past year or so, I've
gotten pretty stagnent with my photography. I did get a digital camera about
1 1/2-2 years ago but I'm still not as comfortable with digital as I am with
film cameras. Does anyone have any new ideas to get my 'creative juices'
flowing again?
|
denise
|
|
response 23 of 28:
|
Feb 2 00:21 UTC 2007 |
Ok, I'm going to put my digital camera to rest for awhile and get back into
film photography again. So while I was out today, I brought some batteries
and some 400 speed film [I was disappointed that the drug store no longer
carries Fuji film, though]. I'll have to take my camera with me again and
see what will inspire me...
|
ball
|
|
response 24 of 28:
|
Feb 2 01:06 UTC 2007 |
Good luck! :-)
|