Share |

Sunday, January 19, 2014

Photo of the Week 2014: #2 Timeless

A photographer's nightmare is to have insufficient disk space left on the computer. I could barely run my usual apps, let alone transfer new photos in or use Lightroom (yes, I use Lightroom, and someday I'll explain to you why I chose it for the bulk of my editing) or Photoshop. So I couldn't get any new photos out for you today.

Instead, I bring you a photo I took more than two years ago. It was one of the first few shots that helped me pave the way towards full manual control of my camera, and also a SOOC (Straight Out Of Camera) shot. Back then, I didn't believe in post processing. I felt that post processing is cheating. A true photographer, I thought, should be able to get whatever he wants using what the camera can offer and with mastery of the camera controls, and deliver SOOC. Truth is, the camera processor is essentially doing post processing. The sensor captures the RAW image, and the processor will interpret the RAW signals to produce the photo the camera feels you're trying to obtain (and of course compress it to JPEG). So post processing (on the computer) is essentially doing the interpretation manually, which in other words is eliminating automation by the camera processor. That's actually less cheating, isn't it?

Not to say that every photo must be post processed; sometimes the camera interprets your photos very well and you can just leave it as that. So the rule of thumb is: it doesn't matter how you get your photo, as long as you get it. Of course, there's a fine line between an impressive photograph and an impressive art work so keep that in mind if you're going to do some extensive Photoshopping.

So here's today's photo, entitled Timeless.

18 mm DX, 1'', f/10, ISO 100.

Admittedly this was no impressive shot. The light came from a warm tungsten lamp, and (if I remember correctly) I tried to angle it to give it a nice shadow but only to realize that at that particular angle the light will not illuminate the face of the clock. And I couldn't lower the lamp too much or it'll illuminate the background, which I want in pitch darkness. This was the best compromise I could obtain (Or was it the best?).

What's interesting about this shot is actually the subject, a clock with no hands. This is actually a mechanical clock from Ikea, one that my dad bought for the fun but broke under my sister's somewhat abusive handling. I really loved this object like this, for I feel it sends a very interesting message about time. Unfortunately the clock now is nowhere to be found, so this is effectively the only photo I have of it.

Timeless. This little mechanical device dictates our daily lives literally down to the second; I always wonder what will happen if one day the world spins without clocks. Will we still care about time? What will we use to gauge the stages of the day? (the sun?) What will it feel like to live in a world that is timeless?

This photo would have been produced better with a better angle and a different lighting. A looming shadow on the ground would perhaps do the job, and perhaps having the legs exposed would make the picture look more complete. I wouldn't do much in post processing though, mainly because half the picture is black. The only edit I may do to this would be to turn it into black and white, though I would have preferred to have some blurred objects in the background.

Unfortunately it'll take me some time to find something similar (effectively to find a pretty vintage clock and tear out the hands). I suppose that's why it's so important to know how to get your shot as perfect as possible, because for anything at all (not just referring to the streets or sports or the fast moving sort of thing), you'll never know whether it'll be the same again the next time you need it. Cool life principle man.

No comments:

Post a Comment