Posted by Sean Bagshaw on June 10, 2008 at 4:08 PM
William Neil has been working on a series for the past couple of years he calls “Impressions of Light” or something like that. He is trying to create unusual, impressionistic and intriguing visions of common outdoor photography subjects, something I’m also interested in. He uses a variety of camera techniques, one of which being slow shutter speed panning and/or zooming. A couple months back he had an amazing image in Outdoor Photographer that he took in a Yosemite redwood grove. It really struck a chord with me. This is my own attempt at something similar. It falls far short of Neil’s, but I like how the motion blur smooths out much of the distracting background forest clutter while emphasizing the lines, texture and lighting of the trees themselves. All the blur is in camera. In Photoshop I created several layers that were copies of the background image and then experimented with different combinations of blending modes (multiply, overlay, soft light) to increase color density, contrast and general mood. What do you think? I'm guessing that folks who prefer more traditional realism in their outdoor photography won't like it.
Do you know of any articles discussing such techniques? From what Jesse wrote he did his all in PS with layers and masks. It sounds like you used both in-camera and PS techniques here.
I checked out William Neil's site and really liked his redwoods shot, especially the first one. Man, I wish I would have seen this 'before' going to the redwoods last month. That would be fun to try out. Maybe I can experiment in PS with panning + blurring with some redwood shots.
Posted by Sean Bagshaw on June 10, 2008 at 5:22 PM
Hi Derek,
Thanks for turning me on to Jesse Speer. I love the look he is getting. I have a basic idea of how he is doing it, but I would love to know more. When I have worked with motion blur filters and layer masks in Photoshop, as Jesse indicates he has, I haven't been able to get anything close, but I haven't spent much time on it. As you point out, all my blur was done in camera by vertically panning with a slow shutter speed. This is William Niel's technique also. I have not come across any tutorials for creating good looking pans in the computer but I'll keep my eyes open.
I really dig this kind of shot. It's the type of shot that I din't like at first when I saw it in OP but it kept growing on me and I kept going back to it and liking it more and more. Then I found myself trying to get a shot like it in the field.
This one is a beauty. I like the colors and contrast here with just enough detail in the trunks.
I'd like to see it with a slight crop up from the bottom to preserve the integrity of the color of the trunks.
Will has been tremendously influential with this. I've seen similar from dozens of photographers now. I must admit I've never really been into it though, which isn't critique so much as just a fundemental difference of artistic opinion and interpretation. I guess I'm a little more of a fan of the realism aspects of photography. I associate this type of interepretation much more with paintings, and those paintings have never moved me the way photography does. For me, it's much more about the capture of a moment than the creation of something else. Again though, just rambling on over personal preferences. Keep doing whatever inspires you, that's for sure!
I have always enjoyed Jesse's work here in Colorado as one of my favorite local photographers. Now he has moved to Montana. So I am expecting to see more great stuff from him in 'Big Sky' country. He has quite an unique artistic eye.
I think I may even like this more. But all three style I find draw me in. I know where Marc is coming from. And I think at first I didn't really care for this type of abstract art. But it seems to be growing on me, especially when 'motion' is added in as with the wind shot above. Another example would be falling leaves in spring, etc...
Posted by Sean Bagshaw on June 10, 2008 at 6:44 PM
Thanks Larry! I'll try your suggestion of a crop up from the bottom.
Marc, I totally understand and appreciate your perspective and have great respect for the intense and rare brand of realism that you have a talent for. Realism is what first drew me to photography, but the longer I do it the more I find that I want to interpret a scene or tell a visual story with my images in a way that goes beyond most people's sense of reality, and yet is still based in reality. I want my images to give viewers the sense of something familiar, and yet at the same time somehow completely different, or surreal, from their everyday experiences in the world. Sometimes this can be achieved by photographing a scene at such a definitive moment that it is outside normal experience and almost beyond belief. In other cases extreme composition, juxtaposition or spatial relationships of key elements is what gives a photo this quality. Other times it can be done by stripping down a scene to ultimate minimalism (like Micheal Kenna's work). I also like the idea of adding a mysterious and unfamiliar quality to photographs by using the camera to stretch time and space. Slow exposure blurs of water, clouds etc. are great and commonly used examples, as are pans, zooms and other camera motion effects. I'm a long way off from achieving the kind of defining look in my work that I'm after, but it is fun to work towards and experiment with.
Interestingly, I would consider a lot of your work to fall into my first two categories. So much of what you do is captured in such a defining moment in time or in such a thought provoking composition that it is familiar, but at the same time beyond most people's personal experience. Even though you shoot what is before you with great attention to realism, it is a reality that most people in the world will never experience for themselves (outside your photos) and it therefore approaches the surreal for them. I think your photos have influenced my approach to this sort of realistic surrealism more than anyone else's (and perhaps Nick Brandt's).
Hey..."realistic surrealism"...did I just invent a new genre?
Posted by Sean Bagshaw on June 10, 2008 at 6:49 PM
Well said Derek. We seem to both share a similar growing interest in this area (see my comment above). Thanks for the link. Jesse is going to be added to my list of photographer bookmarks for sure.
A lot of my work does fall into the categories you mention. No doubt about it. This just takes the concept of surrealism a few steps further than I like to go myself. At least that's how I see it. Much art is somehow, some way, based in reality but I wouldn't consider much of it 'realism'. Yep. Lots to think about.
Posted by Danny Laureys on June 11, 2008 at 12:19 AM
Sean, Fantastic shot and I love the technique, never stop being different, its all about what you like.
Interesting thread. I haven't subscribed to OP for a couple years. Been just tootling along on my own... experimenting... exploring... What do you know...? In this one the motion blur is shooting technique. I have others that are done in computer... Fun stuff.
I like the end product that can come out of a process like this, though I don't try to reconcile it with its photographic origins. If it elicits an emotional response, it will stand on its own, independent of its relationship to the original capture.
That being said, I would expect a very different response when presented to a group of photographers as opposed to presenting it to an audience in a gallery who possess no preconceived notions about its origins or the process that produced it.
Posted by John Williams on June 11, 2008 at 10:30 PM
Rick's nailed my thoughts; it would have very different appeal in different situations. I can imagine it would look fantastic as a piece of art fitting into a specific room, hall, etc. While I too don't chase this type of photograph currently, I certainly appreciate it and like what you've done here! Keep 'em coming!
Discussion
13 repliesI really like this kind of abstract. Jesse Speer over on the RMNP forum does some nice abstracts like this. Here is one recent example:
http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/bbs.cgi?a=vm&mr=30657&CGISESSID=ff5979f9ceae2058ea757bb8ca0b8995&u=8559
Do you know of any articles discussing such techniques? From what Jesse wrote he did his all in PS with layers and masks. It sounds like you used both in-camera and PS techniques here.
I checked out William Neil's site and really liked his redwoods shot, especially the first one. Man, I wish I would have seen this 'before' going to the redwoods last month. That would be fun to try out. Maybe I can experiment in PS with panning + blurring with some redwood shots.
Thanks for sharing this image.
* Update: Here is a thread in which Jesse share's his technique which is also an adaptation of of William Neil's approach:
http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/bbs.cgi?a=vm&mr=30505&CGISESSID=ff5979f9ceae2058ea757bb8ca0b8995&u=8559
Thanks for turning me on to Jesse Speer. I love the look he is getting. I have a basic idea of how he is doing it, but I would love to know more. When I have worked with motion blur filters and layer masks in Photoshop, as Jesse indicates he has, I haven't been able to get anything close, but I haven't spent much time on it. As you point out, all my blur was done in camera by vertically panning with a slow shutter speed. This is William Niel's technique also. I have not come across any tutorials for creating good looking pans in the computer but I'll keep my eyes open.
This one is a beauty. I like the colors and contrast here with just enough detail in the trunks.
I'd like to see it with a slight crop up from the bottom to preserve the integrity of the color of the trunks.
I have always enjoyed Jesse's work here in Colorado as one of my favorite local photographers. Now he has moved to Montana. So I am expecting to see more great stuff from him in 'Big Sky' country. He has quite an unique artistic eye.
For example take a look at this shot which sort of combines the abstract with realism approach using wind:
http://www.jessespeer.com/photo.php?id=107&gallery=portraits&page=2
I think I may even like this more. But all three style I find draw me in. I know where Marc is coming from. And I think at first I didn't really care for this type of abstract art. But it seems to be growing on me, especially when 'motion' is added in as with the wind shot above. Another example would be falling leaves in spring, etc...
Marc, I totally understand and appreciate your perspective and have great respect for the intense and rare brand of realism that you have a talent for. Realism is what first drew me to photography, but the longer I do it the more I find that I want to interpret a scene or tell a visual story with my images in a way that goes beyond most people's sense of reality, and yet is still based in reality. I want my images to give viewers the sense of something familiar, and yet at the same time somehow completely different, or surreal, from their everyday experiences in the world. Sometimes this can be achieved by photographing a scene at such a definitive moment that it is outside normal experience and almost beyond belief. In other cases extreme composition, juxtaposition or spatial relationships of key elements is what gives a photo this quality. Other times it can be done by stripping down a scene to ultimate minimalism (like Micheal Kenna's work). I also like the idea of adding a mysterious and unfamiliar quality to photographs by using the camera to stretch time and space. Slow exposure blurs of water, clouds etc. are great and commonly used examples, as are pans, zooms and other camera motion effects. I'm a long way off from achieving the kind of defining look in my work that I'm after, but it is fun to work towards and experiment with.
Interestingly, I would consider a lot of your work to fall into my first two categories. So much of what you do is captured in such a defining moment in time or in such a thought provoking composition that it is familiar, but at the same time beyond most people's personal experience. Even though you shoot what is before you with great attention to realism, it is a reality that most people in the world will never experience for themselves (outside your photos) and it therefore approaches the surreal for them. I think your photos have influenced my approach to this sort of realistic surrealism more than anyone else's (and perhaps Nick Brandt's).
Hey..."realistic surrealism"...did I just invent a new genre?
That being said, I would expect a very different response when presented to a group of photographers as opposed to presenting it to an audience in a gallery who possess no preconceived notions about its origins or the process that produced it.