after the rain

no technical value in the photographs below, only the desire to share what I saw when I could not resist leaving work a little early after seeing the rain had stopped:




the Chapel of St.Bartholomew in a small grove by the rice fields in Costanzana (Vercelli)

+++




dusk on rice fields in Costanzana (Vercelli) and my favourite mountain Monviso can be seen here too

+++
the E-M5 is becoming a good companion.

Regards, Vittorio

Vittorio Fracassi said:

Vittorio Fracassi wrote:

no technical value in the photographs below, . . .

Click to expand...

Those can be the best kind, the ones that transcend the technical.

Vittorio Fracassi said:

only the desire to share what I saw when I could not resist leaving work a little early after seeing the rain had stopped:




the Chapel of St.Bartholomew in a small grove by the rice fields in Costanzana (Vercelli)

+++

Click to expand...

Like this. Simple. Serene yet moody. Envious tonal expression, very balanced. A feet wet shot?

I've always admired how you do this. And of my favorite subjects - architecture and trees.

Vittorio Fracassi said:

dusk on rice fields in Costanzana (Vercelli) and my favourite mountain Monviso can be seen here too

Click to expand...

" the E-M5 is becoming a good companion. "

Both the rice fields and the closing observation wryly understated.

Lens? Filter?







--
...Bob, NYC

/"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't."/ - Little Big Man
.

Both nice but I really like the second. Nicely composed (both) and the colour is appealling. Nice scene as well.

I really like both photos, but I favor the B&W more as I like the subject matter and composition. However, the B&W could even be better but it appears a bit soft, possibly because it was hand held and taken at 1/30th sec.

lovely peaceful evocative shots, but i knew they would be before looking vittorio. you have a great eye.

Like Bob

Bobo Hodls said:

Bob Tullis wrote:

Bobo Hodls said:

Vittorio Fracassi wrote:

no technical value in the photographs below, . . .

Click to expand...

Those can be the best kind, the ones that transcend the technical.

Bobo Hodls said:

only the desire to share what I saw when I could not resist leaving work a little early after seeing the rain had stopped:




the Chapel of St.Bartholomew in a small grove by the rice fields in Costanzana (Vercelli)

+++

Click to expand...

Like this. Simple. Serene yet moody. Envious tonal expression, very balanced. A feet wet shot?

I've always admired how you do this. And of my favorite subjects - architecture and trees.

Bobo Hodls said:

dusk on rice fields in Costanzana (Vercelli) and my favourite mountain Monviso can be seen here too

Click to expand...

" the E-M5 is becoming a good companion. "

Both the rice fields and the closing observation wryly understated.

Lens? Filter?

--
...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
/"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't."/ - Little Big Man
.

Click to expand...

These are very nice images.





Jack.

Hi Bob,

I hoped you would give a second look to the two images, thanks for doing so and for the kind words. And also for giving me the opportunity to mention and to share something which goes on in my mind and that I believe you understand and master well.

It occurs with increasing frequency that when I take a picture it’s because of attraction: by the subject as it is and by what it could be. The could be part, in the case of landscape or landscape with human artifacts, is an imaginary range of variations in time of day, season, perspective depth.

As a consequence the capture I make must be as RAW as possible, not just as a digital format, but because it must allow me to work on it. Creativity is conditioned by age and habits so for me the post processing is limited to painting with various tools mostly to alter locally colour tones, contrast and brightness. So that the final result can be smuggled as what my eyes saw(read: what my mind would have liked to see), rigorously low profile, as if it was straight out of camera and not the result of sometimes hours of work.

Which can encompass not only variable PP workflows but when necessary and possible a second visit to the crime scene. For the first one I had the Pan 20/1.7 on tripod and my shoes as you guessed were wet; the second was through the Oly 45/1.8, handheld. No HDR and no filters.

Regards, Vittorio

PS. whilst writing I came across a possible explanation for the extra something that short teles do for landscapes: they add richness. Many details of equal importance crowd the flattened two-dimensional scene. Wides may provide the same image but with a hierarchy of elements, caused by deep perspective, that’s why they tend to be weak and have recourse to dominant single objects in the fore-fore ground to make them interesting.

Replies

• robonrome you are spoiling me and pushing the bar higher

• Thanks for the kind comments to: 19andrew47 and Jack

• Indeed a nice time, and at sunset too! ( to: Adventsam )

• to Howard : the chapel is seen as the focal point of interest in the image, as the safe landing port. The surrounding wood and the grey background sky looking vaguely untrustworthy. To try to convey that I gave more sharpness to the details of the building and added brilliance to the evening sun rays on the Chapel facade. On the other hand the background has diminishing detail and exposure from the center to the borders (funnel effect, together with the dominant converging lines of the puddle borders) to guide the viewer to the main point of interest, the Chapel. With the exception of the reflection in the puddle and some shiny leaves on center left to distract attention, useful to stimulate involuntary second glances

Regards, Vittorio

Vittorio Fracassi said:

Vittorio Fracassi wrote:

Hi Bob,

I hoped you would give a second look to the two images, thanks for doing so and for the kind words. And also for giving me the opportunity to mention and to share something which goes on in my mind and that I believe you understand and master well.

It occurs with increasing frequency that when I take a picture it’s because of attraction: by the subject as it is and by what it could be. The could be part, in the case of landscape or landscape with human artifacts, is an imaginary range of variations in time of day, season, perspective depth.

Click to expand...

Vittorio Fracassi said:

As a consequence the capture I make must be as RAW as possible, not just as a digital format, but because it must allow me to work on it. Creativity is conditioned by age and habits so for me the post processing is limited to painting with various tools mostly to alter locally colour tones, contrast and brightness. So that the final result can be smuggled as what my eyes saw(read: what my mind would have liked to see), rigorously low profile, as if it was straight out of camera and not the result of sometimes hours of work.

Click to expand...

Yes. I frame it a little differently in my mind. . . I'm enthused with your conceptualizing of the same impression of what makes one raise EVF to compose. I see a potential, maybe more than one, and the immediate compunction is to expose to draw whatever out of it may be desired later on. Take the memory of the exposure and blend it with the mood of the moment, often enough. Though, I've been 'expressing' in that manner and it often turns a photograph into a rendering (or skirts the boundaries between those forms), I'm trying to be a bit more circumspect in that regard as of late. For some reason it comes easier with a higher quality lens. I read Ansel's books early on, and though I was quite green at the time I felt I understood his notion of exposing for the medium and developing for the print, and pre-visualization.

Vittorio Fracassi said:

Which can encompass not only variable PP workflows but when necessary and possible a second visit to the crime scene. For the first one I had the Pan 20/1.7 on tripod and my shoes as you guessed were wet; the second was through the Oly 45/1.8, handheld. No HDR and no filters.

Regards, Vittorio

PS. whilst writing I came across a possible explanation for the extra something that short teles do for landscapes: they add richness. Many details of equal importance crowd the flattened two-dimensional scene. Wides may provide the same image but with a hierarchy of elements, caused by deep perspective, that’s why they tend to be weak and have recourse to dominant single objects in the fore-fore ground to make them interesting.

Click to expand...

I wish I could identify attractions to such things to myself like that. I'm curious as to what books or photographers have spoken to your sensibilities.

I've not grokked it in that manner, but I think that might account for why I change what my favorite two lenses would be, periodically. Part learning more about their potential, part to shake up practices and visualizations that start to become routine.

Bobo Hodls said:

Bob Tullis wrote:

Bobo Hodls said:

Vittorio Fracassi wrote:

Hi Bob,

I hoped you would give a second look to the two images, thanks for doing so and for the kind words. And also for giving me the opportunity to mention and to share something which goes on in my mind and that I believe you understand and master well.

It occurs with increasing frequency that when I take a picture it’s because of attraction: by the subject as it is and by what it could be. The could be part, in the case of landscape or landscape with human artifacts, is an imaginary range of variations in time of day, season, perspective depth.

As a consequence the capture I make must be as RAW as possible, not just as a digital format, but because it must allow me to work on it. Creativity is conditioned by age and habits so for me the post processing is limited to painting with various tools mostly to alter locally colour tones, contrast and brightness. So that the final result can be smuggled as what my eyes saw(read: what my mind would have liked to see), rigorously low profile, as if it was straight out of camera and not the result of sometimes hours of work.

Click to expand...

Yes. I frame it a little differently in my mind. . . I'm enthused with your conceptualizing of the same impression of what makes one raise EVF to compose. I see a potential, maybe more than one, and the immediate compunction is to expose to draw whatever out of it may be desired later on. Take the memory of the exposure and blend it with the mood of the moment, often enough. Though, I've been 'expressing' in that manner and it often turns a photograph into a rendering (or skirts the boundaries between those forms), I'm trying to be a bit more circumspect in that regard as of late. For some reason it comes easier with a higher quality lens. I read Ansel's books early on, and though I was quite green at the time I felt I understood his notion of exposing for the medium and developing for the print, and pre-visualization.

Click to expand...

thanks for the introspection Bob, it helps me in understanding myself. My approach is similar to yours in the first instants in which I am confronted with the potentially useful scene but it is also accompanied by a physical sensation of elation, whose intensity is a measure of how good it's going to be. Very useful although addictive.

Bobo Hodls said:

Bobo Hodls said:

Which can encompass not only variable PP workflows but when necessary and possible a second visit to the crime scene. For the first one I had the Pan 20/1.7 on tripod and my shoes as you guessed were wet; the second was through the Oly 45/1.8, handheld. No HDR and no filters.

Regards, Vittorio

PS. whilst writing I came across a possible explanation for the extra something that short teles do for landscapes: they add richness. Many details of equal importance crowd the flattened two-dimensional scene. Wides may provide the same image but with a hierarchy of elements, caused by deep perspective, that’s why they tend to be weak and have recourse to dominant single objects in the fore-fore ground to make them interesting.

Click to expand...

I wish I could identify attractions to such things to myself like that. I'm curious as to what books or photographers have spoken to your sensibilities.

Click to expand...

I read very little on photography, my good friends when they recognised my senile passion presented me with books containing photographs by Adams, Erwitt, Gardin, Basilico, probably with the intent to provide guidelines to the flow of banale images they would have been obliged to view and comment. But I read every single word in Luminous Landscape and watched all the TV series on art by Philippe Daverio and Vittorio Sgarbi and of my three sons two of them graduated at the IED (Istituto Europeo di Design). I built a "floodlit board" which stands in my livingroom and on which are displayed my latest efforts, and this provides food for merciless criticism from my family and friends, http://www.zoomview.it/page x fai da te.html

Bobo Hodls said:

I've not grokked it in that manner, but I think that might account for why I change what my favorite two lenses would be, periodically. Part learning more about their potential, part to shake up practices and visualizations that start to become routine.

Click to expand...

Thanks again Bob, you are one of the more competent, gifted, generous and balanced members of this Forum and it's a pleasure looking at your work and exchanging views with you,

gosh he takes nice photos.

Tedolph

I find what's always been the most difficult is what drives me, and wherever it is I want to go. I just know when it does come together its a unique sort of gratification.

Thanks for those references. I like the easel concept, complete with lighting. Like an ego dartboard. ;-)

Vittorio,

Thank you for replying to my comments. After reading them, I reviewed the photo which I like alot, and saw what you were conveying. Keep up the good work, I find that B&W very lovely to view.

thanks tedolf !

Vittorio