What makes Your morning/evening Hours Golden ?

papillon_65 said:

papillon_65 wrote:

papillon_65 said:

Detail Man wrote:

In the nature/landscape shooting that I do, the nature/quality of the light is an essential factor .

The "science" (if there really is one) seems extraordinarily complex, variable, unclear, unsatisfying ...

There are certain types of sky conditions that I have noted can be more conducive - but there seem to also be additional variable factors (such as the time of the year, and the angle of the sun).

Try as I may, my best notations of what worked in the past do not necessarily apply tomorrow ...

Yet, there is a certain glow on certain days/times that that seems quite evident to my eyes, and it seems (in my mind) that others (a painter, a stranger, a young child) can all readily perceive that !

Though such lighting conditions (at least) seem unmistakable , language seems to fall far short ...

Wavelengths, color temperatures, refractions, dispersions, are not truths that speak to the heart .

I can talk about clear horizons, light partial clouds, seasons, times, etc - but there is no set formula.

Question for you: Do you have a language describing how/why the light sometimes enchants us ?

Click to expand...

which is "fluctuation". The reason I love the golden hours is because the light changes rapidly and gives you so many different options, even by the second in some light. However this isn't confined just to the "golden hours". The worst photographic advice I've ever read (and it's oft repeated) is don't bother with midday. Yes the light can be harsh or dull but when conditions are right any time of the day can be worthwhile, you just have to learn to read the light and prevailing conditions.

Yesterday was a case in point, the light was better before the golden hours than during. I nipped out and grabbed this shot, some foreground interest would have been nice (unfortunately cloud formations have a will of their own) but the light and weather conditions still made for a shot I was happy with.



--
It's a known fact that where there's tea there's hope.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

Click to expand...

Harsh light? Take harsh photos.

Martin.au said:

Mjankor wrote:

Martin.au said:

papillon_65 wrote:

Martin.au said:

Detail Man wrote:

In the nature/landscape shooting that I do, the nature/quality of the light is an essential factor .

The "science" (if there really is one) seems extraordinarily complex, variable, unclear, unsatisfying ...

There are certain types of sky conditions that I have noted can be more conducive - but there seem to also be additional variable factors (such as the time of the year, and the angle of the sun).

Try as I may, my best notations of what worked in the past do not necessarily apply tomorrow ...

Yet, there is a certain glow on certain days/times that that seems quite evident to my eyes, and it seems (in my mind) that others (a painter, a stranger, a young child) can all readily perceive that !

Though such lighting conditions (at least) seem unmistakable , language seems to fall far short ...

Wavelengths, color temperatures, refractions, dispersions, are not truths that speak to the heart .

I can talk about clear horizons, light partial clouds, seasons, times, etc - but there is no set formula.

Question for you: Do you have a language describing how/why the light sometimes enchants us ?

Click to expand...

which is "fluctuation". The reason I love the golden hours is because the light changes rapidly and gives you so many different options, even by the second in some light. However this isn't confined just to the "golden hours". The worst photographic advice I've ever read (and it's oft repeated) is don't bother with midday. Yes the light can be harsh or dull but when conditions are right any time of the day can be worthwhile, you just have to learn to read the light and prevailing conditions.

Yesterday was a case in point, the light was better before the golden hours than during. I nipped out and grabbed this shot, some foreground interest would have been nice (unfortunately cloud formations have a will of their own) but the light and weather conditions still made for a shot I was happy with.



--
It's a known fact that where there's tea there's hope.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

Click to expand...

Harsh light? Take harsh photos.

Click to expand...

Depends on which hemisphere you're in. :-D

I use UTC in my Camera. So this one was taken around 1:00 Local time on the same (calendar) day that you were enjoying some harsh but warm sunlight .....

[ATTACH alt=""Harsh" winter light at 1:00 PM local (EST) time "]3013[/ATTACH]
"Harsh" winter light at 1:00 PM local (EST) time

Fortunately the obliquity of the ecliptic will bring some of that summer heat northwards soon.

I just HAD to use that terminology! After all this IS DM's thread, eh?



t

GeorgianBay1939 said:

GeorgianBay1939 wrote:

GeorgianBay1939 said:

Detail Man wrote:

GeorgianBay1939 said:

Detail Man wrote:

In the nature/landscape shooting that I do, the nature/quality of the light is an essential factor.
Question for you: Do you have a language describing how/why the light sometimes enchants us ?

Click to expand...

The nature and quality of natural lighting is something that I find extremely important when photographing flowers. Those opportunities only occur for certain flowers at particular phases in their brief tenure in certain locations at certain times of the day - and it all depends upon the light on any particular day. Without that component being favorable, not much can be accomplished.

In my experience, only a few percent of my shots of flowers (or any flora) have qualified for "keeper" status. Only around one percent qualify a "processed gems". Thus, a lot of patient work is required in order to produce a just a few interesting results. Those are the ones that I post.

I see a lot of flower shots posted where the natural lighting conditions are either lit by glaring direct sunlight or existing in dark and uninteresting shadow areas. It's as if people say, "I think that I will go out today and then aim my camera and push the shutter-button a few times".

They seemingly walk about when it happens to suit their own schedules, and shoot flowers without much regard for the particular lighting conditions that happen to exist at the time. It is as if they think that they will find the shots - as opposed to the shots finding them (and only of special things in special place in special times).

The ability of image processing applications to make uninteresting lighting look interesting after the fact is something that I have found to be rather limited, indeed. The light is every bit as important as the subject - both trump the hardware and the software used to witness and to polish the witnessing of beauty. The required investment is one of time, effort, and patience.

DM ...

Click to expand...

What a wonderful collection of flower images! As I mentioned HERE , we "Northerners" really appreciate flower images as we (patiently?) await spring.

Click to expand...

Glad that you like some of them. They are my favorites out of my few hundred flower "gems". Ontario has a lot more extreme winters than our relatively moderate Seattle weather, indeed. We often see little sun until a few days in May, but are not subject to your temperature extremes.

GeorgianBay1939 said:

I am wondering why you did not include your EXIF data so that beginners like me could learn a bit more about your techniques.

Click to expand...

Post-processing applications can botch up the meta-data (though things are getting better with that). Early on, I did not forsee people taking much interest in the vitals, and the habit stuck, I guess. I have usually mentioned the F-Number, Shutter Speed, ISO, Mpixels of crop, and the processing application in most of the posts where these have been initially presented.

The cameras vary. For the images posted above, Panasonic LZ5; FZ30; FZ28; TZ4; ZS7; LX3 (RAW); and GH2 (RAW) using LGV 14-45mm and LGV 7-14mm lenses. Almost all hand-held, natural lighting, lowest possible Shutter Speeds used. F-Number as high as practical on PASM mode models. JPG processing using PaintShop Pro 9.01. RAW processing using DxO Optics Pro 6.xx and 7.23.

GeorgianBay1939 said:

Your prose reminded me of this image that I made a couple of months ago.

Click to expand...

Just my thoughts as they exist. The gear-freak bit leads to technical satisfactions, but often less inspiring example shots - where it is the subject-matter and it's lighting that counts much more - and (in my case, anyway), a great deal of effort and patience to emerge with around a 1% yield of polished "gems". Am very picky about my images, and have passed on many of mine that are good in many respects (but dissonant in one respect), or which (for whatever reasons) do not resonate (for causes that I cannot explain in words). Viewing perspectives is even less tangible to analysis than is witnessing them in the first place using the elimination of a camera's image-frame.

GeorgianBay1939 said:

I had driven by that spot probably hundreds of time over the last 15 years. Suddenly I just had to stop and look at that scene and then to try to capture it.

Click to expand...

Nice ! That looks like an opportune time-window at that location. I see that you use a DMC-GH2.

GeorgianBay1939 said:

Speaking of your prose (and your depth of technical knowledge) I think that you might like a WEBSITE that was put together by some friends to celebrate the contribution of James Clerk Maxwell to the science of light and photography. I had been sending them my stuff for a while. When they made the site, last fall, they included my recent stuff in these TWO PAGES of the Meeting Maxwell website.

In particular you might like Maxwell's "A Student's Evening Hymn ":

Now no more the slanting rays

......

I must quickly say that I'm greatly honoured to have my amateur(ish) imagery in that website as Maxwell was a hero of mine .... even though I had a devil of a time with his mathematics over 5 decades ago.

Tom

Click to expand...

Yet another great scientific mind who was wider and deeper as human spirit than most remember them for. Always inspiring to see that. Discovery is born out of a sense of wonder which elicits awe in souls. These times seem tunneled, compartmentalized, sterile, and hubristic by comparison.

GeorgianBay1939 said:

PS That amateurish shot with A Student's Evening Hymn is from my driveway, which I caught on the way home one evening. Nice to have that "exposure", eh?

Click to expand...

That is an interesting sunset there. My sucesses with sunsets are few (though I have tried a bit):

Detail Man said:

Detail Man wrote:

Detail Man said:

GeorgianBay1939 wrote:

Detail Man said:

Detail Man wrote:

Detail Man said:

Detail Man wrote:

In the nature/landscape shooting that I do, the nature/quality of the light is an essential factor.
Question for you: Do you have a language describing how/why the light sometimes enchants us ?

Click to expand...

The nature and quality of natural lighting is something that I find extremely important when photographing flowers. Those opportunities only occur for certain flowers at particular phases in their brief tenure in certain locations at certain times of the day - and it all depends upon the light on any particular day. Without that component being favorable, not much can be accomplished.

In my experience, only a few percent of my shots of flowers (or any flora) have qualified for "keeper" status. Only around one percent qualify a "processed gems". Thus, a lot of patient work is required in order to produce a just a few interesting results. Those are the ones that I post.

I see a lot of flower shots posted where the natural lighting conditions are either lit by glaring direct sunlight or existing in dark and uninteresting shadow areas. It's as if people say, "I think that I will go out today and then aim my camera and push the shutter-button a few times".

They seemingly walk about when it happens to suit their own schedules, and shoot flowers without much regard for the particular lighting conditions that happen to exist at the time. It is as if they think that they will find the shots - as opposed to the shots finding them (and only of special things in special place in special times).

The ability of image processing applications to make uninteresting lighting look interesting after the fact is something that I have found to be rather limited, indeed. The light is every bit as important as the subject - both trump the hardware and the software used to witness and to polish the witnessing of beauty. The required investment is one of time, effort, and patience.

DM ...

Click to expand...

What a wonderful collection of flower images! As I mentioned HERE , we "Northerners" really appreciate flower images as we (patiently?) await spring.

Click to expand...

Glad that you like some of them. They are my favorites out of my few hundred flower "gems". Ontario has a lot more extreme winters than our relatively moderate Seattle weather, indeed. We often see little sun until a few days in May, but are not subject to your temperature extremes.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I know what you mean. I went to school UBC near you and spent each winter in a state of wetblah. Hard on a kid born and brought up in the hot dry Okanagan Valley.

Detail Man said:

Detail Man said:

I am wondering why you did not include your EXIF data so that beginners like me could learn a bit more about your techniques.

Click to expand...

Post-processing applications can botch up the meta-data (though things are getting better with that). Early on, I did not forsee people taking much interest in the vitals, and the habit stuck, I guess. I have usually mentioned the F-Number, Shutter Speed, ISO, Mpixels of crop, and the processing application in most of the posts where these have been initially presented.

The cameras vary. For the images posted above, Panasonic LZ5; FZ30; FZ28; TZ4; ZS7; LX3 (RAW); and GH2 (RAW) using LGV 14-45mm and LGV 7-14mm lenses. Almost all hand-held, natural lighting, lowest possible Shutter Speeds used. F-Number as high as practical on PASM mode models. JPG processing using PaintShop Pro 9.01. RAW processing using DxO Optics Pro 6.xx and 7.23.

Click to expand...

I used some of those panny small cameras when I first re-started taking pix about 6 years go. Graduated to a GF1 and now a GH2, which I am slowly learning how to use. Also hand-held -- too lazy (and decrepit) to lug a tripod around in the bush or in my boat where I do most of my imagery. So I work hard at developing techniques to shooting hand held, using the EVF.

I am learning from this WONDERFUL SERIES with so much technique embedded.

Started RAW last fall when I started post processing using Lightroom on a MacBookPro with a nice big monitor. Now I shoot RAW only, and work hard to get that first exposure right... ETTR etc. I have learned a lot from you folks here on Dpreview. Thank you.

Detail Man said:

Detail Man said:

Your prose reminded me of this image that I made a couple of months ago.

Click to expand...

Just my thoughts as they exist. The gear-freak bit leads to technical satisfactions, but often less inspiring example shots - where it is the subject-matter and it's lighting that counts much more - and (in my case, anyway), a great deal of effort and patience to emerge with around a 1% yield of polished "gems". Am very picky about my images, and have passed on many of mine that are good in many respects (but dissonant in one respect), or which (for whatever reasons) do not resonate (for causes that I cannot explain in words). Viewing perspectives is even less tangible to analysis than is witnessing them in the first place using the elimination of a camera's image-frame.

Click to expand...

I find that the processes are synergistic. LOOKING -> CAPTURING -> EDITING -> POST PROCESSING -> EDITING -> SHARING all contribute to the development/education of my visual skills.

Detail Man said:

Detail Man said:

I had driven by that spot probably hundreds of time over the last 15 years. Suddenly I just had to stop and look at that scene and then to try to capture it.

Click to expand...

Nice ! That looks like an opportune time-window at that location. I see that you use a DMC-GH2.

Click to expand...

Thanks. opportune time-window Often the case. Catching the light. Like this one:

Detail Man said:

Detail Man said:

Speaking of your prose (and your depth of technical knowledge) I think that you might like a WEBSITE that was put together by some friends to celebrate the contribution of James Clerk Maxwell to the science of light and photography. I had been sending them my stuff for a while. When they made the site, last fall, they included my recent stuff in these TWO PAGES of the Meeting Maxwell website.

In particular you might like Maxwell's "A Student's Evening Hymn ":

Now no more the slanting rays

......

I must quickly say that I'm greatly honoured to have my amateur(ish) imagery in that website as Maxwell was a hero of mine .... even though I had a devil of a time with his mathematics over 5 decades ago.

Tom

Click to expand...

Yet another great scientific mind who was wider and deeper as human spirit than most remember them for. Always inspiring to see that. Discovery is born out of a sense of wonder which elicits awe in souls. These times seem tunneled, compartmentalized, sterile, and hubristic by comparison.

Detail Man said:

PS That amateurish shot with A Student's Evening Hymn is from my driveway, which I caught on the way home one evening. Nice to have that "exposure", eh?

Click to expand...

That is an interesting sunset there.

Click to expand...

Another fluke, saw it in my side view mirror. Stopped the truck, ran across the road and snapped it. I don't think that I had started shooting RAW yet so it is NOT well processed!

Detail Man said:

My sucesses with sunsets are few (though I have tried a bit):

Click to expand...

Maybe head out to the Islands (to get that sun really low). Or maybe the Olympia (ic?) Peninsula. BEAUTIFUL.

I live on the eastern coast of Georgian Bay, Lake Huron and am lucky to get a lot of nice evenings.

Detail Man said:

Click to expand...

I really like your capture of the crepuscular rays and the composition of the last one.

Yes, as JCM would probably say, "It is a matter of capturing the light".

t

If clear blue cloudless skies at noon were only able to be witnessed for 1/2 hour or less a day, and at that only on the most fortunate of atmospheric conditions, while this warm glow was the norm for the rest of the hours of daylight. . .

Bobo Hodls said:

Bob Tullis wrote:

If clear blue cloudless skies at noon were only able to be witnessed for 1/2 hour or less a day, and at that only on the most fortunate of atmospheric conditions, while this warm glow was the norm for the rest of the hours of daylight. . .

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

Click to expand...

Law of supply and demand/want ?

t

Detail Man said:

Detail Man wrote:

In the nature/landscape shooting that I do, the nature/quality of the light is an essential factor .

The "science" (if there really is one) seems extraordinarily complex, variable, unclear, unsatisfying ...

There are certain types of sky conditions that I have noted can be more conducive - but there seem to also be additional variable factors (such as the time of the year, and the angle of the sun).

Try as I may, my best notations of what worked in the past do not necessarily apply tomorrow ...

Yet, there is a certain glow on certain days/times that that seems quite evident to my eyes, and it seems (in my mind) that others (a painter, a stranger, a young child) can all readily perceive that !

Though such lighting conditions (at least) seem unmistakable , language seems to fall far short ...

Wavelengths, color temperatures, refractions, dispersions, are not truths that speak to the heart .

I can talk about clear horizons, light partial clouds, seasons, times, etc - but there is no set formula.

Question for you: Do you have a language describing how/why the light sometimes enchants us ?

Click to expand...

I think the reason is suspended particles in the air.These scatter the light to reduce contrast end give an enhanced sense of depth, as objects become less defined with distance. They also have a tendency to induce warm colors. However predicting what will happen and when is difficult because moisture and pollution anywhere in the atmosphere from right in front of you to hundreds of miles away can create nice light, but at the same time too much anywhere along the line can block the light completely. Similarly too little will result in harsh light through the whole sunset (I've observed this in high, dry locations with no pollution).

Typically the right light can happen anytime the sun is within 30 degrees of the horizon (or as much as 45), but as it changes angles it quickly passes through various parts of the atmosphere both vertically and horizontally, any of which can affect the quality of light. You really have to gauge what is between you and the distant horizon to be successful. Personally I find the best times are often before or after storms because they typically bring high humidity and clouds can further enhance the effect. People who live in wet areas might instead try just to capture sun since they naturally have more "magic" light. Fog, smoke, dust storms, and other suspended particulates can also help, even if only a small patch that you are standing in. I am a little down on human pollution, it can easily become too much and block the light rather than enhancing. An example would be Beijing, where "golden hour" hasn't been seen for a dozen years, instead replaced by unattractive "grey-brown hour."

I've discovered a difference between "magic" light and a typical sunset/rise is the magic light usually persists for several hours or even days, whereas your typical sunrise is over in minutes.

Hmm quite a few more thoughts and even examples but this is getting too long.

Detail Man said:

Detail Man wrote:

Detail Man said:

no color correction or enhancement used.

Click to expand...

You mean that it is an OOC JPG, then ?

Click to expand...

OOC JPG, just cropped and slight contrast increase. Didn't touch curves or color.

Detail Man said:

Detail Man wrote:

My question relates to what others may think or do in making their decisions to attempt to capture given subject(s) in particular kinds of lighting environments.

Click to expand...

For me, it's opportunistic. I've found many photographic opportunities in various lighting environments at all hours of the day and night.

Early morning -- this deer stepped into the "spotlight!"


7 AM

Late morning: soft, filtered light on this flower:


11 AM

Early afternoon - direct overhead sunlight enhanced the colors of these red roots and reflections in the water:


1 PM

Approaching dusk:


7 PM, summer in California



Mixed lighting provided an eerie effect:


7 PM, late fall (Halloween!) in California

These types of opportunities are different ( and more fun!) than intentionally going out at dawn or dusk for landscapes, such as when visiting the National Parks.

- Richard

--
"Careful photographers run their own tests." - Fred Picker

It looks nicer than other times.

Detail Man said:

Detail Man wrote:

In the nature/landscape shooting that I do, the nature/quality of the light is an essential factor .

The "science" (if there really is one) seems extraordinarily complex, variable, unclear, unsatisfying ...

There are certain types of sky conditions that I have noted can be more conducive - but there seem to also be additional variable factors (such as the time of the year, and the angle of the sun).

Try as I may, my best notations of what worked in the past do not necessarily apply tomorrow ...

Yet, there is a certain glow on certain days/times that that seems quite evident to my eyes, and it seems (in my mind) that others (a painter, a stranger, a young child) can all readily perceive that !

Though such lighting conditions (at least) seem unmistakable , language seems to fall far short ...

Wavelengths, color temperatures, refractions, dispersions, are not truths that speak to the heart .

I can talk about clear horizons, light partial clouds, seasons, times, etc - but there is no set formula.

Question for you: Do you have a language describing how/why the light sometimes enchants us ?

Click to expand...

I think the visual language is a language unto itself. As there are sometimes no translations between differing written or spoken languages, there sometimes is difficulty translating between those languages and languages such as visual, musical etc. (sometimes the experiences of the subject in varying languages play a part especially in the emotions or thoughts evoked...for instance no matter how meaningful a poem or story written in German would be, I wouldn't understand it because I'm not versed in the German language..and even if I could speak rudimentary German..I couldn't understand the nuances within the language). So as I've always felt, to describe one language with another can be very frustrating, almost to the point of futility.

I know this is an old thread, but I find a very interesting one..and one I've thought about some.

--
My Gallery is here -
http://www.pbase.com/madlights
Why so serious? :The Joker

Raven15 said:

Raven15 wrote:

Raven15 said:

Detail Man wrote:

In the nature/landscape shooting that I do, the nature/quality of the light is an essential factor .

The "science" (if there really is one) seems extraordinarily complex, variable, unclear, unsatisfying ...

There are certain types of sky conditions that I have noted can be more conducive - but there seem to also be additional variable factors (such as the time of the year, and the angle of the sun).

Try as I may, my best notations of what worked in the past do not necessarily apply tomorrow ...

Yet, there is a certain glow on certain days/times that that seems quite evident to my eyes, and it seems (in my mind) that others (a painter, a stranger, a young child) can all readily perceive that !

Though such lighting conditions (at least) seem unmistakable , language seems to fall far short ...

Wavelengths, color temperatures, refractions, dispersions, are not truths that speak to the heart .

I can talk about clear horizons, light partial clouds, seasons, times, etc - but there is no set formula.

Question for you: Do you have a language describing how/why the light sometimes enchants us ?

Click to expand...

I think the reason is suspended particles in the air.These scatter the light to reduce contrast end give an enhanced sense of depth, as objects become less defined with distance. They also have a tendency to induce warm colors. However predicting what will happen and when is difficult because moisture and pollution anywhere in the atmosphere from right in front of you to hundreds of miles away can create nice light, but at the same time too much anywhere along the line can block the light completely. Similarly too little will result in harsh light through the whole sunset (I've observed this in high, dry locations with no pollution).

Typically the right light can happen anytime the sun is within 30 degrees of the horizon (or as much as 45), but as it changes angles it quickly passes through various parts of the atmosphere both vertically and horizontally, any of which can affect the quality of light. You really have to gauge what is between you and the distant horizon to be successful. Personally I find the best times are often before or after storms because they typically bring high humidity and clouds can further enhance the effect. People who live in wet areas might instead try just to capture sun since they naturally have more "magic" light. Fog, smoke, dust storms, and other suspended particulates can also help, even if only a small patch that you are standing in. I am a little down on human pollution, it can easily become too much and block the light rather than enhancing. An example would be Beijing, where "golden hour" hasn't been seen for a dozen years, instead replaced by unattractive "grey-brown hour."

I've discovered a difference between "magic" light and a typical sunset/rise is the magic light usually persists for several hours or even days, whereas your typical sunrise is over in minutes.

Click to expand...

That's interesting information. In Seattle where I live the sun sets in the west through marine air above the Pacific Ocean - which harbors a fair bit of moisture even in the Summer. I have read that a fair number of filmakers like to shoot footage in this general Pacific Northwest area in late Summer and early Fall seasons because of the colors in the skies. The sky in later afternoon and near dusk does sometimes become a beautiful blue in that season (and in the Spring, sometimes), and the quality of light is on occasion quite nice (though unpredictable). (Perhaps) those effects have something to do with the presence of moist marine air layers within those seasons.

I find that partial patches of high clouds are nice reflectors. As you note, results can vary widely.

Lights said:

Lights wrote:

Lights said:

Detail Man wrote:

In the nature/landscape shooting that I do, the nature/quality of the light is an essential factor .

The "science" (if there really is one) seems extraordinarily complex, variable, unclear, unsatisfying ...

There are certain types of sky conditions that I have noted can be more conducive - but there seem to also be additional variable factors (such as the time of the year, and the angle of the sun).

Try as I may, my best notations of what worked in the past do not necessarily apply tomorrow ...

Yet, there is a certain glow on certain days/times that that seems quite evident to my eyes, and it seems (in my mind) that others (a painter, a stranger, a young child) can all readily perceive that !

Though such lighting conditions (at least) seem unmistakable , language seems to fall far short ...

Wavelengths, color temperatures, refractions, dispersions, are not truths that speak to the heart .

I can talk about clear horizons, light partial clouds, seasons, times, etc - but there is no set formula.

Question for you: Do you have a language describing how/why the light sometimes enchants us ?

Click to expand...

I think the visual language is a language unto itself.

Click to expand...

Nature is the realm of the unspeakable. It includes, but is not enveloped by, symbolic utterences.

Lights said:

As there are sometimes no translations between differing written or spoken languages, there sometimes is difficulty translating between those languages and languages such as visual, musical etc. (sometimes the experiences of the subject in varying languages play a part especially in the emotions or thoughts evoked...for instance no matter how meaningful a poem or story written in German would be, I wouldn't understand it because I'm not versed in the German language..and even if I could speak rudimentary German..I couldn't understand the nuances within the language). So as I've always felt, to describe one language with another can be very frustrating, almost to the point of futility.

Click to expand...

Witnessing is about the witnessed, as opposed to being a story composed by/about the witness.





In that sense, Nature is silent in it's indifference as to how or why we conceptually envision it.

Lights said:

I know this is an old thread, but I find a very interesting one..and one I've thought about some.

Click to expand...

Good to know your thoughts, my friend.