Andrew Sanderson - Home Photography: Inspiration on you Doorstep

This book was recommended to me by my tutor after assignment 3 "My Neighbourhood". I managed to grab a second hand copy from Amazon (which came all the way from India??!) and have thoroughly enjoyed reading it. It's a very easy book to read (unlike a lot of photography books that can be very verbose and abstract in language) and is well illustrated with lots of inspirational ideas. What was particularly interesting is that although the book was written in a time of colour photography, most of the images are not in colour. It was also written before the explosion of digital photography but makes use of a number of post processing techniques to add creativity to the images. Heavy use of photoshop is often criticised in photography circles, and yet creative image processing was used long before it's invention. It simply moves the processing from a dark smelly room onto a pc. I know which one I prefer! I tend not to use many of the creative features of photoshop because I think of it as graphic art rather than photography. In particular, I have not used it much in this course. However I have taken the liberty to try some digital processing techniques in this post.

The book was written after the author became a new father. Like myself, he often found himself staring out at the beautiful skies but unable to head out to make the most of it in stunning landscapes because he was looking after the children. If I had a pound for every time I experienced that frustration, it could pay for my entire photography habit.

I set myself the objective of trying to open my eyes and find inspiration around the home. This included making use of interesting light, creative depth of field or post processing. I also included taking the dog for a local walk in my definition of "home" and a wander around the garden to see what I could find. I also used a free download from Poladroid to create "poloroid" look photos. Finally I included a post processing experiment on a popular view from my local city of Newcastle. Ironically, once I had set myself this objective we had the most beautiful sunsets which I had to capture from inside the house.

So here's the fruits of my labours - inspiration on my doorstep.

Light Science & Magic

I have had this book for a few months now and have dipped into it now and again. I intend to read it alongside the "Artificial Light" section of the course. It was recommended because it facilitates understanding of light, by explaining physics in ways that are easy to understand. Lighting effects come in and out of fashion, and new equipment is coming out all the time, but the laws of physics don't change. Therefore I figure that by studying this book in depth, I will save money over time on seductive lighting equipment (always looking to save money!).

Unbelievably, I got an A grade in A' level physics less than 20 years ago. I think I must have left my brain on a bench in Amsterdam because it's like starting from scratch.

The book contains experiments & projects, and I will upload some of the results onto this post.

Update 20 June 2010

Well I've ploughed through chapters 1-4 of this book, and it has been a challenging but stimulating learning process. I enjoy science, although I find the application into practical photography quite a big leap. The first 3 chapters are about principles and chapter 4 is the first practical application into surfaces. I thought it would be useful to summarise some of the key learning points gained so far.

There are 3 important principles of light which predict how it will behave:

1. The effective size of the light source is the single most important decision in lighting a photograph
2. Three types of reflection are possible from any surface. They determine why any surface looks the way it does and are diffuse reflection/ direction reflection and glare.
3. Some of those reflections occur only if light strikes the surface from within a limited family of angles.

There are 3 attributes when describing the light - brightness, colour & contrast. Colour is classified by the Kelvin temperature scale (and is what I have been looking at in projects 51 - 53). A high contrast light source is also known as a hard light and occurs when its rays all strike the subject from nearly the same angle. Shadows are sharp & clearly defined. Therefore a low contrast, soft light is when light strikes from many different angles i.e. diffused light. For a single light source, the size of that source is the primary factor influencing its contrast.

Photographic lighting is the interaction between the light itself, the subject & the viewer.

A subject can do 3 things to the light that strikes it:

1. Transmit it (e.g. glass). This can be direct transmission or diffuse transmission of translucent subjects.
   
2. Absorb it (e.g. black velvet). Most subjects only partially absorb & selective absorbtion determines colour.
   
3. Reflect it. This is the most relevant to photographers and can be diffuse reflection, direct reflection or glare (polarised reflection).

Diffuse reflections are the same brightness regardless of the angle from which they are viewed, and examples are white card, light blue tissue paper etc.

• NOT AFFECTED BY ANGLE OF LIGHT
• NOT AFFECTED BY CONTRAST OF LIGHT SOURCE
• ARE AFFECTED BY DISTANCE FROM THE LIGHT (inverse square law - see project 55)

Direct reflections are a mirror image of the light source that produces them.

• THE ANGLE OF INCIDENCE EQUALS THE ANGLE OF REFLECTION
• THE REFLECTION IS AS BRIGHT AS THE LIGHT SOURCE ITSELF, HOWEVER THE SIZE OF THE REFLECTION IS DETERMINED BY THE DISTANCE FROM THE LIGHT

Direct reflections are used to determine the family of angles for a surface, and this determines where we should place our lights. A light placed outside of the family of angles will not produce direct reflection.

Polarised reflections are similar to direct reflection in that the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection but a polarised reflection is always substantially dimmer than a photograph of the light source itself. Glossy subjects produce a greater amount of polarised reflections, and they are more visible with black or transparent subjects because they produce weaker diffuse reflection so it's easier to see the direct reflections.

Some points as to whether a reflection is polarised or direct reflection;

• If a subject is made of a material that conducts electricity, its reflection is likely to be unpolarised;
• Therefore electrical insulators such as plastic, glass & ceramics are more likely to produce polarised reflection
• If the surface looks like a mirror, it is likely to be simple direct reflection.
• The conclusive test is the appearance of the subject through a polarising filter.

Placing a polarising filter over a light source and turn a direct reflection into a polarised reflection. As the open sky is a polarised light source, this can mean that sunlit metals etc. actually produce polarised reflections.

I found the section on polarised light & reflections the hardest bit of the book to get my head around, but it is pretty key. From now on, I will simply upload any of my results from any experiments that I do as I work my way through the book (e.g. photographing certain surfaces, texture etc.)

Review of a Selection of Works from the Photographic collection at the Museum Ludwig, Cologne

This is my first real serious look at a photography book i.e. a book containing the work of others, rather than a "how to" book of photography. There are a couple of points that hit home, before reviewing the work which includes many artists considered icons of 20th century photography.

The first was that the invention of photography liberated painting from the need to replicate reality, and therefore became a means of documenting history and capturing moods and moments. Social-documentary photography was born with the likes of Lewis Hine. I find looking at many early photographs depressing in mood, but initially did not consider that this was due to the fact that such photographers were driven by the hope that their images would initiate change. I find this a very interesting concept, and looking through those eyes gives the images greater impact to me.

The photographic movement in France at that time surrounding Henri Cartier-Bresson contrasted with this in that the forces driving such photographers were their own aims & style, termed "author's photography". Other movements in photography in the early 20th century included its use as a means of political propaganda, surrealism and of course Ansel Adams f/64 group, so called "Straight Photography".

Given the expense and less practical equipment that was available then, it is even more astounding what images were created at that time. Most of those individuals were required to be technically innovative with their equipment as well as artists. This is particularly apparent with the likes of Ansel Adams and Harold Edgerton. In modern times, even by middle school, pupils are often separated into "artists" and "non artists", and the A-level system in particular tends to separate science from the arts so pupils can either be one or the other. I suspect not many students study physics with fine art, yet a number of those early photographers were required to be both.

From the entire collection in the book, the artists that stand out to me as those I would like to emulate would be:

Ansel Adams, for his sharp and powerful landscape compositions;
Henri Cartier-Bresson for his decisive moment; I particularly like Rue Mouffetard, Paris 1958;
Alfred Eisenstaedt for his street photography; V-day 1945;
Dorothea Lange for her moving social documentary photography during the Great Depression;

I remain unmoved by nudes, apart from Edward Weston's "Nude" 1936. I also strongly dislike surrealist photography, and photography which captures strong unpleasant subject matter such as "Bon Appetit" by Anna & Bernhard Johanne Blume. Indeed there are some images that I can hardly bear to look at. But I guess that makes them strong, albeit unpleasantly so!

Transient Light by Ian Cameron

This is a book about landscape photography, which I feel deep down is where my true interest in photography lies. When the children become too old to let me take their pictures, and I've had my fill of flower still lifes & insect macros, landscape photography is where I see myself going. Taking pictures of people still intimidates me; I never understood before how the personality of the photographer is such a driver of what they do. Being a shy, non confrontational personality translates into my dislike of photographing street scenes and people in general, other than my close family. I enjoy seeing street photography images, especially the likes of Dorothea Lange and Henri Cartier-Bresson, but it's pretty tricky right now with section 44. I have always found stations a rich source of people watching activity, and thought that may lead to photographic inspiration, but current intolerance & suspicion of photographers makes station scenes elusive.















Back to landscape photography. The appeal to me is that the scope for innovation is infinate, because of the light. An unremarkable scene can be transformed to a remarkable one by virtue of the season and the light. This gives infinate permutations. The other draw is my personal wonder at the landscape and it's beauty, I never cease to be amazed at nature's wonders and the colours of the sky. My current circumstances (2 young children and a part time office job) mean that my opportunities for catching the best light in the morning are missed, and I have not yet captured a sunrise, despite living 40 minutes from some beautiful coastline. I hope to rectify this over the next few months before the clocks go forward.

This particular book is a great source of helpful practical tips so I thought I would summarise some of the ones which took me by surprise.

• Including the moon in a landscape shot is difficult, and will record as a white sphere unless taken at twilight or shortly after (it overexposes). Long lenses/ long exposures will also cause some motion blur of the moon. I have only recently mastered shooting the moon, but have not yet managed to incorporate it into a landscape.
• Shadows shape the landscape, giving it texture and form, therefore the direction of light needs to be understood & managed.
  
• The effects of a polarizer are difficult to mimic through computer processing. The temptation with a polarizer is to have it permanently screwed onto the lens. However there are several problems with that. Firstly it is a 2 stop ND filter in itself. Sometimes that may be desired, but it restricts opportunities for hand held photographs which are always a preference for me. It is also of no use in front lit or back lit situations. At full effectiveness it can cause shadows to block up to full black, and also for rainbows to disappear. Twisting to halfway gives the best outcome in those scenarios, whereby contrast & colour saturation are boosted. A key workflow decision is deciding whether a scene will benefit from having a polarizer attached, and whether to use at full effectiveness.
  

• Any reading on landscape photography would have you believe that bright overhead midday sun means you can't take pictures. Whilst that may be the case for a lot of situations, it can lead to beautiful coastal scenes, particularly in conjunction with a polarizer, as the overhead light penetrates the depths of the sea. This is a useful tip for me, living near the photogenic North East coast, as it presents opportunities in Summer for landscape photography when the capture of sunrises is impractical for me.

• I have never yet achieved a decent frost tree shot. The conditions I need to look for are a clear blue sky, and combine that with a polarizer.
• Perfect reflections are rare outside dawn or dusk. I can't believe I haven't noticed this before.
• Virtually all lenses perform best between f8 and f11. I have previously used f22, believing that to give greater sharpness, however I will limit this to f16 maximum in future. It is preferable to use filters to block the light rather than a smaller aperture.