more dereliction - stepping outside your comfort zone?

Calina

If you read my blog, you'll have seen this last night.

Based on some of the stuff coming out of a couple of other threads I'm opening this one up to debate.

I don't usually do dereliction photography. I'm not always sure what my motivation with the sports photography is - it varies on whether I'm shooting kitesurfing (get the action) or surfing (get the relationship between the surfer and the wave) (the two are not always mutually exclusive either) but I do know that my motiviation with urban/land/sea/scapes are to create things of beauty and that can be hard to do with a dilapidated building which is slowly decaying into an ugly eyesore on the sea front, in Dun Laoghaire, for example.

I don't know a lot about the building. I understand the baths were still in use in 1997 but they are a lot older than that - built sometime in the 19th century. When I took the photograph, the light was sort of flat and I wasn't really standing where I wanted to be. But I wanted to create something that gave some hint of the former glory while making it very clear the building was a dead building. Since the building is so old I went with tinting it - this enabled me to have some leeway in fixing lacunae in the colour version (it's very flat and lacking any feeling at all where as with the black and white, I'd scope to fix contrast issues for example). The tint is sort of a throwback to some of the old postcards I occasionally see around the place.

The shot is very much out of my comfort zone. It's not a sports photograph, it's not one of the candy filter shots, it's not even the flowers from the Botanic Gardens. In a way, the trip around the derelict baths of South Dublin made me want to do some more abandoned buildings. I'm not even sure why, if only from a documentary point of view. But only a subset. I was in Mayo a few weeks ago with the abandoned village and that didn't strike me quite so much. I think it may be because this is still a living memory type building.

Anyway I'm interested to hear what other people think of stepping out of their comfort zone, where they've gotten - unexpectedly - interest results of the exercise...

smelltheglove

I think you have clearly achieved what you set out to do and it is a lovely shot. With regards to stepping out of our comfort zone it is something I try to do a fair bit, I did so not too long ago right beside this when I wasnt feeling any get up and go.



I think we should all step out of our comfort zones for many reasons, obviously to broaden our 'eyes' but also to give us more interest in what we do, I think it can make us better photographers if we deal with situations we would not normally do. For example, I am a people photographer, I shoot people in happy times, be it weddings, family portrait sessions or parties but I want the ability to do more, to deal with any unusual situation, so at the very start of my dabbling into photography I shot boxing, way way out of my zone, but I found it helped me to get a sense of speed, working fully manually I was able to learn to change my settings very very quickly, deal with low light and speed at the same time and I think it made me better in what I do in the fact that I never rely on any settings other than manual.

As I said a million times I dont find landscapes etc interesting in any way or form to shoot but I love to see what other people do and admire someone who can sit for a long time with one shot in their mind and capture that exact shot, something that I try to do from time to time but have not yet found the time to really concentrate on it.

dakar

First of all, can we sticky this as an excellent example of how to engage people in C&C.

I think you've done a good job of achieving your aims with this. There's a nice hint of faded grandeur, the treatment works well and the contrasty processing fits with the dereliction.

My eye is drawn around the image and keeps been pulled back to the reflections in the pool. The mirror smooth reflection and the sky are the only elements of this image that would have been the same if this shot was taken in the pools heyday and contrast well with the run down surroundings.

On the downside, I don't like the text in the border (although the border itself is ok with me).

Oh, and your sensor looks a bit grubby

EDIT/ just re-read your original post, and realise you may not have wanted C&C, but to kick start a discussion of stepping outside ones comfort zone , my bad!

Calina

dakar wrote: »

First of all, can we sticky this as an excellent example of how to engage people in C&C.

Thanks. *blushes*

dakar wrote: »

I think you've done a good job of achieving your aims with this. There's a nice hint of faded grandeur, the treatment works well and the contrasty processing fits with the dereliction.

My eye is drawn around the image and keeps been pulled back to the reflections in the pool. The mirror smooth reflection and the sky are the only elements of this image that would have been the same if this shot was taken in the pools heyday and contrast well with the run down surroundings.

Well, strictly speaking, if the place was still open you probably would have had people splashing around in there. And I burned in the reflections because I blew them out in RAW processing. Should I admit that?

dakar wrote: »

On the downside, I don't like the text in the border (although the border itself is ok with me).

Is it the presence of text or the fact that I've an esoteric taste in fonts? I wanted to date it like they used to do those postcards that inspired the tint.

dakar wrote: »

Oh, and your sensor looks a bit grubby

I know. It's heading for a wet clean. All the years I spend on the beach and I never got one spot on a sensor...this now, however...grub all over the shop.

dakar wrote: »

EDIT/ just re-read your original post, and realise you may not have wanted C&C, but to kick start a discussion of stepping outside ones comfort zone , my bad!

I will take C&C as well. I'm of the opinion you get more out of C&C the more you put into it first up. That's why mostly there's a commentary along with the photo when I do this.

dakar

Should I admit that?

Why not? You've just compensated for the shortcomings of your sensor, in that your sensor doesn't have the dynamic range of your retina. It's not as if it's a horrendouly fake technicolour HDR

EDIT/ which of course you could have made the creative decision to do either. I just may not have been very complimentary about it....

Is it the presence of text or the fact that I've an esoteric taste in fonts? I wanted to date it like they used to do those postcards that inspired the tint.

I don't particularly like text in borders in general, although I can see why you chose this font. Just not my thing.

It's heading for a wet clean.

I bit the bullet and got a Copper Hill kit, I couldn't be doing with sending my camera off every time it gets mucky. One of the downsides of living in the sticks (although there are compensations:))

AnCatDubh

A personal rambling, interpretation and discourse;

I really like this image, the decay theme is actually something imho that can be quite beautiful in the reality of its starkness.

Question - Where do you think is the intended audience for such an image?

LaChapelle spoke about how everyone gets something different from his art and he isn't too prescriptive as to the interpretation. With his 'deluge' images some people got life from it and some people got death.

From the view contained in the scene, I would hazard a guess that it is almost a statement on today, Ireland, 2009. The decay in the foreground which has a very nice leading line gonig at about a 35 degree angle from just above the bottom left out along the wall and across the pool, almost pointing to 'the distance'. While 'the distance' is a skyline which i'm now thinking contains the masts of yachts, I first thought them to be the bows of those large crane structures of the building sites of this fair city. Eitherways, for me, this decay line points towards affluence in which ever form it may be. Perhaps even a social commentery in there somewhere.

The treatment, shadows and highlights give an edge to it yet you've treated it with a softness. Its not tack sharp which is probably something that I would have started out looking for in such a scene of decay. The softness and almost sepia tones work as a style.

Compositionally, I wonder about urban/decay photography and how do you make it unique to your own persona when the subject of your compositions are in all likelihood bigger than your individual style. How would people know looking at your image that it was you that took it (without reading it below).

Photography can have societal impact. It demonstrates visually what people can find difficult to truly explain in words. The issue can however be that photography can be the biggest source of contrived materials as it promises to do only one thing which is to capture an optical scene either factually or creatively at one moment in time.

Well done. I like it.

Calina

dakar wrote: »

Why not? You've just compensated for the shortcomings of your sensor, in that your sensor doesn't have the dynamic range of your retina. It's not as if it's a horrendouly fake technicolour HDR

I'm unskilled at HDR and from the point of view lighting prefer playing with filters and off camera flash. I guess we all work with what we're comfortable with.

AnCatDubh wrote: »

A personal rambling, interpretation and discourse;

I really like this image, the decay theme is actually something imho that can be quite beautiful in the reality of its starkness.

Question - Where do you think is the intended audience for such an image?

Ah, there you see. Initially, the audience is me. If I like it, it stays, if I don't, there's a delete button right here. Once it gets past Calina QC, my objective really is to highlight the fact that despite our relative wealth (I say that advisedly and in comparison to most countries in - say Africa and parts of Asia) we are impoverished in how we treat our surroundings. Dublin is full of dereliction and some of the buildings/locations are beautiful. In a way it's a way to wake people up to what we've got and how we can better use it.

AnCatDubh wrote: »

LaChapelle spoke about how everyone gets something different from his art and he isn't too prescriptive as to the interpretation. With his 'deluge' images some people got life from it and some people got death.

Interesting. I missed him for a variety of reasons chiefly I was kitesurfing at the time. I don't really mind one way or the other what people get from shots but I suspect that depending on your point of view you could the pathos of a building dying or the possibilities offered for the future - ie, this was once great, could be great again. I can't dictate what people get; I can only provide clues as to what I'm aiming for.

AnCatDubh wrote: »

From the view contained in the scene, I would hazard a guess that it is almost a statement on today, Ireland, 2009. The decay in the foreground which has a very nice leading line gonig at about a 35 degree angle from just above the bottom left out along the wall and across the pool, almost pointing to 'the distance'. While 'the distance' is a skyline which i'm now thinking contains the masts of yachts, I first thought them to be the bows of those large crane structures of the building sites of this fair city. Eitherways, for me, this decay line points towards affluence in which ever form it may be. Perhaps even a social commentery in there somewhere.

Pretty sure it's masts. The marina and port of Dun Laoghaire are pretty much there. The social commentary is not much poor ----> affluence as decay can take everything no matter how recently we used it.

AnCatDubh wrote: »

The treatment, shadows and highlights give an edge to it yet you've treated it with a softness. Its not tack sharp which is probably something that I would have started out looking for in such a scene of decay. The softness and almost sepia tones work as a style.

The style is pretty much nicked from a load of postcards various relatives searching for their roots have shown me. In part, I wanted to generate some feeling for the site rather than revulsion. Of course, both revulsion and feeling can lead to "something" being done about it.

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Compositionally, I wonder about urban/decay photography and how do you make it unique to your own persona when the subject of your compositions are in all likelihood bigger than your individual style. How would people know looking at your image that it was you that took it (without reading it below).

Ah. This I don't know. Someone told me that I have a very distinctive processing style which I can't quite square with myself. I would say I've a very distinctive Delete button style. I've a feeling though that I am never best qualified to describe exactly what my style is.

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Photography can have societal impact. It demonstrates visually what people can find difficult to truly explain in words. The issue can however be that photography can be the biggest source of contrived materials as it promises to do only one thing which is to capture an optical scene either factually or creatively at one moment in time.

Well done. I like it.

I have another photograph which was designed to have an impact on how people view their environment. It's not a decay building per se but...




I guess, when you get down to it, what I want to do is get people to look at their environment and realise that what they do and don't do has an impact on it.

Does this...clarify things in any way?

magicbastarder

regards stepping outside your comfort zone, the two occasions where i was furthest from it were two weddings i was asked to shoot; as mentioned in a different thread, most of my enjoyment of photography comes from the process rather than the product, so having to take photos based on a timeframe imposed on me, and having the photos dictated to a large extent, rather than me 'discovering' them was completely at odds to what i'm used to and enjoy.

i can't say the experiences gave me a taste to go back. the shots i'm happiest with were the traditional 'firing squad' shots from the second wedding (the brief for the first was much less formal), because i regained control of the situation and could space things out to suit myself.

magicbastarder

Calina wrote: »

I have another photograph which was designed to have an impact on how people view their environment. It's not a decay building per se but...

i much prefer this shot - the rainbow rapids shot looks murky on my monitor (which i admittedly like to keep dark)

Silverfish

As a side note, we have a private Urban Exploration forum for the recording and exploring of derelict areas and buildings, there's a few photography forum people in there, access is by request but we don't usually turn people away

Just if anyone is interested in that side of things.

AnCatDubh

Would people believe that you need to get out of the comfort zone (where ever that might be) to keep an edge to your photography?

Humberklog - if you read this. Your stuff is consistently edgy. Do you continuously go around out of the zone or is out of the zone actually your comfort zone?

Fenster

Honestly, Treasa, when I saw photo last night on Facebook I had to admit that it just doesn't stimulate anything in me. Technically, it is dark, it is too contrasted and there are dust spots in the sky.

Creatively, it is a pool of water, some old buildings and a cloudy sky. There isn't any particular focus in the photo. The water isn't reflecting the complex, but could be. And while it isn't personal, I hate hate hate sepia toning in photos.

magicbastarder

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Would people believe that you need to get out of the comfort zone (where ever that might be) to keep an edge to your photography?

depends on what you mean by an edge. you need to challenge yourself, but that doesn't necessarily mean getting out of your comfort zone.

i'm halfway decent enough with a camera that people ask me for tips. my first one always is 'make life tough on yourself'. go out with one lens, or one type of film, with limited ammo. the harder you have to work for the shot, the better.