The Picture In Your Head.
What do we mean by Visualisation?
Visualisation is a process whereby the photographer considers
the scene they wish to photograph and makes a series of decisions about the
equipment, techniques and post-production processes available to them, in order
to translate the “picture in their head” into the final produced image. The process
will involve consideration of all things practical, technical, aesthetic, possibly
even financial, which will have a bearing on the production of the final image.
Finding an appropriate viewpoint, anticipating the appropriate light, selecting a lens and composition ... these are all elements within the process of visualisation |
The following considerations may be included in the process.
Aesthetic:
•Why is the photograph being taken? What is its ultimate
purpose or use?
•Which objects, or areas of the photograph, does the
photographer desire to be sharp?
•What overall framing and composition of the scene is
desired?
•What is the most appropriate lighting for the subject matter?
Technical:
•Which techniques are required to produce the desired image
sharpness?
•Will the prevailing weather conditions have an influence on those
techniques?
•What equipment constraints are there?
Practical:
•Is the ideal viewpoint physically attainable, or are there
compromises necessary?
•Is this the appropriate time of day/time of year?
Why is visualisation useful?
Many keen but unfocussed (no pun intended) photographers are
frustrated by the inconsistency, and apparent unrepeatability, of their best
work. Visualisation is a process which encourages a more systematic approach to
one’s photographic practice, which will ultimately help the photographer to
take control of the techniques which affect the photographic image. This will
improve both the quality of their images, and the consistency - the good
photographs will therefore become intentional, for known and understood reasons, rather than bafflingly accidental.
How do we see?
In simple terms, when a scene is scanned by the eye, light
from the part of the scene currently being scanned is focussed by the eye onto
the retina, and the signal from the retina is transmitted to the brain where it
is translated into a visual picture that the viewer can make sense of. As the
eye moves over the scene, taking in objects that are close by, and objects that
are far away, the eye constantly refocusses the image it is receiving, and the
brain constantly reprocesses the information it is receiving. Even in
conditions of near-darkness the eye can distinguish enough detail to allow the viewer
to avoid obstacles, because the brain is able to interpolate imprecise data and
fill in the gaps from previous experience.
How does a camera’s way of “seeing” differ from the eye’s
way of seeing?
The eye is often compared with a camera, and there are some
similarities. Both use a lens to focus light, both use a light-sensitive medium
to record the impression of the light, but there the similarities end. Aside
from the obvious difference of the eye seeing a constantly changing and moving
image, the two principal differences between the eye and the camera that are of
significance to the photographer, are the ability of the eye to constantly
refocus, and the ability of the eye to see (via the brain’s interpretive
abilities) in a very wide range of light conditions. The ability of the eye to
rapidly change focus, and thus for nearby objects to be perceived in sharp focus
virtually simultaneously with more distant objects, is not shared by the
camera. The camera lens may be focussed on only one plane at a time; therefore
in a photograph, only objects lying on this plane will be measurably sharply
focussed. In practice, there are photographs which appear to be sharp
throughout the depth of the scene, so there is a technique which allows the
photographer to mimic this ability of the eye.
The ability of the eye to see detail in a much wider range
of light conditions than can a light- sensitive emulsion or digital sensor,
though, is one which poses many more problems for the photographer. Generally
speaking, the brightness range (scene contrast) able to be perceived by the eye/brain
combination can be as much as 10,000:1 - that is to say, the brightest part of
the scene can be 10,000 times brighter than the darkest, and the eye can still
distinguish detail. In the case of a colour negative film, this contrast range
is reduced to around 1000:1, and in the case of a transparency film, it is reduced to around
100:1. Combine that with the contrast reduction involved in producing a paper
print of a photograph and it should be evident that a photographic representation
of the real world is not equivalent to literal reality. Quite the contrary, in
fact - a photograph, by its very
nature, is always at best an interpretation of reality, and the person in control
of that interpretation is, of course, the photographer. However, until the
photographer makes full use of the process of visualisation, and incorporates
into that process some measure of the shortcomings of the way a photograph
represents the real world, then ultimate control of the image will remain elusive.
For futher in-depth discussion of the differences between the eye/brain system and the camera/film or camera/sensor systems, see the following articles on my other Blog:
Opening Gambit - Decisive Moment v. Saccadian Rhythm
"Size Constancy Scaling"
For futher in-depth discussion of the differences between the eye/brain system and the camera/film or camera/sensor systems, see the following articles on my other Blog:
Opening Gambit - Decisive Moment v. Saccadian Rhythm
"Size Constancy Scaling"
No comments:
Post a Comment