At 02:55 AM 5/25/2006, Moose wrote:
>AG Schnozz wrote:
>> Feeling a little inspired, I wrote a little essay about a tiny
>> community here in Iowa. I hope you enjoy it.
>>
>> www.image66media.com
>>
>> bottom of page, click on "Killduff - Disappearing History"
>>
>I've been wondering why this nice essay doesn't hold my attention very
>well, my eyes sort of wandering about, instead of staying on task.
>
>I'm thinking it's because the images are too flat, not interesting
>enough to be, at some non-intellectual level, worth reading about.
>
>I hope you will take this as constructive commentary, letting you into
>the head of an occasional picture book buyer who saves old calendars and
>sometimes pulls them out just to look at the pictures.
>
>I tried it out on 3 of them, and I, at least, am more attracted to
>punchier pics <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/KillDuffWeb/>.
Here is my attempt at constructive criticism, which I do to help myself learn
as much as anything. For me I think of magazines as the venue of comparison.
The photos do tell stories, but each one feels isolated unto itself. That is,
as a complete set, there is no overall view of main street, or something to
place the individual photos in context, an overall image of place. Each photo
by itself is a small story, a snippet, but combined together they feel a bit
rambling. There still needs to be one photo to define the place. If I were
traveling down the road, how would I know I've entered the twilight zone.. ..
I mean entered or arrived at Killduff? Versus some small-town Illinois or
Missourah.
It seems the essay has several things going on. Story and history of a small
community town. Story and feeling of an adventure through the town. Insights
and philosophy about doing photography.
For the average viewer, they probably will just look at the photos, then some
text to try to tell them what the photo is about, then if interesting, drill
down into more detailed text. So perhaps with each photo a short separate
description. Then if there is interest, the reader can drill down into the
detailed text. I think of magazines like National Geo where most people just
look at the pictures. Next they read the caption. Next they read the story if
they want more.
The basic rules of writing I learned way back when, and still try to use
today, are: 1st sentence tell the reader what the paragraph is, tell them,
then finish by telling them what you told them; the classic intro, body,
conclusion. If there are two separate ideas in a paragraph, they should be
separated. Even if the paragraph is once sentence long. All this is to help
digest the information for the lazy readers. Maybe put philosophical points
for photographers in some other format. With the website design of today, it
may be possible to weave these different stories and views into separate
flows.
I'm not sure you had the intent of a story when you did the photography and
perhaps it came to you later, so hindsight is always clearer. The one photo
of the door with KEEP OUT, since it is part of the text, a nice close-up of
the door and cross-bones. The ET ornament also, as you already have a tractor
view, a closer version of ET or angle with bare minimum to indentify the
tractor as a tractor. I think you also have a propensity for angles and
lines, like the church (and all buildings). I know my SO does not like
disorientation as much as I do. As a story on doing photography, they are
fine, but as a historical record, I'm not sure. On the church, I'm drawn
to the steeple and the windows. If I were in documentory mode, I might try a
longer lens further away to see the steeple and lower window, less down
spouts. Or for my SO, a simple straight on shot - here's the church. Maybe
not artsy, but may go with the story better.
Of course if this were a Nat Geo thing, you should have at least 500 shots
to edit through :-).
WayneS
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|