I am new to this business of digital camera's and photography. As with most beginners, trial and error are my textbooks and reference works simultaneously. Yesterday I discovered something that may be important, but who am I to judge. It was a magnificent day and the blue sky was painted delicately with long wispy cirrus clouds. Could my camera capture what my eyes found so engaging?
So I took some shots of that sky but anchored it to the earth and what was going on below. From where I was standing the activity taking place was all about fishing from a waterfront on the Connecticut River in Old Saybrook.
When I got home and downloaded those shots onto my computer for storage and editing I was confronted with a dilemma. My brightness adjustment did two opposite things simultaneously. When I brightened the picture to reveal more about the fishermen and their surroundings on the ground the delicately outlined clouds I had captured on the same frame turned into an undifferentiated glare. So I adjusted in the other direction and the facial and bodily features of the fishermen became mere dark shadows.There were a dozen similar photographs and the same thing happened with them. What was good for the people was bad for the clouds and vica versa.
It later struck me: Wasn't that a good metaphor for aspects of "Environmentalism"? Doing things to better the lives of people can detract from the environment. Conversely, doing things for the environment necessarily dims man's glowing preciousness.
I had to make choices and since my initial intent was to try and capture some of the beauty in the sky my figures had to be sacrificed.
(( see new photo in photo gallery))
7 comments on Photography and Environmentalism
Add a comment
To add comments without entering your email and image verification, you must be logged in. Login or Join Blogster
That is the grand hope. My guess is that if that is at all possible it would only materialize if we are willing to redefine "obtain his do".
Thats the place. You're exactly right. Back in those days there was an informal seafood restaurant there with stone benches for outdoor eating. Now we have a miniature golf course and at a little distance another sit down formal at Saybrook Point.
You're quite right of course. I offer a caveat for your consideration. Motion picture film makers know that there is a trade off in the competition between the foreground and the background. A subject must be chosen and once decided all else is background and out of focus.
The question then is whether that is an artifact of the camera's limitation or does it replicate what the human eye does. Does the human eye focus alternatively on foreground and background or does it happen simultaneously. I don't pretend to know for sure. but it is interesting nevertheless. [SMILE]
I would like to say though, John, that I enjoy your short article. It's very much the way of the world nowadays. Me or that tree? My valuable time, or less landfills? It's a stumper, at that.
Robyn B., Jul 26, 2007, 7:02pm EDT
Robyn B.
I appreciate your comments. You've alerted me to the fact that my title points to a topic that is much larger and that a much longer piece could easily be written. Thanks for your contribution, it enhances my offering.