Title and Caption Your Photographs

Giving titles and writing captions for your photographs helps you tell the story of the moment – and makes it easier for you to share your photo experiences with others. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it is not. Give it a try. It's a good exercise.

For this photograph:

Title: Love Bite.

Caption: On the sprawling plains of Botswana's Okavango Delta, the world's largest inland delta and home to more than 200,000 large mammals, an adult lioness gives her mate a "love bite," considered a mark of passion by man – and perhaps animals.

Explore the light,
Rick

P.S. Tech info: Canon 1D Mark II, Canon 100-400mm IS lens at 170mm. ISO 200. F/7 @ 1/400 sec. Exposure compensation - .33.

Follow-Up to My Monk Photograph Question

On Friday, I posted the above photograph, which I took in Laos this past October the day before the Full Moon Ceremony.

I asked the reader: Is there something about the photograph that bothers you? It was kinda a trick question, because I knew what most folks would say – in more or less words: I do not like crop - the decapitated monk on the left side of the frame bothers me.

You can see all the comments here.

Several years ago, I would not have cropped the picture in this manner. My basic philosophy at the time, and one that I generally still follow: Don't amputate people at the joints and don't decapitate them!

In the past few years, however, the style of cropping off body parts has become a style – as illustrated in ads and even in National Geographic.

The idea behind this exercise: it's a good idea to look at the work of other photographers. It's a great way to learn – and to determine, for yourself, what you like and what you don't like

I am sure there are those out there who still rather see the monk's head in the frame. That's cool.

I find it interesting that I was influenced by this cut-off style. Here are some screen grabs that illustrate this shooting/cropping style.


Before moving on, of course we could comment on each of the above photographs – and every photograph ever published in the history of the world. The OMG! ad was obviously a set-up shot. And the above medical-type shot was surely a gotta-capture-this-moment type shot. But what about the Women Digging shot - which I love? Notice how all the subjects are perfectly - yes perfectly - isolated from each other. At first glance, it looks like a documentary-type photograph, but my guess, and it's only a guess, is that some planning went into the wonderful photograph.

For answers as to why we seem to accept the cut-off style, in most cases, I turned to some of my photographer friends.

Kayla Lindquist – It takes away from being a specific person to being a mood, feeling or fantasy. Sometimes it works other times it doesn't.

• • •

Jeff Kane - I know that I'm supposed to have a problem with the amputations, but in your photo I think the "body" seems to frame and focus the picture pretty well.

http://www.jeff-kane.com



Jeremy Pollack - Here's a thought... reality TV.

Bear with me here. What I find common amongst all these images, beyond their different framing, is that they all feel as if they are taken at eye level or just below. Just about the same level as a steadicam or the even more common "shakey cam" from many newer movies, reality TV shows and Youtube . The same framing, but from a higher angle, would not work as you would lose that sense of immersion in the photograph. Instead, these images all offer a sense of being in the middle of the scene, as if it is just a frame grab from a moving picture.

This type of camera work is extremely common in the movies now, as well as in reality TV. Just as we photographers are trying to become videographers, we appear to be mimicking some of the modern videography trends in our still photographs.

Fat Frog Photography
http://www.fatfrogphotography.com
http://www.jeremypollack.net

(Hey, it me, Rick, again. I think Jeremy has something there. Below are two screen grabs from the intro movie for my Light It! app. The opening shot shows my head cut off, but just a few seconds later you can see that it's me. Good work Jeremy!)



Click here to see the actual Light It! app movie.

• • •

David H. Wells – In GOOD cases it gives the viewer the feeling of being part of the situation in the photo. It creates a feeling of being there, of being close to or even intimate with the people in the image. In the BAD cases it looks sloppy, like a form of bad surgery.

www.DavidHWells.com
• • •

Richard Zakia - Rick, With the non-ad photographs, I think the reason is that the center of interest was most important and that is what the photographer wanted to call attention to – i.e. the focal point.

With the ad, the removed part of the woman's head was, of course, intentional. This makes the model anonymous as if she was wearing a mask so she could be anyone and not a particular person and still be attractive. I recall some earlier ads that actually decapitated the persons head. The noted photographer John Baldessari did a whole series of photographs with the heads of men and woman covered with a colored circular sticker.

Richard Zakia - Photographic Composition.

• • •

Thanks to my friends for sharing their insight. And thank you all for participating in this exercise.

And while I'm on the topic of others influencing our thinking . . . think about music. If you play an instrument (as I do), no doubt you were and are influenced by another musicians.

Explore the light,
Rick

P.S. Here are two more pictures that break the standard rules of composition.

I'm almost done! Below is photo of a famous statute that has the arms "amputated" . . . and it's still a popular work of art.

Hey, I know I've spent way too much time on this blog post. I am going back to playing guitar – and trying to sound like Santana.

How Did I Make This Picture in 1975?

Hi All

I took this picture, my first ever published, in 1975.

Technically speaking, how did I make the picture? The camera is not in the straight-on reflection.

The photograph, a self-portrait, is a direct print from a negative.

Explore the light,
Rick

P.S. I added this P.S. after a few comments.

I took this picture while I was struggling as a music teacher.

I sent it to Technical Photograph magazine, where it got published.

Shortly thereafter, the publisher asked me to be the editor of a sister magazine, Studio Photography magazine.

After two years as editor, Minolta wanted me to head up the PR account Bozell and Jacobs... a position I held as V.P./Group Supervisor for 10 years.

I left the agency in 1990 to do what I am doing now.

Go figure....

Here is the answer: I used the tilts and swings of my dad's Linhoff 4x5 inch view camera to see the toaster head-on from an angle.

Good fun!

Now it's your turn! Take a self portrait this weekend!

And the HDR Program/Plug-in Winner Is . . .

Since the publication earlier this year of my 36th book, HDR Digital Photography Secrets, for which I mostly used Photmatix, and the subsequent release of Nik Software's HDR Efex Pro, I have received tons of emails asking me, "Which HDR program one is best?"

I usually answer, "Well, which image-editing program is better, Lightroom or Photoshop?" I ask the question, tongue in cheek, because I use both Lightroom and Photoshop –because both programs offer distinct advantages. Every pro I know uses both programs.

I continue to say that I use both Photomatix and HDR Efex Pro. Here, too, both programs offer advantages.

Photomatix is very fast, and makes it easier for me to get very smooth skin tones, as illustrated above.

HDR Efex Pro is a bit slower. However, it offers U Point technology, which lets you place control points, for fine-tuning exposure, contrast, color, etc., anywhere in an image. Curves are also included. So, there is less need to bring an image into Photoshop for additional enhancements, as I often do with my Photmatix images.

Both programs can get you basically to the same place, but the journey with HDR Efex Pro will cost you a bit more. Both programs are also a lot of fun and can help you awaken the artist within.

And to get your started, both programs offer many presets, which give you creative ideas on how to enhance your images.

My advice to serious HDR image makers is to get both programs. If you do, the winner is . . . you!

You can get a discount on both programs:
Photomatix - use this code upon checkout: ricksammon.
HDR Efex Pro - use this code upon checkout: RSAMMON. (You can use this code to get a discount on all Nik plug-ins.)

Explore the light,
Rick

P.S. Digital enhancements are a popular topic here on the blog. One of the most popular recent posts was on Topaz's Labs new InFocus. Here is another example of this plug-in.

But first, until December 3, you can save big time on InFocus. Click here.

Above: Original image.

Above: Image enhanced with InFocus.

Heck, know it's kinda hard to see the difference in low-res images - but the InFocus image definitely looks sharper.

For a better look, I cropped the images. Keep in mind, however, that the images are still low-res.

Below left – close-up of original. Below right – InFocus applied. Notice how the eye is sharper and the line of the horse's nose is much more defined in the InFocus image.

Here's a link to an earlier post on InFocus.

Explore the light,
Rick

Mozart and Composition – Photo Composition, That Is

Mozart once said (well, maybe he said it more than once): I’m not so much concerned about the notes, but the space between the notes.

As a musician (I studied at Berklee College of Music in Boston), I can relate to that quote – because the space between the notes is just as important as the notes themselves. No space . . . and you have just noise.

In photography, space is important, too. If all the elements in a scene are jammed up, your picture will be a mess.

These two pictures “work” because there is space between the subjects in the scenes.

You can create space by orchestrating a scene. In the making of the top image, we asked the riders to space out the horses during this set up shot. The first shots was just a jumble of shapes.

In the making of the bottom image, I carefully chose a shooting angle that clearly showed the butterflies mating. (I used my Canon ring light, by the way, for that even lighting.)

Your assignment: take a few pictures this weekend and focus on space.

P.S. Speaking of being at Berklee, world-famous Photoshop Expert Eddie Tapp and Canon’s Steve Inglima are both skilled musicians. So is artist John Paul Caponigro and the Mac Group’s Joe Brady. Tony Sweet is an accomplished jazz drummer. Scott Kelby? He plays keyboards, guitar and he sings. And… Ansel Adams played the piano! I guess photographers and musicians have something in common: We all think about space.