My first Critique of a Photograph

Morning Golden Rays

by: Bill Atkinson

Location:
Smoky Mountains, Tennessee
Camera:
Hasselblad
Format:
6 x 6 cm
Film:
Fujichrome Velvia


There were so many photos to choose from so I got dizzy what to choose (wasted so much time too). Finally, I found this photo and chose it because it reminded me of something..which is not the point of this blog.

Here goes something..I don't think I am qualified to criticize this photo but I guess I have the potential. So there's these 3 contexts that must be taken in consideration when interpreting a photograph. First is internal context which is already given on top, the title, the photographer, the date I am not so sure when but I know it's recent. The title of the picture tells the highlight of the whole picture which is the rays of the sun, though I am not definite but I really think he took this picture because of the radiant beams of the sun above to the grove. But maybe I am wrong but for sure when you see the text or the title "Morning Golden Rays" you looked at the picture and took notice of sun rays as what Barrett said that the meaning of a picture is fenced in by the text that accompanies it. Second is the external context, the picture's representational environment, I found this photo at Bill Atkinson's Photo Gallery On-line that's why I looked at it in an artistic way.. Before arriving at the site I also been through one site but I was discouraged to choose photo from that site because it's like a photo gallery slash travel guide..It seemed commercialized..this proves it is true that the environment wherein the photo is seen does affect how you see it. The last is the original context which is the information about the making of the photograph. The picture is taken by a hasselblad camera, format 6x6 cm, film is fujichrome velva..This part just tells how ignoramus I am in photography, so I needed some research..I found out that this kind of camera with the 6x6cm size rollfilm is still widely used because of its superior image quality over smaller film and digital sensor cameras..Honestly, I cannot tell the difference because I do not have the copy of the photo in my hands because I cannot appreciate its quality on the monitor..A photo of a digital camera may look high definition on the screen of my computer (than a photo taken then scanned) but it may look not when printed.. then, the photo from a film turned out with more quality.

Color

This is particularly significant in this photo because of the rays of the sun..Of course as inexperience as I am I know the effect of a picture taken against the light. Bill Atkinson surely did some techniques for the photo to turn out that way. If I was the one who took the picture with my ordinary camera, it would the forest will not be as green as it is. The angle too is just right, it's kinda on the side to capture the essence of the scene (the way the rays entered the shady woodland-perfect!)..

Texture

Though the picture is two dimensional..It still looked like its three dimensional because of the angle taken by the photographer in taking this pic..You see trees before the rays, then the rays, then at the back of the rays is trees, it creates the texture of this photo.

Shape

In this picture, the object is the rays..here the position of the photographer let's you see how the rays opens up (triangular prism).

I had nothing negative to say about this photo because I liked it just the way it is. The angle is just right.

Seed

It's really true that we tend to judge the art by its title..coz when I looked at this sculpture I was tempted again to understand why it's called seed. But I am not going to let myself fell in that trap. (hmmm, just a side comment it's seed right but it's already a tree)

So here's one of Kublai art pieces that captured my attention (An old man that seem to have a tree that grew out of him or he's really a part of that tree). It is not that different from other pieces of Kublai. There's that similarity among all his works. I, somehow, just knew that he was the one who made that Durian with Lumads inside sculpture at the airport. It has the same astonishing effect on me when I saw his creations at Kanluran so I figured out that's Kublai's(it's quite creepy looking at it coz it large and seems to have life).As what Gombrich said it is the artist's style. Clearly, it is not a faithful record of something because there's not a man in the world that has a tree grown in him, rather it is a representation of something in the artist particular point of view (I guess this is one of the creatures in the realm of Mindanao myths and legends or symbolizes? still need to research). But as what I've said it captured Kublai's style and his purpose of reflecting the Mindanao culture through art. It make sense coz the ones who usually sees his art are Mindanaoans and as what Gombrich said that an artist work in a style that the audience can comprehend. The appeal of this artwork to me is like one of the extraordinary creatures in Mindanao epics. It makes me think of indigenous stuffs.

hmmm, these are all I can think of as of the moment.. quite vague, still need to polish my thoughts..BRB