To make or not to make...On a recent trip to Scotland with a workshop group we twice visited Loch Clair in Glen Torridon for dawn. On both occasions the light was stunning, with the mountain Liathach bathed in a deep red glow for around ten to fifteen minutes – a time period consistent with an LF photographer being able to capture an image! On the group's second visit the cloudscape was amongst the finest that I have ever witnessed. On both occasions the other photographers in the group worked feverishly to capture something of the beauty laid out before them. Yet I found myself unmotivated to make an image. The scene was sublime yet, despite the abundant water, it singularly failed to float my boat.
I began to think that perhaps there was something wrong with me (highly likely). What exactly was stopping me making a picture. I know I'm not known as 'Mr Vista' but I do like a wide view so that didn't seem a likely explanation. There had to be something about this particular wide view that was inhibiting the action of my trigger finger. This worried me for the rest of the workshop. As a landscape photographer how could I not make an image of such an amazing sight? One thought was that maybe it was because I'd seen it before. In truth, not this particular view but similar ones. I don't like to feel that I'm repeating myself so I often conduct a kind of internal examination (ooh, err missus!) of my motives to make sure that I'm not taking the easy route and treading exactly the same well worn path. To add another twist, it had long been an ambition of mine to make an image across Loch Clair in great dawn light. Yet I literally couldn't make the image. No matter how hard part of me wanted to I couldn't bring myself to put the camera on the tripod. Perhaps I was just losing enthusiasm for landscape photography, becoming jaded after years of chasing the light. Perhaps it was time to pack away the dark cloth...
Then, a few days later (on a different continent) a scene grabbed me by the throat and I felt compelled to make an image. Any thoughts of being jaded disappeared in the instant that I recognised the possibility for the image. No longer "a washed up has-been" I returned to the problem of why I couldn't make the earlier image. It occurred to me that though I had hugely enjoyed the experience of those dawns I had also instinctively known that any image I made would be a pale ghost of the depth of feeling that I had experienced. What I had experienced was literally ineffable and any image of it would lack depth and subtlety. It would have had an undeniable attractive, but superficial, gloss imparted by the amazing light but in fact the strength of that light would be counter productive; any hope for subtlety and richness drowned in a crimson flood. Evocations beyond 'Gosh!' or 'warm' beaten to a blood red pulp. The point I'm trying to make is that sometimes you can't say what you feel in a single image. Its range is too poor, its sensory inputs too restricted. I'm not likely to take up cinematography any time soon but it is important to realise the limits.
Like many things it's blindingly obvious once you know it. But it surprised me that it has taken me quite so long to make the realisation. Obviously I've been 'not-making' images for decades, taking the decision to move on and find something else. But usually this was because the subject failed some quality test of my own devising or that what I was striving to achieve was beyond my reach technically, not because simply it was too good. Perhaps it's just another excuse to not take the camera out of the bag, or perhaps it's a sign of some late-found maturity in my photography. I hope it may be.
75 comments:
How refreshing...you might recall that I had a similar experience when we were in Ullapool? I forget where we were but after an intense few days it struck me that just being there meant more to me than actually taking an image. It was a liberating moment
Being a landscape photographer carries with it a responsibility to recognise that we are often in places, on our own, where nature is putting on show and it feels that it is just for us. We have to know when picking up the camera will mean that we are just NOT going to capture what we see and be relaxed about it.
The maturity / presence comes in recognising when that moment is.
Being in the landscape, being present and thinking just of that moment - well sometimes it can't get better than that.
That contenment comes rarely in everyday life, when it happens to me I make the most of it
David,
Once again, thanks for eloquently putting into words something that has been preoccupying me for a while:
As photographers, do you think we are in danger, in our compulsion to make images, of becoming like voyeurs, recording everything but not truly experiencing anything at all?
Hi Julian,
There is always the chance that photography might distance us from our subjects. In fact this effect has often been reported, especially by war photographers who felt immune from what was happening around them – until they got shot!
If we merely record what is in front of the camera we stand little chance of moving our audience. In order to evoke emotional response we need to do more than simply record. John Loengard, a long-serving staff photographer for Life magazine, wrote in ’Pictures Under Discussion’:
A Ming vase can be well-designed and well-made and is beautiful for that reason alone. I don't think this can be true for photography. Unless there is something a little incomplete and a little strange, it will simply look like a copy of something pretty. We won't take an interest in it.
What do we need to do to move beyond illustration? First and foremost be passionate about our subject! Secondly we need to present things in a novel way. This doesn't mean that there has to be something flashy about our compositions or filtration. Rather that it presents the subject in a way that quietly surprises the viewer and thereby opens their eyes. It has often been said that we need to see with the naivete of a child in order to convey our wonder. The rest is down to how we choose to frame, what lens we use, how we render the image and a thousand other conscious and subconscious decisions.
Personally I am sure that photography has brought me closer to the natural world than I would have otherwise been. It has given me a deeper understanding and a stronger emotional connection. An all because it has taught me how to really see rather than merely look.
I had a somewhat similar experience at one of the LF workshops in Bamburgh, amazing dawn (pronounced as such by Mr. J.C. and he's seen more than most). I did want to make a picture at first but simply couldn't find a satisfying composition. Within a few minutes I decided just to enjoy the whole thing. It didn't surprise or disturb me though, it was just a case of not finding a picture that was worth while, amazing warm light does not in itself make a picture. A quote from the very same J.C. (on a different occasion) is rather apt: "You not have to make a photograph." The next morning the light was still great but not so good as on the first occasion; I made two pictures simply because I did find compositions that I liked.
I think however that there is a danger in the view that the picture must convey the depth of the experience. I do not believe that any picture can convey the actual experience unless it is of a truly uninteresting subject (cigarette butts?!). So it is just as well for me that this has never been my aim. The photograph (in my view) is an entirely separate object arising out of exploration of the landscape; yes it should convey depth but that could be quite different from what was experienced at the time. Most viewers don't realise that, e.g., a photograph might have been made in the rain with howling wind (and luckily they have no idea of the expletives employed). Complete immersion in the landscape means that the experience is far too rich and multi faceted for it to be captured purely visually. But this doesn't matter so long as the photograph produced evokes thought and reflection on the part of the viewer; the crucial point being that it should do so not just once but repeatedly. For many people a well composed photograph in amazing warm light does the job just right, but this is no argument for us as photographers always to make an image when presented with these conditions (nor should we fall prey to inverted snobbery and always refuse).
My claim that no picture can convey the full experience might seem like a condemnation of photography (or indeed painting). But in fact I do not believe that anything other than the actual experience can do the job. In this I am in good company, e.g., T.S Eliot sates "The most generalised form of my own view is simply this: that nothing in this world or the next is a substitute for anything else; and if you find that you must do without something, such as religious faith or philosophic belief, then you must just do without it..." (in The Use of Poetry and the Use of Criticism, p. 113 in the original Faber & Faber edition). If you want the landscape experience then you must go out there. If you want an artistic experience arising out the landscape experience then a photograph or a painting might just be the thing.
On the subject of amazing light let's not forget that the most subtle effects are often as a result of drizzle or even heavy driving rain; I include vistas here not just intimate pictures. Many times I have been presented with this (well I do work almost exclusively in Scotland) but made no photograph because I had no appropriate composition for that light at the time; this has never caused me a crisis of conscience. Many times I have taken advantage of my good fortune. So lighten up David!
KK.
Dear Mr Ward,
Fellow readers,
I have finally latched onto your blog and I have to say it has made a good read so far. There are a few points which merit discussion – apologies if they seem out of place after this particular entry.
When faced with a scene of considerable natural beauty such as the one you mention above, there would have been plenty of ways of expressing your feelings by drawing the viewer’s attention to one part or another of the scene. Was it really impossible to find a composition of colour and texture which would have suited your palate? That can happen too. Some scenes survive the transformative processes of photography better than others.
The transformative processes are known to the photographic community, as are the rules that help create a striking result. (Looking at your picture ‘Detail at Poverty Flats’ you must have known that the colours and textures were going to contrast. This is a technology you understand – it’s not magic (cf A.C.Clarke).) In response to a previous entry, a photographer’s photograph is a photograph which relies heavily or uniquely on these processes and rules: it is a distillation of this understanding. It illustrates this learning above all. Another photographer will understand the value of such a picture and will uniquely be able to react to it: this could be the main motor of the history of photography (and analogously for other arts), although sometimes some learnings are lost because they are not recognised by people who can practically care for the physical support.
I am sufficiently clued up to know that the print is at a remove from what is seen on the ground glass. Velvia is hardly the most realistic film but it gives some great results – if you like saturated colours. When the light gets low, the combination of Velvia and long exposures allow us to reveal the strange colours in all their glory. You have found your own way of creating strangeness by emphasising detail or generally removing context. I believe, you create a picture that is divorced from its physical counterpart in the hope that it will be judged on its own merits. Why then say that it is an illustration of Nature’s beauty when clearly you are creating something new and, dare I say it, original therefore? We are both using transformations to create a new origin, a new starter-point for our visual imagination – an object to which we can react independently to what the photographer saw or felt.
To me, your response to Nature seems bipolar: on the one hand, you want to create this novel, abstracted picture and on the other you want to illustrate the beauty of Nature. Which is it that you want? What is your message? In view of the transformative processes, we can’t really hope to show the beauty of Nature. So maybe we should stick to creating allusions that share some property with that which was before the camera (showing the shadows, Plato would say). I also dislike your anti-postcard stance: not all postcard shots are naïve. Both the postcard and the “arty” shot are allusions: the former to the happy memories of some holiday-maker, the latter to the photographer’s idea of Beauty. It seems a little presumptuous to say that one is more transcendant than the other.
On another note, for somebody who likes to proclaim his dislike of modern art so openly, I personally find that much of the visual language in your pictures comes from the twentieth century. Is this an over-simplification of your blog? Your picture page 56 of Landscape Within reminds me of Ben Nicholson. The great difference between prints and paintings is the lack of physical texture. We should get talking to BPD to see if they can throw some real sand in! That would have far-reaching implications for all these philosophically-minded comments about the estrangement from reality.
Lastly I would like to draw your attention to the French MF and LF website Galerie-Photo. The French are taught philosophy at school and many continue to think philosophically in to adult-hood. If you will excuse my presumption, I believe that your discussions would benefit from a study of threads such as “What is a Landscape?”: landscape of the mind, landscape in the print, the landscape outdoors, with openings on the question of the origin of Beauty, not forgetting the study of the photographer’s aim. Much of what is said on this blog is light-hearted compared to:
http://www.galerie-photo.info/forum/read.php?f=5&i=3193&t=3193
http://www.galerie-photo.info/forum/read.php?f=5&i=2157&t=2157
As an aside, and in response to a previous comment about the use of jargon vs plain English, the fact that these links are in a foreign language does not make them any less valuable.
Apologies for clogging up your blog with my own ramblings (clogging vs blogging!).
I look forward to hearing from you; best regards,
Charles Twist
Hi Charles, I don't mean to respond to what seems primarily a response to David but I wanted to question a couple of points.
Charles:Velvia is hardly the most realistic film but it gives some great results – if you like saturated colours. .... Why then say that it [David's photography] is an illustration of Nature’s beauty
Which begs the question "What is real?".. With psychological research highlighting that we remember colours more saturated than they actually were, then is what we remember real or is the actual technical colour measured real? By this judgement, Black and White photography cannot represent Nature's beauty...
Charles:To me, your response to Nature seems bipolar: on the one hand, you want to create this novel, abstracted picture and on the other you want to illustrate the beauty of Nature.
This doesn't seem mutually exclusive to me... If it's beauty that we want to represent, it has to be our perception of beauty (can beauty exist without our perceiving it - I'll leave that for photo-galerie). Just because Nature has been processed through a subjective filter doesn't mean you aren't trying to represent it.. I think you'll agree that very few of David's pictures belie their natural origins and I'd expect that the experience whilst taking them wasn't totally removed from the representation created.
Charles:Your picture page 56 of Landscape Within reminds me of Ben Nicholson.
If you want to go to extremes it's also reminiscent of Doris Salcedo but isn't it a little harsh to take a single picture out of context? It's also reminiscent of Andrew Goldsworthy (and some Michaelangelo frescos)
Charles:(re:postcard) : It seems a little presumptuous to say that one is more transcendant than the other.
Subjectivity be damned (unless of course the UK is an exception in it's banal postcard abundance).
Charles:for somebody who likes to proclaim his dislike of modern art so openly, I personally find that much of the visual language in your pictures comes from the twentieth century.
I agree but I have the feeling the phrase modern art as used by David is slightly different than the modern art as represented by the impressionists (for example). I'm assuming he's referring to the anti-art style movements. Impressionism is probably a well aligned with David's work with it's ethos of natural light and gestalt perception. You might even go so far as to call Velvia a form a Fauvism ;-)
Hello Charles
Good to have you on board but please call me David, not Mr Ward! Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the blog. On reading your comment it occurs to me that I may have failed to express myself clearly. I’ll try and address your points one by one.
Charles: When faced with a scene of considerable natural beauty such as the one you mention above, there would have been plenty of ways of expressing your feelings… Was it really impossible to find a composition of colour and texture which would have suited your palate?
In the situation I described I did find it impossible to make an image. On further reflection and introspection I’ve reached the conclusion that it wasn’t simply that I would have been unable to do it justice. I’m indebted to a previous comment from K.K. for helping me to clarify my thoughts. I didn’t mean to suggest that a photograph could encompass the entire experience of being in a place – even I am not that naïve – but to point out that on this occasion the gap between experience and image was particularly wide. KK’s quote from T.S. Elliot is very apt: "The most generalised form of my own view is simply this: that nothing in this world or the next is a substitute for anything else…”
More than this I felt that any image would only illustrate the subject, not express anything about my relationship to the subject nor say anything new. The strength of the light and the nature of the subject meant that any subtlety would have been submerged. The connotations of warm light and mountains are stronger than anything that I feel I can bring to the making of the image. Again I find myself agreeing with KK (damn you!) that soft light and rain are often the conditions that I find most satisfying. As I get older I find that I make fewer and fewer images in direct light (at least on the foreground). I find that in these soft conditions my own ‘voice’ can be heard above the clamour of the light.
To try and put it more succinctly, the view held no mystery for me and I suspect for any subsequent viewers. Without mystery any image will fail to hold the viewer’s attention for long. Humans seek early closure in the problem of vision – how many times have I written that! In other words once we’ve understood the description of a space it will no longer intrigue us. There has to be something else in the image to hold our attention. Many photographers try to hold on to our attention by using overt filtration or extreme wide-angle lenses to distort perspective. I find these approaches to be more show than substance.
All of this doesn’t mean that the dawn at Loch Clair wasn’t beautiful, stunning in fact, but only that I didn’t want to make an image. I don’t make pictures simply to record the world around me, though in part that is inevitably something they do, rather I try and make images that are in some fashion transcendent. Of course whether they are or not for the individual viewer is beyond my control.
All photographs are transformative but not all are transcendent. After 20+ years making images I’m more interested in the possibility of transcendence in a photograph than just in its inherent transformation of the world.
Photography is a voyage of discovery for me and I want to keep moving into what are, for me, uncharted waters. Of course not everyone wants to say something new in a photograph, nor should they. Perhaps after this long it’s impossible to truly say anything new in any visual art. But it is still possible for an individual to say something new for them, to hint at least at a discovery.
Charles: The transformative processes are known to the photographic community… In response to a previous entry, a photographer’s photograph is a photograph which relies heavily or uniquely on these processes and rules: it is a distillation of this understanding. It illustrates this learning above all.
This seems like a fair definition, one might just call it a reflection of practice and experience.
Charles: Velvia is hardly the most realistic film but it gives some great results – if you like saturated colours. When the light gets low, the combination of Velvia and long exposures allow us to reveal the strange colours in all their glory. You have found your own way of creating strangeness by emphasising detail or generally removing context. I believe, you create a picture that is divorced from its physical counterpart in the hope that it will be judged on its own merits. Why then say that it is an illustration of Nature’s beauty when clearly you are creating something new and, dare I say it, original therefore? We are both using transformations to create a new origin, a new starter-point for our visual imagination – an object to which we can react independently to what the photographer saw or felt.
Well no photograph is truly realistic, how “realistic” they are is a matter of considerable deabte. Photographs aren’t reality, they’re something else – a new “starter-point for our visual imagination” as you put it. My general inclination is not to merely illustrate (as I’ve said many times!) but to try and do more than this. I don’t think anybody would seriously criticize Monet today because he used colours that were too saturated, yet some people still feel that photographs should be realistic. What is realistic colour? Human vision is relative not absolute, we see colours in relation to the other colours in a scene not as a fixed translation of their wavelength. In contrast, film and digital capture have a direct response to a particular wavelength (ignoring any modification by filtration or auto white balance etc.). Of course different films and different sensors behave in different ways, one might think of this as subtle variations in flavour. We pick films because we like their flavour in the same way as some people prefer Gordons to Bombay Sapphire. It’s a matter of taste. As to why people are hung up on photographs having ralistic colour, I don’t have an answer because I don’t feel the need to emphasize a photograph’s supposed veracity.
Where photography differs from other visual art forms is that any photograph is necessarily linked to the time and place of its inception. One might say then that all photographs are fundamentally illustrations. However they can be more than this. I don’t think that I’ve ever said that my images are “illustrations of Nature’s beauty” – of course somebody will now point out the exact point at which I wrote this! I hope that they might be “original”, they’re original for me, but I doubt that they truly are in the grander scheme of things. I seek to express something about the beauty that I find in nature but not to simply illustrate it.
Charles: To me, your response to Nature seems bipolar: on the one hand, you want to create this novel, abstracted picture and on the other you want to illustrate the beauty of Nature. Which is it that you want? What is your message?
Again, not trying to illustrate – I’m trying (and failing?) to make images that are transcendent. But whether I succeed or not (and I’m ontologically bound to fail for a percentage of the audience and a percentage of the images) I’m enjoying my voyage of exploration.
I can’t quite see why abstraction and natural beauty are mutually exclusive. Why can’t my response be more complicated than you suggest? I don’t think that these attributes of a photograph are inevitably discrete or that they represent polar opposites. As to what my message is; I take photographs to express my “message” rather than write. I can’t express in words what is conveyed in my photographs and this isn’t simply a failing of my language skills. Setting aside that every viewer will get something different from the viewing, one isn’t translatable into the other. In fact, on a deeper point, I don’t think that what I do can even be thought of as having a simple “message”. I believe that what we apprehend from an image is not directly translatable into natural language and what I’ve learnt about linguistics and psychology seems to support this view.
Charles: I also dislike your anti-postcard stance: not all postcard shots are naïve. Both the postcard and the “arty” shot are allusions: the former to the happy memories of some holiday-maker, the latter to the photographer’s idea of Beauty. It seems a little presumptuous to say that one is more transcendant than the other.
I never meant to suggest that all postcards are naïve. I used the term postcard as an archetype for illustrative photography. Of course this doesn’t mean that all examples in a class conform to the archetype. Nevertheless the point of a postcard is generally to illustrate a place in order to convey a sense of that place to the person who receives it. Its raison d'être is not to be arty or connotative but to denotative. No doubt for the sender the image will be more than denotative (irrespective of whether the holiday was good or a disaster!) but if the receiver has never been there and the place is not famous it seems unlikely that it will be connotative for them. And without connotation there can be no hope for transcendence. None of this means that postcard images are necessarily ‘bad’, postcards can obviously be ‘good’ illustrations; they can be well composed, technically superior, visually appealing and so on. This is all they are required to be. Many of my images would make very bad photographs. It’s simply a question of horses for courses.
Charles: On another note, for somebody who likes to proclaim his dislike of modern art so openly, I personally find that much of the visual language in your pictures comes from the twentieth century. Is this an over-simplification of your blog? Your picture page 56 of Landscape Within reminds me of Ben Nicholson.
I would refer you to Tim’s response to your comment: “I agree but I have the feeling the phrase modern art as used by David is slightly different than the modern art as represented by the impressionists (for example). I'm assuming he's referring to the anti-art style movements. Impressionism is probably a well aligned with David's work with it's ethos of natural light and gestalt perception. You might even go so far as to call Velvia a form a Fauvism ;-)”
I did live through a fair chunk of the twentieth century so it’s hardly surprising that my images bear witness to visual influences that I have absorbed, whether consciously or unconsciously. I would have to disagree that I dislike Modern Art per se – it’s a very broad church so it would be very arrogant of me to dismiss it all. Rather I dislike some aspects and exponents of what might be called High Modernism; specifically their wholesale dismissal of traditional aesthetic values (such as beauty) and passion in favour of an-aesthesia and dispassionate intellectualism. As for any similarity between my work and that of abstract painters I can only think that it is coincidental. Pardon my ignorance but I don’t know the work of Ben Nicholson at all. I would guess that we might both be inspired by similar subjects and hence achieve a measure of congruence in the images that we make. Of course it’s just as likely that the connection is of your own making. Humans are, after all, fantastically gifted at recognizing patterns and making connections where none actually exists ;-)
Charles: Lastly I would like to draw your attention to the French MF and LF website Galerie-Photo…
Thank you for bringing this to the attention of Oceans readers, I will investigate…
Charles: Apologies for clogging up your blog with my own ramblings (clogging vs blogging!).
No apology necessary!
Hello David and Tim,
Thank you both for taking the time to answer.
I am at the younger end of the spectrum, so your comments are insightful. I'll stick with the rock'n'roll while I can! (dramatic contrasts, glaring light and jarring compositions - it won't sell whatever we do...)
Painters prefer north-facing rooms with large windows, so you're not alone in seeking the soft light.
(i) B&W can hardly be an illustration of Nature, stricto sensu. At best a representation and more truly only an allusion - as with the other forms of photography. We are agreed on the main point: photos can only allude to reality or some perception of it - they're no replacement.
(ii) I think that some of your (David Ward's) photos deliberately deny their origin by removing context. Which is what makes me say that I feel your response is bipolar: sometimes glorifying Nature, sometimes turning your back on it. Which I felt sat uncomfortably with the rationalisation sought in your writings. Your comments go some way to answer this though and I will give them further consideration. I understand now that you want your pics to be stages of a process from mundane reality to stand-alone picture.
(iii) The p56 pic is just one example. There are a number of pics based on planes of colour and texture: sand at Budle Bay, the slate quarry (cf May entry), Balance.jpg, etc. That kind of juxtaposition and the dynamic equilibrium they demonstrate, the interest in texture, all have been investigated throughout the 20th century. Would they have been thought beautiful before then (in the sense of "traditional aesthetic values")? (I accept entirely that that is my interpretation of those pictures; and I can be a bit creative...)
(iv) Re postcards, you're right to say that the receiver perceives little connotation - my oversight. I just wondered whether all this talk of Beauty has led us to forget the happiness that simple pictures can bring. What is more valuable: beauty or happiness? (my point being that, in photographs, both are alluded to in their own way). As for transcendance and how that is achieved, what its link to Beauty is, etc., I'll need some more thought before commenting further.
I realise that this blog is about David Ward's pictures, but is there some way of showing one's own pictures to illustrate a point? (short of giving a link)
I look forward to reading more.
Charles
Hello Charles
Glad that I've clarified some things...
However (and you sensed there would be a "however"!) I still don't see why making an abstract image from nature means that I'm turning my back upon nature. As we agree, the photograph is not reality but based upon it. My abstract studies of nature aren't nature but based upon it. They are related but separate, ineluctably bonded but not the same thing. The relationship is complex but cannot I feel be represented as polar. Rather as apects of a continuum. My abstracts are, I feel, just as celbratory as my more conventional landscapes. Just different to, not opposite to.
My writings (apart from my musings here) are generally about perception and signification. They are intended to help people reach a level of understanding about why some images work and others don't in a depth not supplied by the "rules" of composition. I don't think that they stand as a rationalistion of my images. They are a supporting structure, perhaps, but I never consciously consult them prior to making an image.
I try not to make any images that merely portray mundane reality – this would be akin to the cigarette butts photograph that KK proposed in an earlier comment – so even in my more conventional landscapes I try to include elements of beauty and mystery.
One might ask whether the visual arts would have explored texture and abstraction as worthy topics were it not for the birth of photography... Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
To reiterate, I don't mean to traduce what one might call 'straight' landscape images. They have a much wider appreciative audience than my images do therefore a great number of people find joy in viewing them. Making them myself is another matter. One might argue that I do, if only because the subject matter is similar (and specific locations are even the same...) but despite superficial similarities I would suggest that very few of my more recent images might be included in this genre (of course I might be deluding myself!). I certainly wouldn't dream of suggesting that 'simple pictures' can't bring happiness. Perhaps we might make a comparison with music. Pop music is adored by millions, classical music has a smaller coterie of admirers. Both use the same notes yet their effect is very different. Both serve the purpose of lifting the spirits (amongst other things) but in different ways. Similarly I hope that my images might raise the spirits of a few people though they're not, perhaps, as straightforward as postcards.
Please feel free to paste a URL to a particular image if you want to demonstrate a point.
David
Hi KK
Good to hear from you and damn you for saying what I was trying to more eloquently than I could! ;-)
It was never my intention to suggest that a photograph could represent the full depth of the experience. I only meant to suggest that on this occasion not only would any image that I made fail to do this even more spectaculalrly than usual but also that the strength of the lighting conditions would drown out anything that I might bring to the image. This isn't always true in warm light, nor at Loch Clair. It just was for me that day.
I do think that there are circumstances in which it is futile to try and make a landscape image that attempts to do anything more than illustrate what is in front of the camera. There's nothing wrong with this. As you say, "For many people a well composed photograph in amazing warm light does the job just right..." I don't mean to be snobbish (inverted or upright - though as an LF photographer inverted seems apposite) about this, there certainly are circumstances in which I would make an image in such light if other factors were favourable.
I wholeheartedly agree with you about so called poor light. Many of my personal favourite images have been made in these conditions.
As you know KK, it's in my nature to take things too seriously , but I'll try and lighten up! ;-)
Dear David
Unfortunately I am far less eloquent than your other readers so please forgive the simplicity of my writings. Up until this evening I was convinced that you had suffered one of the laws of distraction. That being one of many things that can stop your creative juices from flowing. On the morning you mention there did happen to be sixteen other photographers in very close proximity all fighting over the best ferns and reeds for foreground use. I knew myself that my image from that morning would only fill a gap in my greeting card standard work albeit with more than average light.
This evening however i found myself back down in 'my backyard' in Benderloch. The tide was perfect, great storms were leaping out of Mull and the foreground rock was reflecting all that colour too. I set up for the 'money' shot but could not bring myself to make it.
Choosing instead to make an abstract image and then sit back to observe the last light. There was no agony involved in my change of mind nor any regret.
I guess the point i am trying to make is that as long as the decision not to make an image was your own then it was the right one, artistically the right thing to do at that place at that time.
Most of us have yet to learn that not making an image is sometimes better than wasting our time and film on something that ultimately will not satisfy our own needs as photographers.
Richard
Charles:The p56 pic is just one example. There are a number of pics based on planes of colour and texture: sand at Budle Bay, the slate quarry (cf May entry), Balance.jpg, etc. That kind of juxtaposition and the dynamic equilibrium they demonstrate, the interest in texture, all have been investigated throughout the 20th century. Would they have been thought beautiful before then (in the sense of "traditional aesthetic values")?
I think that it's a bit of a myth that the 20th Century has a monopoly on non-figurative/abstract art. One thing that isn't well known is that a lot of the modern artists were influenced by photography themselves (I'm talking mostly about the impressionists).
However in response to your comment about perceived beauty through aesthetic values, I think the problem is that the mainstream aesthetic values were market driven from the rich elite. This meant that there was very little market for non-figurative art that was in any way novel.
I think you have to look to other sources to see where the mainstream aesthetic lies and I think you'll find this in the world of craft, which is where the average person expressed their aesthetic. The history of expressing beauty in the creation of objects is probably longer than that of fine art.
I'll finish on what I think is one of the first artists that really expressed the understanding of modern composition and abstraction. This artist was a huge influence on modern art and is held by many to be the unwitting grandfather of the whole movement..
I'm talking about a japanese artist called 'Katsushika Hokusai' who was creating this sort of artwork since the 1700's. I think most people are familiar with his famous tidal wave and also his pictures of mount Fuji but he was for me just a brilliant observer of the world around him. The impressionists combined this type of study with the colour of turner and exposed a new way of seeing the western world. I think David's pictures reflect this time in history , the 19th Century, better than it reflects the 20th Century.
Have a look at these pictures for examples...
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Hello David
My first go at this blogging business...A really fascinating and a refreshing discussion.
The not making an image moment happened to me, last weekend, at Robin Hoods Bay with Dave T. There was a fabulous red dawn over the sea, but after playing around with a couple of potential images I gave up and just watched it and enjoyed. It was full on into the dawn light, and in this instance I wasn’t motivated by any image I know I could make (I was of course personally motivated by the dawn). And I didn't regret having not made an image. Is this different to or the same as what you are describing?
Back to Loch Clair. You'll remember I was standing close by at the time; on a mission to make the image I had visualised on the previous visit and we had discussed over breakfast. The previous time, my first ever visit, had yielded nothing but the 'rabbit in the headlights' effect (very different I think from what you experienced) but this time I knew what I wanted to say.
I guess my point is this: I was motivated to make an image because I knew I wanted to say something about the place and felt that I could, probably, pull it off. At Robin Hoods Bay, at that time and place, I was not so motivated by any potential image I could visualise.
This makes me think: Is there is a difference between choosing not to make an image on that day in Scotland at dawn with brilliant light and a similar decision any one of us might make to not make an image in, say, mid day summer sunlight. It is surely not the fact that the light is not right. Is it that you know, from experience, the image won’t work, it won’t live up to your expectations and will not do justice to what you feel about the place and want to say?
If I’ve learned one thing from the workshops I have done with you, it is selection based on vision. I am now relaxed making for 3-4 LF images max in a day, to a much higher standard than I would ever have ‘accidentally’ managed several years ago. For me the question of what motivates one to make or not make an image is at the heart of the question ‘what is your vision’.
One interesting question: did uniqueness have anything to do with your motivation? With 16 other people blundering around the landscape there wasn’t much chance of that? If you had been there on the Sunday before with nobody else, would it have made a difference?
Another question that bothers me is can you get so selective, you stop altogether – 3 images a day becomes 2 becomes 1 becomes 1 a month? And does selection limit ones creativity? (one of the reasons I choose to digi-snap in parallel with LF is partly because it helps me realise potential new images – that morning being a case in point)
Either way, you’ve made me think harder about what motivates me or anyone else to make an image. Joe C is an interesting case in point. He is motivated to document the landscape - I am sure he made an image at that moment and that it will probably end up in his next book. It will never have occurred to him to not make an image when the stage was lit up in a way that might do justice to what he wants to say. For me that is just having a different vision and one of the reasons I so love looking at how different photographers work and what motivates them.
By the way, I made a digi-snap of the cloudscape which I have posted to the L&L gallery - taken in true Galen Rowell fashion. My motivation for taking it was different to the motivation I had for making the main LF image that morning. It was a record shot, a scenic snap, a memory jogger for someone with a crap memory like mine. I think deep down it also satisfied the urge I still have to record the moment, however badly. Now at least it has some value as illustration…!
Hi Jon,
Nice to see you on Oceans!
I think that the reason I didn't make an image was perhaps a question of experience, or perhaps an incorrect interpretation of experience... It just didn't feel right. My angst was primarily driven by the fact that the conditions were exceptional. Surely I should be making an image!?! I'm sure that I could have found a composition (despite sharing the location with 15 others) but it would have been an empty gesture, it would have been an image that I knew probably wouldn't come out of the draw. I don't think uniqueness was an issue as I'm fairly confident I could have made a different composition – in fact I did, the one that accompanies this blog entry!
Jon: Another question that bothers me is can you get so selective, you stop altogether – 3 images a day becomes 2 becomes 1 becomes 1 a month?
This question was once posed by a friend who said to me that if one makes fewer images as one gets better is the definition of a photographic genius someone that wanders across the landscape looking at compositions and not making them? There's always the chance that one can get too precious and disappear up one's own a**e! However I think that it's quite natural for the rate of image making to drop as one gains experience. Surely if it stayed the same it would be a sign that either one hadn't learnt anything or one was insanely talented and every image was a masterpiece?! Even Ansel didn't make that many great images in a year...
I too made a digisnap of the cloudscape... on my phone! It will serve as a memory jogger of a truly amazing experience. Perhaps this just highlights that the I don't use the LF camera simply as a means of recording a moment but for something more than this...
BTW: You can find Jon's image HERE
Hi Tim,
Thanks for your further insightful comments. I alluded (rather obtusely perhaps!) to your point on painting being influenced by photography in my answer to Charles:
One might ask whether the visual arts would have explored texture and abstraction as worthy topics were it not for the birth of photography... Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
More than just being unfluenced I think that the case can be made that painters began exploring abstraction because photography was so much better at plain description than most painters could ever hope to be. Before the discovery of a viable photographic process one of the prime objectives of painting was achieving verisimilitude. Since photography came along painting has largely turned its back on this endeavour (setting aside a few movements aimed at achieving ultra realism). Coincidence? I think not.
By the way, I say discovery rather than invention as possibility of photography has been known for centuries.
Hi Charles
I hope you're still reading the comments on this post...
One thing that you wrote in your last comment is puzzling me:
I understand now that you want your pics to be stages of a process from mundane reality to stand-alone picture.
Please explain if you're around!
Regards
David
Hello all,
Here's a link to an image I did feel motivated to make in full blooded light (as Niall Benvie refers to it): Uttakleiv epic sunset
Hello David,
Thank you for your answer. I am always happy to expand but was afraid to be hogging rather than clogging! :-)
I see some of your pictures as being closer to reality than others. When you shoot an object (eg a stand of trees or pebbles), such that the viewer will need little effort to recognise which object was in front of the camera, I would say you are a lot closer to reality than if you created a picture where the object photographed is not instantly recognised. Recognisability is subjective; this proposed rule is relative not absolute. (This might be a mathematical thing that KK would recognise: true in each case, but not true for all cases at once.) For me, there are pictures of yours which remind me of the 20th century art I love and have spent a number of years studying (more than photography and before it). These pictures remind me more of this other object than the object which was before your lens. So, my judgment of your work has led me away from what you were photographing towards something more generically graphic. For me, there comes a point where the photograph ceases to be a representation of reality and takes on a life of its own in terms relating purely to graphism. It may be that this was not your intention.
I think it is important for the photograph to be a graphical message - to be planes of colour and (represented) texture. I wish I were better at it ([url=http://www.lf-photo.org.uk/participants/C_Twist/Front_door.htm]better example[/url]) and derive great pleasure from the ones where you have succeeded.
With regard to your preceding message, the musical comment could be taken a lot further. There is a whole section of contemporary music based on the recording of everyday sounds. Some musicians use these sounds in relatively naturalistic terms, some in a far more treated form. Sounds familiar?
Lastly, I know rationalisation comes after the event. Having said that, I discovered on the French forum, that there are people who construct a photographic project by deciding all the minutiae of the shoot before they shoot. The inspiration takes place at a very theoretical level. The framework gives great homogeneity to the work - and strength too, I must say.
Thank you for this opportunity to speak out. I hope the above helps.
I look forward to hearing your comments.
Charles
Thanks David,
I think we're in agreement that photography, and in particular it's transformation of seeing, played a more important effect on art initially than art did on photography. The Pictorialists were the ones obsessed with formal art and look where that led.
I like the photographic/artistic isn't a continuum but is more ouroborous like, eating it's own tail.
One of my favourite enlightenment moments is when wide angle photography was initially shown to people they didn't understand what they were seeing! This view of the world was so far removed from reality that we had to learn a new way of seeing in order to understand it. Now, of course, we're exposed to this view all of the time and don't think it strange .
From the age of six I had a mania for drawing the shapes of things. When I was fifty I had published a universe of designs. but all I have done before the the age of seventy is not worth bothering with.
I found a wonderful quote whilst doing some background browsing and I think it's quite appropriate for this lifelong learning quest that is photography.. It's by Hokusai..
"From the age of six I had a mania for drawing the shapes of things. When I was fifty I had published a universe of designs. but all I have done before the the age of seventy is not worth bothering with.
At seventy five I’ll have learned something of the pattern of nature, of animals, of plants, of trees, birds, fish and insects. When I am eighty you will see real progress. At ninety I shall have cut my way deeply into the mystery of life itself. At a hundred I shall be a marvelous artist. At a hundred and ten everything I create; a dot, a line, will jump to life as never before."
Maybe...
Also, in response to Jon's comments, I have also thought about the extremes of the reduction of output and come to the conclusion that one needs to set ones standards just higher than ones capacity. This way we, satisfaction is just out of reach and we have to make real effort for every result. I don't think it's a matter of not taking many pictures but of really understanding what you are taking pictures of..
Let's imagine we were permanently trapped in that moment of time with the red light and the lake at Glen Torridon. Would we never take a photograph? I think we would, sooner or later the inspiration particle would hit whilst we were looking at the right topic and then we'd work hard to get a result. A lifetime in that moment may produce a huge amount of work. But the inspiration, light, subject and mood must meet.
At least I imagine this is so, I'm still learning how and why I'm taking photographs and I feel a little fraudulent talking it when I can't do it quite yet. Also, sometimes I have to make myself take pictures I know won't be particularly stunning because I know I will learn from the process. At some point I may learn enough that the only reason I take a picture is to get at the result - at the moment I'm definitely not there yet.
Hello Tim,
That last paragraph about life on the learning curve is something I can associate with closely. It reminds me of the scathing comment: “this student has set himself low standards which he has failed to attain”, which should be uttered more often maybe.
On the question of art and photography, I am sure it makes a great subject for a thesis, but it goes against a lot of the manifestos from the 1900-1935 period which I have read. Much of the late 19th century is in thrall to technological and scientific progress. I never got the chance to read Seurat’s treatise on pointillism, but I doubt the movement would have come about without the advent of synthetic dyes. I wouldn’t be surprised to know the first colour notation schemes date from that period. I think pointillism has more to do with Goethe’s treatise on light and Chevreul’s book on simultaneous contrast than with any photographic development. All this led to Delaunay’s simultaneism: the manifesto mentions wave-particle duality and the relativity theory with its talk of systems of reference, as well as the two books above, but photography, no.
Another thread: Cezanne reacted to impressionism which is at the end of the day superficial (based on first impressions). He wanted to go deeper, to reveal the essence of the object (like Hokusai above). He believed in representing it from several viewpoints at once. Although, some of the results now remind me of drop-shift on a view camera, I doubt that was his starting point. This work led to Braque and Picasso creating cubism after a lot of experimenting. Was this really a reaction to photography? Having read Gleizes’ Du Cubisme, I rather think not.
Take Kandinsky: allegedly, he realised that his pictures could be abstract the day that a gallery hung one of his real-world-based pictures upside down.
I will concede that image projection has been used to create exacting sketches of cities (eg Canaletto). But I can think of only one direct influence of photography on painting in the period 1900-1935: futurism and the use of motion blur.
In all the above examples, I have stayed with movements which at their core sought to depict the real-world. There are so many ways to do so. Different movements show different facets. Some results require more processing than others. But it’s all done through thought and experimentation.
The way the movements evolve is interesting. I see no need for photography in any of the above, although I am certain that a good many of the artists had a camera and tried their hand at it. It would hardly be surprising to see their work - photos and canvases alike - echo their vision and findings, and therefore have similarities. Could that be at the heart of what you describe?
I don't think that the movements evolved in order to get away from photography: they were exploring world representation systems out of curiosity, keen to expand or replace the system that had prevailed for so long (after all, everything else in their world was being renewed). They felt limited and frustrated, that the old system wasn't taking into account new thoughts in other fields. They also wanted to be closer to their perceptions - aiming to depict the essence of the object.
I see evolution as being canvas-based primarily – one result leading to another. I think that the resulting pictures act as stand-alone graphical information bereft of much of the subtlety which the artist intended (or even needed in order to create it). The next generation of artists look at them and react with a new vision and imagination, a different subtlety – a new culture. It’s a continuous and cycling process of reaction and action.
I look forward to hearing your comments.
Charles
PS could the moderator alter my previous message to make the link to my picture? What is the correct syntax? Thank you.
Hello David,
You said: "I try and make images that are in some fashion transcendent."
I presume what you are wanting to transcend, is the object before the lens, in order to elevate it and make it resonate with feelings or thoughts in other fields. Do you think transcendence leads to a picture which breaks its tie with that which was before the lens? I know you have said that you are seeking to make transcendent pictures while not denying their illustrative qualities, and I accept that you have given yourself this twin-task; my question relates uniquely to the transcendence aspect. Do you feel transcendence can or should retain its link to the real world? Ignoring the illustrative qualities, is the transcendent picture still a landscape photograph?
Thank you for your patience.
Charles
Hello David.
I've just returned from a few days in the Highlands hence the delay in replying. I am of course distressed to find that you agree with much of what I said; must try harder next time. I should explain that my posting was largely taking up the theme you introduced and musing on possible variations of it rather than ascribing any particular view to you, though that wasn't made very clear. No doubt the list of your faults makes for long and interesting reading but snobbery (inverted or otherwise) is not amongst them. Also I couldn't resist the golden opportunity of telling a photographer to "lighten" up; the joke was too bad to miss out.
During my few days in the Highlands I had exactly the opposite of the experience you described. I wanted very badly to make a photograph on several occasions but the forces of nature would not allow it. Incredibly strong wind coming from just about every conceivable direction at random with rain and spray mixed in exceeded the limits of LF photography (well unless you follow what some advertising people were doing and photograph from the back of a van but that does limit compositions and locations somewhat). Even so the few days of rain were great (not a single sunrise or sunset). While I'm on this point it is amazing how good the envelopes for QuickLoad are, they can take quite a soaking without the film showing any bad effects; nice one Fuji.
I don't know if the story of Turner having himself tied to the mast of a ship in order to experience a storm in full is true. However this does seem to me to distil the essential difference between photography and other visual art. I've never thought much of the claim that photography is tied to an actual subject as being the difference, after all any work of art represents something; abstract or figurative. Here I am ignoring such juvenile notions as "automatic" art. The real difference is that the photographer cannot decide to create the work at a later time. I'm not claiming this as an original insight but it does seem to me that too often discussions place a great deal of weight on the photograph as an image of an existing reality as opposed to an imagined one. This has as much insight as it has interest.
I've enjoyed all the other postings but I'd better not start commenting on them as well otherwise this posting might become a bit of a saga.
KK.
Hi Charles,
I may wall be wrong but from the way I've read around the start of modern art, the three biggest influences were japanism, photography and the industrial revolution (with it's status quo busting after effects). Japanism itself has many photo like themes (the photographic crop, a record like vision). But I believe that without photography, the path of impressionism->cubism->abstraction (to miss a few steps) would not have been quite the same - I don't want to overstate it's role but to place it way below some direct philosophical influence seems unjust.
Seurat grew up and was influenced by optics and printing (the photographic reproduction method in France had many similarities with the pointilism technique) and it's wideley accepted that this understanding of optics and printing inspired his techniques. Some of his first artistic dalliance were with Delacroix who said 20 years earlier "When a photographer takes a view, all you ever see is a part cut off from the whole: The edge of the picture is as interesting as the center. All you can do suppose an ensemble, of which you only see a portion, apparently chosen by chance....The photographs which strike you most are those in which the very imperfection of the process as a matter of absolute rendering leaves certain gaps, a certain repose for the eye which permit it to concentrate on only a small number of objects.". Degas in this same period was using his photographic influence very obviously, he was even photographing in a similar fashion. This, combined with the heavy influence of japanese aesthetic influenced most of the new style.. I'm not sure about links to Goethe, Delauny and Chevreul but I'd be happy to read about it if you have a reference to the link (although as far as I know, these were most active in the early 20th century, 40 years after modern art started).
Cubism itself isn't as 'black and white as it could be. One of cubism's leading exponents was an avid photographer and used it's 'vison' as a strong influence. The following movements split between photography and art with Rudchenko as a great example of how images, graphic design and abstract/constructivism can feed back into art with Bauhaus schools of design/art (and he was an influence on Kandinsky before they fell out). Of course the problem is that most art texts won't mention photography at all :-)
Just a minor addition to Tim's contribution. In entry 892 (Diary III, 1911) of his Diaries Paul Klee starts:
Am continuing to play with a dark notation for light-energy. My interpretation, in the sense of a photographic negative, can yield thoroughly positive pictorial results against a white background.
He goes on to describe experiments he made whereby he projected a drawing made on glass onto paper on a table. The glass was at various angles to the paper, i.e., tilting the back of a camera (though he does not describe it in these terms).
I don't think it matters very much if artists have or have not been influenced by photography other than as a matter of historical record. The position of photography as means of producing art does matter and cannot be doubted other than by the ignorant. I deliberately do not state that photography is art, this makes not more sense than claiming that paint and brushes (or the result of their application) are art; good to see the Forth bridge painted but I don't think the painters think of themselves as artists.
KK.
Hi K,
I agree about your comments re: is photography art.. More appropriate is the question "Can a photograph be art?" for which it would hard to answer no to.. I agree that it is academic whether the connection between art and photography flows whichever way. It is also personal preference whether you choose to be influenced by other artistic genres or types. It is nice to look back at how artists solved similar problems a long time ago though.
Regarding the original topic post, I'm beginning to think of nearly all photography as problem solving (especially landscape photography) which can explain why some poeople will make photographs and some won't under the same location and conditions. It's because they are trying to solve different problems and the location/conditions are only two of the variables. Working out what you are trying to solve is often the most difficult thing and I think many photographers are guilty of reaching quick simple solutions and then post rationalising a problem to fit. The nice thing about photography is that your 'problem' can be refined over time and some of your previous solutions are only 'local minima'. Even if you don't like the metaphor I hope you can see where I'm going..
Tim
Hi Charles
Sorry that it has taken me a day or two to answer your comment.
By a transcendent image I mean one that connotes more than it denotes, one that does more than merely describe. Obviously there are degrees of connotation and almost any photograph will connote more than it denotes since it will include social or historical signifiers. I'm striving to make images that have quite a high level of connotation, ones that evoke an emotional response in the viewer. This is necessarily a flawed and imperfect process as each viewer brings their own baggage to the viewing and one man's emotive image is another's postcard ;-)
Transcendence in this sense doesn't deny the source, it simply makes for a richer image. I think that making a transcendent image is akin to writing poetry; individual words might be quite banal and with fixed meanings but in conjunction with another take on alternate meanings. My 'words' are drawn from the land, sea and light. I'm trying to make the combination of these photographic descriptions evoke something beyond mere illustration.
I am of the opinion that a degree of abstraction heightens the likelihood of transcendence arising, not that abstraction is essential in order for transcendence to occur, and that almost 'straight' images of the 'real world' certainly can be transcendent for individual viewers.
Whether my more abstract images made in the landscape are landscape photographs is an interesting question. A friend of mine says that we are natural light photographers rather than landscape photographers. I feel that since the land is my source that I am still a landscape photographer. Any other classification is just splitting hairs. But perhaps as the local representative of "Pedants are We" I shouldn't be accusing anyone else of splitting hairs...
Thank you David for taking the time to answer. We are basically in agreement. There is much in our discussion which applies to the Cory Wright thread so I will leave it at that.
KK: I like the idea that a photograph is defined by the moment at which it was taken, but I sense that that is not strictly true, especially when shooting in the "quiet" light. Isn't it the case that a rock or pebble etc would appear the same pretty well whenever you saw it under that light? Considering that light is not uncommon and assuming that the objects being photographed don't change too quickly, then that leaves a lot of spare decisive moments.
Your comment on Klee was unknown to me. Thank you.
Tim: thank you for the additional comments. You're obviously dealing with a period a little earlier to the one I was referring to. The Hokusai prints which you show, are indeed very close to photographs. I am not as familiar with the impressionist work as with the 20th c. work. I will follow up your comments on Seurat and will look out references on Delaunay etc. If I find anything useful, I'll email you. Note: Kandinsky's involvement with the Bauhaus and the graphic work of Radchenko came after Kandinsky produced his first abstract images.
Thank you all for your comments - it has been very instructive.
Charles
Hi Charles,
Agreed that Rodchenko/Bauhause came post Abstract but I was mainly trying to highlight that photography was 'in the air' all of the time - Kandinsky was heavily influenced by the Impressionists (although at first didn't understand them) and he lived with an avid photographer during the year before he created his first abstract art. I don't imagine there was any "Good god! Look an abstract photo! I'd best paint something like that" but I do think the 'Photographic vision" will have been an influence on his work (either directly via colleagues environment or indirectly through his admiration of the Impressionists). Interestingly, whilst fact checking, I discovered that Kandinsky was also heavily influenced by folk art (Bavarian glasswork) just as Picasso and many other expressionists were - so you could say that craft rather than art influenced abstraction the most? Thanks for the reply - I look forward to continuing the conversation but possibly David's comment system isn't the place to do it :-) Perhaps you could start a thread on lf-photo and I'll reply there?
Hello Charles,
I agree that strictly speaking there are photographs that can be made at a time of choice (e.g., under studio conditions). In the landscape this is a much more difficult matter but in theory at least possible. My comments were strongly linked to the changeable conditions scenario but I should have added a caveat in the statement itself. The real point being that a painter can "store" the experience and then make his/her work at another time and away from the subject (making rough sketches or even photographs of no great merit in themselves to aid memory). The landscape photographer does not have this possibility other than in very limited circumstances. Certainly it is possible to return and make a photograph under different or even very similar conditions (something that I do regularly with many compositions since I do not believe in the concept of "the best light" but rather in "appropriate light"). However there is a limiting case where the photographer (at least of a certain type) has to move on with regret. Under the conditions I described in my posting it would be impossible to produce a large format photograph (believe me I've tried on a different location and more directional gale force wind, the result was one broken tripod leg, a lost hat and a rather alarming tumble down a rocky slope with filters flying in all directions; amazingly the camera stayed on the crippled tripod, a Gitzo G1548GT with all segments fully extended and as wide as possible). Oh I did take a photograph with a small digital camera on the location described in my previous posting but this really doesn't count; I have no plans to join the "it's so bad it must be deep" school of photography.
KK.
Hi !.
might , perhaps very interested to know how one can manage to receive high yields .
There is no need to invest much at first. You may begin to get income with as small sum of money as 20-100 dollars.
AimTrust is what you haven`t ever dreamt of such a chance to become rich
The company incorporates an offshore structure with advanced asset management technologies in production and delivery of pipes for oil and gas.
It is based in Panama with structures everywhere: In USA, Canada, Cyprus.
Do you want to become really rich in short time?
That`s your chance That`s what you desire!
I feel good, I began to get real money with the help of this company,
and I invite you to do the same. It`s all about how to choose a correct partner utilizes your savings in a right way - that`s AimTrust!.
I earn US$2,000 per day, and what I started with was a funny sum of 500 bucks!
It`s easy to get involved , just click this link http://bygufowoji.freewaywebhost.com/jucoro.html
and lucky you`re! Let`s take our chance together to feel the smell of real money
Hi !.
You re, I guess , perhaps curious to know how one can reach 2000 per day of income .
There is no initial capital needed You may begin earning with as small sum of money as 20-100 dollars.
AimTrust is what you need
The firm incorporates an offshore structure with advanced asset management technologies in production and delivery of pipes for oil and gas.
Its head office is in Panama with structures everywhere: In USA, Canada, Cyprus.
Do you want to become an affluent person?
That`s your choice That`s what you really need!
I feel good, I began to take up income with the help of this company,
and I invite you to do the same. It`s all about how to select a correct companion who uses your funds in a right way - that`s the AimTrust!.
I earn US$2,000 per day, and my first investment was 500 dollars only!
It`s easy to start , just click this link http://evitorij.greatnow.com/qazegij.html
and go! Let`s take this option together to feel the smell of real money
I wish not agree on it. I think nice post. Specially the designation attracted me to study the unscathed story.
Good day, sun shines!
There have been times of troubles when I felt unhappy missing knowledge about opportunities of getting high yields on investments. I was a dump and downright stupid person.
I have never thought that there weren't any need in large initial investment.
Nowadays, I feel good, I begin take up real income.
It gets down to select a proper partner who utilizes your money in a right way - that is incorporate it in real deals, and shares the profit with me.
You can get interested, if there are such firms? I'm obliged to tell the truth, YES, there are. Please be informed of one of them:
[url=http://theblogmoney.com] Online investment blog[/url]
Good post and this post helped me alot in my college assignement. Gratefulness you seeking your information.
Hi there!
I would like to burn a theme at this forum. There is such a thing, called HYIP, or High Yield Investment Program. It reminds of financial piramyde, but in rare cases one may happen to meet a company that really pays up to 2% daily not on invested money, but from real profits.
For quite a long time, I make money with the help of these programs.
I don't have problems with money now, but there are heights that must be conquered . I get now up to 2G a day , and my first investment was 500 dollars only.
Right now, I managed to catch a guaranteed variant to make a sharp rise . Visit my web site to get additional info.
http://theinvestblog.com [url=http://theinvestblog.com]Online Investment Blog[/url]
Hello,
I'm just browsing sites for the children of Haiti.
I'm here for a non-profit haiti organization that is dedicated to
building an oppurunity for the children in haiti. If anyone wants to give money then this is the place:
[url=http://universallearningcentre.org]Donate to Haiti[/url] or Help Haiti
They give kids in Haiti a positive outlook through education.
Please check it out, they're legitimate.
I greatly appreciate anyone's help
Ola, what's up amigos? :)
I will be happy to receive some help at the beginning.
Thanks in advance and good luck! :)
Hello,
I have developed a new clean web 2.0 wordpress theme.
Has 2 colours silver and blue, has custom header(colour or image).
I am curently working on it, so if you have suggestions let me know.
You can view live demo and download from here www.getbelle.com
If you found bug reports or you have suggestions pm me.
Wish you a happing using.
many thanks to [url=http://www.usainstantpayday.com/]USAInstantPayDay.com[/url] for paying the hosting and developement of the theme
Beesenhalse
Glad to materialize here. Good day or night everybody!
For sure you didn’t here about me yet,
my name is James F. Collins.
Generally I’m a venturesome gambler. all my life I’m carried away by online-casino and poker.
Not long time ago I started my own blog, where I describe my virtual adventures.
Probably, it will be interesting for you to read my notes.
Please visit my blog. http://allbestcasino.com I’ll be glad would you find time to leave your opinion.
Hi there everybody, I just registered on this fantastic community and wanted to say gday! Have a fabulous day!
leila megan fox, [url=http://discuss.tigweb.org/thread/187756]megan fox dirty[/url] megan fox bikini photos
kim kardashian plastic surgery, [url=http://discuss.tigweb.org/thread/187768]kim kardashian ray-j[/url] kim kardashian and ray j sex tape for free
taylor swift fearless remix version, [url=http://discuss.tigweb.org/thread/187772]taylor swift carnival ride[/url] taylor swift zombie
hannah montana miley, [url=http://discuss.tigweb.org/thread/187786]lilly and oliver hannah montana[/url] watch hannah montana the movie 2009 online free
how many harry potter books have been sold so far, [url=http://discuss.tigweb.org/thread/187792]lego harry potter baby[/url] lego harry potter
tom cruise pictures, [url=http://discuss.tigweb.org/thread/187798]cruise line from lihue to sandiego[/url] what to do when getting off cruise ship mexico
justin bieber charity, [url=http://discuss.tigweb.org/thread/187812]sheet music justin bieber[/url] justin bieber fake pics
britany spears naked not blurd, [url=http://discuss.tigweb.org/thread/187814]britney spears bikini david letterman[/url] britney spears flash games
megan fox comments, [url=http://discuss.tigweb.org/thread/175542]megan fox dildoing[/url] megan fox full body
if you guys quintessential to stroke [url=http://www.generic4you.com]viagra[/url] online you can do it at www.generic4you.com, the most trusted viagra dispensary repayment in favour of generic drugs.
you can learn drugs like [url=http://www.generic4you.com/Sildenafil_Citrate_Viagra-p2.html]viagra[/url], [url=http://www.generic4you.com/Tadalafil-p1.html]cialis[/url], [url=http://www.generic4you.com/VardenafilLevitra-p3.html]levitra[/url] and more at www.rxpillsmd.net, the top-priority [url=http://www.rxpillsmd.net]viagra[/url] oldest on the web. well another great [url=http://www.i-buy-viagra.com]viagra[/url] pharmacy you can find at www.i-buy-viagra.com
Loyalty Bonus. This is exactly as it sounds. All honest online casinos, and offline ones too, want to keep hold of their good returning customers, and will offer loyalty bonuses, including free casino chips, as a result.
Are you new to casino slots, Baccarat, or any other type of online casino game? Some sites provide you the opportunity to participate in a virtual casino school. Some sites have tutorials to explain the rules and nuances of certain games. The web resources are there to enable you to play blackjack and beyond with the best of them. [url=http://www.onlinecasinos5.com]casino bonus[/url]
[img]http://www.bodog.com/publish/etc/medialib/bodogcom_media_lib/home-page-logo.Par.68918.Image.gif[/img]
Another feature of casino slots online is the loyalty factor. Some virtual gaming sites offer bonus credits to you every time you make a deposit to your account. If you're going to play on a regular basis, it pays to sign up with a site the pays a dividend back to you. There's a myriad of online casinos available for you to choose. Take the time to investigate what's available. Take the time to learn the games you want to play. Utilize all a casino site has to offer you to help you play better. Plan your playing, plan your budget, and let the online games begin.
Online Casinos, believe it or not could be the best solution for some. I know that some of us, including me, like to go to Vegas or other places to play in their casinos, but this is not possible all the time. For all of us who do not have time, online casino gambling is the best solution.
It is very important that the casino you choose to register for the offer at any of your favorite games, such as virtual table games, slots and rollers. The online casinos usually have a list of games they offer on their website to see the potential players. In case your favorite games are not listed, it is advisable to proceed to the next casino.
1. You need to go on a vacation if you want to play in the regular brick-n-mortar casinos. That will cost a good amount of money and take away a whole lot of your quality time. Then, your family may want to tag along, as they too don't want to miss out on the action. So, in the end you will end up paying for airfares, hotel rooms, car rentals, food, shopping and hanging around. When you actually get to the casino, you will find that there's very little money left to spend on the casino games, which is the reason why you went there in the first place! However, online casinos spare you the trouble of traveling and wasting money on riff-raffs. Plus they save you a whole lot of time as you can play in the comfort of your home at a time of your own convenience and at your own pace plus within your own budget too.
I have been visiting various blogs for my Thesis Writing Plan research. I have found your blog to be quite useful. Keep updating your blog with valuable information... Regards
Another issue that you must stay on top of is price fluctuations from the bookmaker. The prices for placing bets do not just change with different bookies but even with the same. You cannot take it for granted that the prices that are quoted in print like the Racing Post will be valid at the time of the event. With sports betting things can change very rapidly so be sure that the price will be honored before placing your bet otherwise this can seriously affect the outcome of your arbitrage sports betting.
The Parlay System is one of the most famous of betting systems that are commonly used in horse racing. Many have said that contrary to other sports betting systems, the Parlay System has a pyramiding effect on your profit which means your winnings are played on successive wagers.
[url=http://www.pulsebet.com]sport bet[/url]
It appears that the United States legal system is closer than ever before to cutting off ties with any type of online gambling within its boundaries. This includes poker, casinos, and sports betting among others. Generally speaking, anything that has to do with transmitting money via the internet as far as gambling is concerned is being cracked down on quite harshly.
And finally, in the first article in this series I mentioned being honest with yourself, because one of the biggest lies I have found that a tremendous number of Bettors are guilty of is denying to themselves how many times their Base Bank has been busted! If you too are guilty of this, please remember that until you face up to the truth with the determination to do something about it, you can't expect to turn the situation round in your favour.
Do you have problems with your roofing?
[url=http://www.roofingfortworthtexas.com][b]CLICK NOW FOR FIRST HAND INFO![/b][/url]
Roofing Burleson Texas
[url=http://www.roofingfortworthtx.com]Roofing Burleson Texas[/url]
roofer, gutter repair, find a roofer
slate roofer, emergency roofer
siding installation, siding repair, architectural shingles, slate roofer, home roofers, metal shingle!
siding repair,metal roofer, metal shingle, shingle roofer, architectural shingles.
find roofer, find roofer
house roofers, interlock industries
copper shingles, roofer company
Ciao,
my name is Joan and I am a Party Manager.
In my experience, numerous people encounter quite a setback, discovering the right Plan for their next Party!
Well, how about Duck Pond to make it a real success?
Have a look at this page! You can book Duck Pond for nice prices!
[url=http://www.outrageousadventures.com]Click for more Info![/url]
Have a good time at your coming Party, Joan
[url=http://www.williamclarkpainting.com/services.php]ACOUSTIC CEILINGS[/url]
[url=http://www.williamclarkpainting.com/res_gallery.php?cat_id=45]QUALITY CONTROL AND DAILY INSPECTIONS[/url]
[url=http://www.williamclarkpainting.com/testimonials.php]OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE[/url]
Finding the right sports books and bookmakers to use for your arbitrage sports betting can be a daunting task with the internet now they are everywhere. The list of crooked bookmaking sites that have helped part people with their money and robbed them of their winnings grows longer every day. Being enlightened about this all sports bettors should do their due diligence before signing up with any bookmaker and be sure of their reputation as well as their guarantees on return of winnings. Almost all sports betting sites will have reviews so read them before making your decision on which one you go with.
The Parlay System is one of the most famous of betting systems that are commonly used in horse racing. Many have said that contrary to other sports betting systems, the Parlay System has a pyramiding effect on your profit which means your winnings are played on successive wagers.
[url=http://www.pulsebet.com]sport bet[/url]
On the other hand if you were to lose then you would wager twice what your original bet was. According to proponents of the system, this strategy will eventually enable you to win the bets you place and when you win you would recover all your lost bets plus one unit profit against your initial wager.
Another important subject I must briefly refer to is "catch-up" staking. If you find that you need to employ this tactic regularly, it means three things: (1) your Selection System sucks, (2) you haven't got a clue about what constitutes a proper Staking Plan, and (3) you have turned your chances of regularly and quickly losing your Base Bank to a 100% certainty!
Moving on we have non other than Bobby Charlton - now Sir Bobby Charlton of course. Another member of the Busby Babes who also survived the crash in Munich Bobby netted 249 times for Utd- the club record. For a long time he also held the record for the most appearances for the club at 758, a figure that has since been surpassed by Ryan Giggs. manchester united [url=http://www.pulsebet.com]manchester united[/url] As a tribute to United’s nationwide popularity, the club has held the record for the highest average attendance in English football for over 34 years. The only time they did not hold the record was during the 1987-89 period when the Old Trafford stadium was being renovated. In some circles, it is believed that the Manchester United Red Devils are the most widely supported football club in the world. [url=http://www.pulsebet.com]rooney wayne[/url] Manchester United Football Club is an English football club that plays in the Premier League. The Red Devils as they are commonly known have more than 300 million world-wide supporters. Meaning that out of every 20 people on earth, one of them will be a Manchester United Fan! Currently managed by Sir Alex Ferguson, Manchester United are one of the most successful teams in the history of English football having won 21 major titles since he became manager in 1986. During its remarkable history, many distinguished players have run out in the famous Manchester United shirt which can trace its origins back when Manchester United were known as Newton Heath Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Football Club.
One of the factors that can influence the outcome of your program is that many bookmakers set maximum stake limits which can keep you from placing your full wager, so make sure that there in no max limit with any of the bookies that you are dealing with.
bet football | bet online sport betting
The Parlay System is one of the most famous of betting systems that are commonly used in horse racing. Many have said that contrary to other sports betting systems, the Parlay System has a pyramiding effect on your profit which means your winnings are played on successive wagers.
[url=http://www.pulsebet.com]college football betting lines[/url]
In July 2006 they finally got what they were hoping for when legislation was passed with a vote of 317 to 93. By passing legislation, it appears imminent that the Wire Act of 1961 is going to be updated to more closely coincide with the internet world of today. Basically, the Wire Act states that it is a felony to transmit bets via wire communications. The next step in the process is for the bill to go in front of the Senate. If they agree with the first round of voting it is safe to say that things are going to change drastically.
And finally, in the first article in this series I mentioned being honest with yourself, because one of the biggest lies I have found that a tremendous number of Bettors are guilty of is denying to themselves how many times their Base Bank has been busted! If you too are guilty of this, please remember that until you face up to the truth with the determination to do something about it, you can't expect to turn the situation round in your favour.
Predilection casinos? study this inexperienced [url=http://www.realcazinoz.com]free casino[/url] games. director and abduct up online casino games like slots, blackjack, roulette, baccarat and more at www.realcazinoz.com .
you can also go over our lately [url=http://freecasinogames2010.webs.com]casino[/url] give something at http://freecasinogames2010.webs.com and gain realized genially misled !
another supplementary [url=http://www.ttittancasino.com]casino[/url] spiele locality is www.ttittancasino.com , in gain german gamblers, offshoot in free online casino bonus.
Hey, I am new here.
I love www.blogger.com because I learned a lot here. Now it's time for me to pay back.
The reason I want to post this guide on this of www.blogger.com is to help people solve the same problem.
Please contact me if it is inapproprate here.
This is the guide, hope it would help you.
Ultimate DVD Ripper Software with Output Prominent for All Portable Media Players Now Available ------ From Xilisoft Corporation
03.11.2008 - Xilisoft Corporation today released its brand new ripping software for DVD movies and music - DVD Ripper Ultimate for Windows. Being professional DVD ripping software, this product does not specialize in its main function only, but also features a huge of premium accessorial tools including a significant Video Editor in clip, effects, profile and merge, a Bitrate Calculator for output file size adjustment, a Snapshot when previewing DVDs, and an Actions setting in and after conversion for software status, etc.
With an affordable price of $55, Xilisoft DVD Ripper Ultimate totally deserves your sight! The product is optimized to match almost all popular video and audio format files such as AVI, MPEG, WMV, DivX, MP4, H.264, RM, MOV, M4V, XviD, 3GP, MP3, WMA, WAV, RA, M4A, AAC, etc., and offers a feat profile setting compatible with various standard portable media devices like iPod, iPhone, PSP, Apple TV, and cellular phone and so on.
The ultimate DVD ripper's clip edit feature ensures one clip or more segments off a DVD movie you personally favor, and can clip it out or rip them off as a complete one. On the other hand, the merge function can combine more than one chapter or title into a whole one.
The effects edit offers numerous video frame adjustment options to inspire your fire for video creation, e.g. it may allow you to crop the video displaying area, to fine-tune the frame's brightness, contrast and saturation, to modify the subtitles' position and style, or to add and change your own watermark in the movies ripped from DVD.
The output profiles have been promoted more compatible for all kinds of video and audio quality. By pressing the "Add Profile" button, you can even concurrently choose diverse profiles for one source to rip it into multiple destination files in case of long time-consuming. For experienced users, an advanced setting panel has also been built in to customize the bitrate, frame rate, etc. yourself. There is a Bitrate Calculator attached either if you can customize the output file size further.
Like more regular applications, Xilisoft DVD Ripper Ultimate supports status selection as well. Under this function, if you want to play down the program priority, you could set it run background as it works, and preset its status after ripping done.
Xilisoft Corporation (http://www.xilisoft.com) is a leading consumer-software manufactory dedicating to digital application, management and web-security software providing. We develop multiple market channels based on the Internet to the people all over the world, and each individual product with its multitude of functions has already won its reputation from users all over the world.
Resource:
[url=http://www.topvideoconverter.com/dvd-video-to-iphone-suite-mac/]mac iphone video converter[/url]
[url=http://www.topvideoconverter.com/hd-video-converter/]covnert hd video[/url]
[url=http://www.topvideoconverter.com/mp4-converter-mac/]MP4 Converter Mac[/url]
[url=http://www.topvideoconverter.com/dvd-cloner/]clone dvd[/url]
[url=http://www.dvdaudioextractor]DVD audio extractor[/url]
I am heartly thanking this site for letting me post a comment...
you have a very great site....
Jeux Casino is an online casino site..
Wow, you have a wonderful site. it is my pleasure to visit this site.
Question: what would be your choice? playing while earning or surfing while learning?
poker en ligne is a kind of hobby that you can play while earning.
Thanks.
jolleyopentee
[url=http://healthplusrx.com/high-cholesterol]high cholesterol[/url] Sheermremancy
May just be the Very best subject which I read all month?
pdpjrvg gaq zuboq pornstar gallery
scojz!
whrdi zwjvrg fxo anal trailers
I would like to thank You for being the member of this website. Please allow me to have the opportunity to express my satisfaction with Hostgator web hosting. They have professional and quick support and they also offering some [url=http://tinyurl.com/hostgator-coupons-tutorial ]Host gator coupons[/url].
I appreciate HostGator hosting, you will too.
http://rsgold4noobs.com/forums/index.php?action=profile;u=14499
This is my first glimpse at David's blog, and I scanned it quite quickly. But what struck me was his admission of sometimes being stuck, uninspired, and frustrated that he might have lost his interest in landscape photography. Then he wrote, "...It occurred to me that though I had hugely enjoyed the experience of those dawns I had also instinctively known that any image I made would be a pale ghost of the depth of feeling that I had experienced..." and I really sensed his frustration. Thank you, David, for admitting such a frustration, one I have felt when I couldn't make an image of what I was seeing, but knew there was something there. Often, I am rewarded later with another image, one that speaks to me loudly and forces me to take notice.
[url=http://www.doudounepaschercs.org/]doudoune[/url] noaub [url=http://www.mclouboutin.com/]loubutin[/url] sgxmc [url=http://www.monclercool.net/]doudoune moncler[/url] miwwj [url=http://www.mclouboutin.com/]christian louboutin[/url] kzinb [url=http://www.chaussuresuggpass.org/]ugg pas cher[/url] tuicd
ction at your house!Burberry Overdyed Look at Crossbody BagT
http://chanelbags1130a.weebly.com/
http://guccibags1130a.weebly.com/
http://lvbags1130a.weebly.com/
http://lvbags1201a.weebly.com/
http://lvbags1201b.weebly.com/
http://lvbags1201c.weebly.com/
http://lvbags1201d.weebly.com/
http://chanelbags1201a.weebly.com/
[URL=http://pharmacypills.atspace.co.uk/buy-amitriptyline-canada/london-order-endep-75-mg.html]london order endep 75 mg[/URL]
[url=http://www.burberryscarfoutleter.com][b]burberry scarf[/url] lbhxpriwjhdo http://www.burberryscarfoutleter.com
[url=http://www.sacvanessabrunosolde.com][b]http://www.sacvanessabrunosolde.com[/url] echwaevmfclm sac vanessa bruno pas cher
[url=http://www.burberrypascherlondon.com][b]sac burberry[/url] awhylkqjyjlg sac burberry
[url=http://www.louisvuitton2013outlet.com][b]http://www.officiellouisvuitton.com[/url] pfgbuewbxeiu http://www.officiellouisvuitton.com
[url=http://www.sacalongchampsolde.com][b]sac longchamp solde[/url] lbdhzeltwigb sac longchamp solde
[url=http://www.officielsaclancelsolde.com][b]sac lancel solde[/url] ssocvmpjthzb http://www.officielsaclancelsolde.com
[url=http://www.burberryscarfoffsale.com][b]burberry scarf[/url] itrnzzthaeqa http://www.burberryscarfoffsale.com
[url=http://www.2013saclancel.com][b]sac lancel[/url] zcvurvkzrwah sac lancel bb
[url=http://www.freewebs.com/trazodone-buy]desyrel 25 mg
[/url]
[url=http://shenenmaoyis.webs.com/][b]sac longchamp[/b][/url]
[url=http://shenenmaoyie.wordpress.com/][b]sac longchamp[/b][/url]
[url=http://www.zimbio.com/Shoes+And+Fashion/articles/5BeMlTZZcvm/Articles+l+int+rieur+de+votre+sac+Avez?add=True][b]sac longchamp[/b][/url]
[url=http://shensacen.altervista.org/cadeaux-de-graduation-maison/][b]sac longchamp[/b][/url]
[url=http://en.netlog.com/shenenmaoyii/blog/blogid=16139671][b]sac longchamp[/b][/url]
[url=http://clarithromycin.webs.com]biaxin online no prescription
[/url]
[url=http://vesteabercrombiefr.org/]abercrombie[/url] rtico [url=http://monclerbransonfr.org/]doudoune moncler[/url] gmvhs [url=http://escarpinlouboutinfr.com/]chaussures pas cher[/url] jckrb [url=http://escarpinlouboutinfr.com/]louboutin pas cher[/url] fjszn
[url=http://ribavirin.webs.com/]copegus 100 mg
[/url] buy copegus online
copegus 100 mg
purchase rebetol online
[url=http://orderamoxicillin.webs.com/]amoxicillin clavulanate 875 mg
[/url] can you buy amoxicillin over the counter in canada
amoxicillin 500 mg during pregnancy
amoxicillin 500 mg buy online
[url=http://casodex-bicalutamide.webs.com/]Pencial
[/url] purchase Casodex online
Dimalan
Bicamylan
[url=http://amoxicillin-buy.webs.com/]amoxicillin mg\/kg\/day
[/url] amoxicillin 500 mg liquid
buy amoxicillin online uk
buy amoxicillin online no prescription mybb
[url=http://cyclosporine.webs.com]karel neoral semena
[/url] cyclosporine rxlist
sandimmun kaufen
cyclosporine nephrotic syndrome
The company offers 1 [url=http://nhommuachung.net/thoi-trang.html]mua hang gia re[/url] per day in every of the markets it serves. The Groupon capabilities as an assurance agreement utilizing ThePoint's technique: if a certain quantity of folks indication up for the offer you, then the offer will get obtainable to all if the predetermined least is not accomplished, no a single gets the offer that doing work working day. This lowers hazard for merchants, who can handle the price reduction coupons as amount discount charges as properly as income advertising sources. Groupon can make resources by maintaining close to fifty % the money the buyer pays for the coupon.
For illustration, an $eighty therapeutic massage could be obtained by the client for $forty by indicates of Groupon, and then Groupon and the retailer would break up the $forty. That is, the retailer presents a therapeutic massage valued at $eighty and will get close to $twenty from Groupon for it (beneath a fifty%/fifty% break up). Or, if $240 really worth of home portray companies is obtained by the purchaser for $fifty via Groupon, then the business will get $20 5 and Groupon retains $25. The shopper will get the therapeutic massage, or the residence painting services, in these illustrations, from the retailer for which they at initial compensated out $forty (or $fifty) to Groupon. There are specific businesses to which Groupon to get started with did not offer you its services, these kinds of as capturing ranges and strip clubs even so, capturing ranges have been showcased on Groupon.
As opposed to labeled marketing and marketing, the support supplier does not commit any upfront expense to participate: Groupon collects personalized data from well prepared buyers and then contacts only folks buyers, mostly by day-to-day digital mail, who may possibly maybe be fascinated in a distinctive solution or company.
Groupon employs a big amount of copywriters who draft descriptions for the discount rates highlighted by e mail and on the website. Groupon's promotional text for the 'deals' has been observed as a contributing factor to the acceptance of the web website, showcasing a distinctive blend of comprehensive fact-examining and witty humor.
Owing to Groupon's market place area getting primarily composed of woman clients, the bargains are generally concentrated on the overall health, physical fitness and magnificence markets.
There are achievable problems with the business design. For illustration, a successful offer could rapidly swamp a little organization with also a lot of shoppers, jeopardizing a chance that customers will be dissatisfied, or that there will not be enough item to meet up with the desire. Hole, a huge garments retailer, was in a position to offer with 445,000 coupon codes in a countrywide offer (even although it experienced server issues at one distinct stage), but a smaller organization could flip out to be out of the blue flooded with purchasers. One particular specific coffee store in Portland, Oregon struggled with an increase in customers for three months, when it sold shut to a single,000 Groupons on the a single working day it was presented, in accordance to one particular particular report. In response to related concerns, Groupon officials position out that 'deal' subscriptions ought to be capped in progress to a reasonably priced range.
Read More: [url=http://reve-travel.com/kiem-tim-hang-dien-tu-gia-re-tren-thi-truong-cong-nghe/]gia re hang ngay[/url]
Excellent, what a blog it is! This weblog provides useful information to us, keep it
up.
Here is my web page ... 激安プラダ バッグ
Post a Comment