Yesterday, I mentioned that my friend and I took macro and abstract pictures. He had a point-and-shoot (the same one I had purchased a few months ago, actually), and I had my gear with my macro lens. So, how did that go for him?
Here is one example of a picture I took:
This was an abstract of a mailbox. While his wasn't as colorful as mine, it was better composed. It looked more like an abstract painting, in my opinion. His point-and-shoot did not limit him at all, and his creativity made a difference.
I also took this picture:
I had far more control over depth of field than he, because of my macro lens. With his picture, the background was highly visible (some grass). Here, you can only see the plant. Which is better? I can't say, but having more control is a definite plus.
However, these pictures don't tell the full story. My friend really excels at taking "whimsical" pictures. When I say that, I'm referring to the fun, whimsical ones. I don't even have an example to show you, because I'm not good at that style at all. However, watching him gave me some ideas. He learned from me, as far as being creative with mundane subjects is concerned (street signs, fences, plants, etc.). And that's why I like to team up with him - his best pictures don't remotely resemble mine, and we both learn a lot. It's a prime example of how it isn't always the camera - it CAN be the photographer. Till tomorrow!
No comments:
Post a Comment