Monday, September 22, 2008
Full Photographic Finale (for the week)
Sam Abell's photography is very documentary in nature. His goal is, as an observer, to record places and events as they are. His presentation followed this style with a scripted slide show and an allotted time that he finished to the minute. It was a documentary of his career. This is not to imply a dry lecture. Far from it. He held a room of over 100 people spell bound for two hours as he showed images and regaled us with stories from his personal family life as well as tales of adventure from his professional travel. Interspersed with all this were tips for improving our photos: use strong diagonals, bad weather means good photos, put peoples' heads and shoulders above the horizon line, compose and wait, take pictures from behind people to respect their privacy.
As a portrait photographer, Kenneth Linge's photography is highly personal. With the goal to capture the individual's personality at its best, he employs copious amounts of personal interaction to surface their inner beauty. Like Sam, his presentation followed his photographic style. The opening "Hi I'm Kenneth. What do you want to talk about today?" exemplified our entire time with him. It was highly interactive with participants' questions and comments driving the direction of the discussion as we covered topics ranging from the color of his studio walls to the psychology of photographing people.
Even with the great differences in picture and presentation style, I thoroughly enjoyed the time spent listening and learning from each. If you ever get a chance to see either one, I highly recommend it.
2 comments:
Comments are welcome but I do moderate them. This is simply to keep things wholesome for general family viewing. By default, comments will be accepted. The few things that will cause a comment to be rejected are:
1. It is too long even though it may be well-written and make interesting points. It's supposed to be a comment, not an essay. If you have that much to say, write a blog article and backlink to me.
2. It is nasty, impolite or uses language that is unacceptable.
3. It includes a a link that has a typo or is broken in some other way.
4. It should have been sent as an e-mail since it is clearly addressed to me and does not appear to have been intended for other readers.
5. It is blatantly self-promotional. This does not mean it can't be self-promotional at all, but it should add some value over an above the marketing.
Great "compare and contrast" post. I wish I could have gone to both.
ReplyDeleteSpot on with your comments. I wish I could have gone Friday night, but I enjoyed our photowalk immensely.
ReplyDelete