I found this exercise a little exasperating. “Imagine a magazine about rain and design an original photograph for the front cover” BUT it had to leave the viewer in no doubt about the subject.
So having had 3 months of solid rain and biblical flooding not far from here, the sun has come out and, at the time of writing, I am yet to see a downpour that I can respond to. I have an idea but it isn’t especially original and I need to wait until the forecast is right. I explored ‘rain’ ideas in part 4 of The Art of Photography so I have included the link here should the weather not change in-between now and before I hand in the last assignment.
However, in the meantime, I have been playing with different ideas but they fall short of the brief.
Image 1. I took this image of the Tate Modern as a reflection in a puddle. The effect of the sun capturing the rain drops in the trees and the texture of the Tate Modern towers lends itself to a concept that Paul Munson MA studied for his dissertation. Very loosely he looked at photography as not only the 3D product but as a 2D effect of ink on paper. The abstract nature of this image appeals to me and fits in with the added theme of The Tate Modern. By cross processing I have added the 3 D depth but still retained a 2D surface texture that can be enjoyed as such.
However, this image would need verbal prompting; but a magazine about rain would provide that prompt.
I sent this image (albeit without the brief ) to Paul Munson to look at as it was inspired by his work.
“Looking at your picture again, it has something of a mystery about it, and also a vulnerability- there’s a tenuous grasp of something quite vague as though we are caught between three dimensions and two. The surface is is resisting the image and hence the kind of delicate look and flatness – although there is a vague sense of depth. The surface (actual surface) is more compelling and that is, for me, where photography becomes interesting. That’s why impressionists were on to something. A rejection of depth and priority of the surface. Because the pictures are surfaces and they wanted to be honest about that.”
This is a more conventional image. Taking the greenery away encourages the viewer to look at the rain aspect and the structure and effect of the water on the leaf. The ‘dead’ space allows for titles and other text.
More conventional but more abstract then Image 2. 200mm with OCF popped. Again, taking the colour, away encourages the viewer to notice the abstract pattern created by the rain bouncing off the the concrete.
http://www.paulmunson.net/made/ Last accessed 12/04/2014
I am frustrated with myself. They are boring with maybe the exception of image 1 but it doesn’t scream out “rain” to the viewer. I prefer the rain work I did in the last unit.