In light of my tutor’s comments regarding Assignment 1 – Landscape, I’ve made a few amendments to the assignment. I felt my tutor’s comments were all valuable and agreed with the large majority of them. One recurring theme was that the buildings appeared to be falling over in some photographs so I’ve since fixed that as suggested. This meant cropping in slightly after correcting the verticals but I didn’t feel too much was lost in terms of important landscape features or composition.

Photograph 2 – Assignment 1 – Landscape – Amended

Photograph 2 – Assignment 1 – Landscape – Original

Another suggestion was that cropping in on the right and bottom sides for Photograph 2 – Assignment 1 – Landscape would be beneficial in honing in the viewer’s eye towards the posts , which I had already mentioned created a frame for the rest of the photograph, thus strengthening the composition. Secondly, although this is subjective, I agreed that in retrospect the clouds were too dark in certain areas for the overall photograph and so I dodged them slightly.

Photograph 4 – Assignment 1 – Landscape – Amended

Photograph 4 – Assignment 1 – Landscape – Original

Finally, in response to using the portrait format (instead of landscape) for the final three images (excluding Photograph 7 – Assignment 1 – Landscape which I’ve subsequently added), my reasoning was that I wouldn’t have been able to include (fit in) the important foreground elements of the Thames’ foreshore within the frame had I stuck with landscape (I had no qualms about changing orientation either way).

Photograph 5 – Assignment 1 – Landscape – Amended

Photograph 5 – Assignment 1 – Landscape – Original

Overall, I felt that by implementing these little changes/corrections, the project was quite a bit stronger and so I was more pleased with it. As mentioned, I’ve subsequently added Photograph 7 – Assignment 1 – Landscape which, although included the Shard again as the landmark, was from another angle and another part of the Thames’ foreshore. In my opinion the dynamic clouds, created by using a longer exposure and with moving, broken-up clouds in the sky made the photograph stronger, particularly because they were moving towards the viewer. This latter factor I felt added further dynamism and sublimity to the photograph.

Photograph 7 – Assignment 1 – Landscape

One element all of the photographs I submitted for Assignment 1 had in common were that they were taken from a fairly low viewpoint. This was for two reasons; the first being simply that it was practical to capture the foreshore and have more compositional possibilities from down beside it when the tide was out than from above on the riverside. Secondly, I felt it offered a more subjective viewpoint, where the viewer would more likely to be involved with the various elements of the foreshore, with the big landmarks still dominating the skyline. This way the viewer could potentially feel emotion for the sublimity of the scene I was tying to portray.

For technical information I was aware when the foreshore would be revealed when the tide was out by using a very useful app called ‘Tides Near Me – Free’, I found on the Google Play Store by Meech, R.  (2013). Combining this with another app on the Google Play Store: ‘Sun Surveyor’ by Ratana, A. (2011-2015), allowed me to find when there would be ‘good’ lighting on the landmarks I would be photographing. Specifically, I used ‘Sun Surveyor’ by Ratana, A. (2011-2015) to find at which window there would be the golden/blue hour each day and plan my journeys to the foreshore (when the tide would be out) accordingly.

My initial intentions were to capture all the shots in colour; my reasoning being: the famous landmarks juxtaposed against the Thames’ foreshore would be more easily recognisable in colour but on second thoughts I decided to the contrary to process them all in black and white. This was because, while experimenting with a black and white treatment for one of the photographs, I found the intrigue for the viewer instigated by this juxtaposition of the old (Thames’ foreshore) and the New (the famous landmarks), was further pronounced by this treatment. It made the viewer question what they were seeing further and kept their eye in the frame for a longer period of time. This I put down to be perhaps because of their unfamiliarity with objects that seemed like they should be familiar (in particular the famous landmarks) a feeling I felt was integral to the sublime. This effect was what I was aiming for; provoked by the relationships between the old in the foreground and the new in the distance.

I was admittedly a bit worried about how the night or blue hour shots would turn out like in black and white; whether they would be recognisable as taken at that time was my main concern. However, the lights from the buildings were beneficial in making this time of day subtly apparent. At the same time, I was quietly satisfied that the daytime photographs I had taken for the assignment didn’t lose anything by being converted to black and white; in fact I felt they gained a whole lot of mystery and character from this process.

With both the day and night black and white photographs, just as the viewer begins to recognise the famous landmark(s), they then have to try to make sense of the foreground, which the black and white treatment lends no help to. So, the juxtaposition between the landmark and the foreshore is established in the viewer’s mind. All of this incomplete puzzle in the viewer’s mind helps encourage them to step further into the sublime of each photograph; the power of the strangely familiar landmark, juxtaposed with the uncertainty of the otherworldly or forgotten Thames’ Foreshore (depending upon how well versed the prospective viewer is concerning the Thames’ Foreshore).

References:

Meech, R. (2013). Tides Near Me – Free.

Ratana, A. (2011-2015). Sun Surveyor.

Photograph 6 for me contained the most considered and powerful foreground in this set of photographs. This was because the foreshore/foreground (consisting of a set of eroded tinder stumps – presumably an old jetty) made a very obvious triangle shape, where the triangle ‘started’ at the base of the frame and traversed ‘into’ the frame to a point right in the centre of the photograph. This was a deliberate attempt by me to create a focal point, which attracted the viewer’s eye, similar to the stereographs’ compositional device of: ‘an object the focus of the viewer’s attention; often placed centrally and as the single focal point’. I had come across this type of compositional device while reading though Krauss’ 1982: ‘Discursive Spaces’ essay.

My intentions for Photograph 6 were to use this strong focal point as a point of reference for this ‘view’ and then lead the eye up towards the Tate Modern landmark in the distance because of the triangle shaped lead-in line. I felt this was unsuccessful because the Millennium Bridge kind of got in the way of this. However, the central foreshore ‘stump’ at the point of the triangle was conveniently a similar shape and luminosity as the Tate Modern in the distance. This was further accentuated by the black and white treatment, where a colour treatment wouldn’t have rendered this similarity nearly so obvious in my opinion.

Photograph 6 – Assignment 1 – Landscape

I had to blend two images together to make Photograph 6. My reasoning for this was the foreground was a strong compositional element but when exposed ‘properly’, it made the upper half of the image ‘washed-out’ and (for me) quite bland. When the sky and water were exposed correctly, the foreground was too dark for me and so blending two images I felt was one way of achieving a well-balanced exposure. To get the final photograph with a higher dynamic range (similar to Photographs 2 and 3), I simply opened up the two exposures in Photoshop as layers in the same document, made sure they were aligned and started painting one exposure of the desired areas of the other using a layer mask.

Lastly, both exposures for Photograph 6 were taken using a 10 stop neutral density filter to get long exposures in the daylight; the darker exposure to get movement in the clouds above around the Tate Modern and the lighter exposure to get the misty effect of the water at river’s edge.

Technical information for Photograph 6 was:

Darker exposure – f11, 33s, ISO 100, focal length 15mm

Lighter exposure – f11, 91s, ISO 100, focal length 15mm

References:

Krauss, R. (1982). Photography’s Discursive Spaces: Landscape/View. [online] Available at: http://dm.postmediumcritique.org/Krauss_PhotographysDiscursiveSpaces.pdf [Accessed 21 Nov. 2014].

For Photograph 5, similar to Photograph 4, I used the foreshore element itself to draw the viewer’s eye toward the one landmark: St. Paul’s Cathedral. I lined the shot up so that the lead-in line (an old pipe) of the foreshore would meet the cathedral if the line was extrapolated. I thought this worked well, especially since that part of the foreshore (the pipe) was the only part of that stretch of foreshore I observed could be used as a strong compositional device.

The misty effect of the water at the river’s edge featured yet again. I felt it helped lead the viewer’s eye up form the rocks, past the foreshore to the river and then finally St. Paul’s Cathedral (with the Millennium Bridge helping to lead the eye to this landmark, which incidentally took up a small part of the frame). I did feel this photograph was void of a little bit of ‘drama’ but it fit in very well to the theme I’d chosen in my opinion; where compositional devices were used to draw the viewer into the relationship between landmark and foreshore. The part of foreshore I had chosen (the old pipe) did look somewhat ominous to me though and its composition was somewhat reminiscent to me of Turner’s ‘Rain, Steam and Speed – the Great Western Railway’, exhibited, in 1844. However, here the diagonal line led to St. Paul’s Cathedral, rather than the mostly bare and expansive sky of Turner’s painting.

Photograph 5 – Assignment 1 – Landscape

Once again, I made use of my 10 stop neutral density filter to create a long exposure in the daytime.

Technical information for Photograph 5 was:

f11, 52s, ISO 100, focal length 11mm

References:

Turner, J. (1844). Rain, Steam, and Speed – The Great Western Railway. [Oil on Canvas] London: The National Gallery.

Photograph 4, was an instance where the app called ‘Tides Near Me – Free’, I found on the Google Play Store by Meech, R.  (2013), proved invaluable. Not only does the app tell the user what time the tide is at its lowest, it also usefully tells the user how low a tide that particular low tide will be in metres. I realised that a particularly low tide would be present on the day I captured Photograph 4. I was quite relieved when I managed to capture Photograph 4. This was because I badly wanted to find a stretch of the Thames’ foreshore around the Big Ben/London Eye area, where the foreshore appeared to take up less space than other stretches of the river. It seemed this stretch of the river was only revealed when the tide was very low; like this particular day. To capture a photograph containing both the London Eye and Big Ben was valuable to me because as mentioned, I felt that stretch of the river’s foreshore was relatively small and therefore hard to photograph. Also, there wasn’t much of the foreshore obvious but eventually I found some remains of the foreshore, which conveniently served to double-up as a powerful (in my opinion) diagonal lead-in line towards the landmarks of the London Eye and Big Ben present in the distance.

Photograph 4 – Assignment 1 – Landscape

Compositionally, I was able to use the diagonal lead-in line of the foreshore, along with the continuing theme of smooth water with a misty effect at the edge of the foreshore (from another long exposure) to help push the viewer’s eye up towards the two landmarks. In my opinion they were placed ideally in the frame, quite close together but not so much as to be ‘crowded’ in the frame. The London Eye was also apparently spinning fast because of the long exposure. I was not sure at the time whether this was desirable because it could look unrealistic but I found it just served to attract the viewer’s eye up to it; though not taking away from the diagonal lead-in line of the foreshore too much.

Again, since Photograph 4 was taken in daylight, I decided to use a 10 stop neutral density filter to obtain a long exposure. I felt the long exposure worked really well; especially the misty effect at the water’s edge. The sky featured moving clouds, which I felt complemented the landmarks in particular, because the viewer’s eye looked towards the London Eye first (in the direction the clouds were moving) and then under the clouds to Big Ben.

Technical information for Photograph 4 was:

f11, 61s, ISO 100, focal length 11mm

Photograph 3 contained not one but two landmarks, although one (Tower Bridge) was much smaller in the frame than the Shard (the other landmark). I thought it was good observation to manage to get these two landmarks in the same shot as well as the foreshore. The Thames’ foreshore did seem to dominate Photograph 3 a lot more than the two prior photographs for this assignment but I felt it only added to the sublimity of the scene. In particular the large, complex part of presumably an old wharf appeared to dominate the extreme right of the frame, even thought he Shard was evident on that side of the frame. I felt the placement of these two objects in the frame were nicely offset by the much smaller but more recognisable Tower Bridge in the extreme distance; all three intersected by London Bridge. This composition was almost forced upon me in order to get the two landmarks and the foreshore in the frame but I thought it worked nicely.

Again I used a long exposure (half forced by the blue hour time of day and half calculated because of the silky water and misty area where the water met the rocks on the foreshore that were created in the longer exposure). Again this was an image made up of two blended exposures; one exposed for the foreground/foreshore and another for the background. Because it was the blue hour I decided I had no need for filters in these two exposures.

Photograph 3 – Assignment 1 – Landscape

Technical information for Photograph 3 was:

Darker exposure – f11, 30s, ISO 80, focal length 11mm

Lighter exposure – f11, 30s, ISO 400, focal length 11mm

In Photograph 2, I tried to employ a couple of similar techniques – the misty effect of the river against the shore and the smoothness of the water and also subject matter and sublimity. However, a lot of this photograph bared significant differences excluding the aforementioned techniques. These differences included: a different kind of compositional device. I was half-forced into making this change in composition because there wasn’t much foreshore to choose from and the space within which to work in was quite cramped. Having said that; I decided on this composition as well; influenced by some of the 18th and 19th century paintings I had been researching regarding framing.

As I had noted while carrying out research on 18th and 19th century paintings, ‘I felt the framing elements equally led the eye’; however in the case of photograph 2, the objects framing the scene were not ‘trees framing the main subject’ and the subject didn’t possess ‘small figures and an expansive sky’ but rather the scene was framed by parts of the Thames’ foreshore and instead of the ‘small figures and an expansive sky’, there was obvious a huge famous landmark – Tower Bridge. I thought this kind of framing was very powerful and quite unconventional for me and the type of landscape images I had produced to date. The reason I found it powerful was that the viewer’s eye was forced in between the two high, vertical columns of perhaps an old wharf (even though there was some space on the right side of the photograph past the right foreshore element). This I had experienced was a typical trait in the paintings, where the viewer’s eye was forced to the centre of the image. However, because of the foreboding presence of Tower Bridge, for me at least, my eye was attracted to this landmark but also, ‘bounced back’ towards the foreshore; which was unfamiliar and suddenly became obvious to the viewer.

Another difference Photograph 2 possessed compared to Photograph 1, was the time of day it was shot at. I visited this part of the Thames’ foreshore just before the Golden Hour, where the light from the Sun was casting interesting shadows and highlights on Tower Bridge, while the foreshore remained quite dark. This was another case where I felt the black and white treatment applied added for me to the sublimity of the scene. Instead of there being a warm glow to the Tower Bridge, the viewer would potentially be more inclined to look at the form of the bridge and how it related back to the strange foreshore.

The time of day also meant I had to utilise different equipment on my camera and employ a different technique for Photograph 2 than Photograph 1. This included a 10 stop neutral density filter on top of the lens to reduce the amount of light hitting the lens dramatically, which was necessary in order for a slow shutter speed to be acquired in daylight. Also, I had to blend two images – a lighter exposure based upon the shadowy areas of the foreshore and a darker exposure for the highlights of Tower Bridge and the sky.

Photograph 2 – Assignment 1 – Landscape

One more compositional point of note was that although the viewpoint didn’t look particularly high; in fact my intentions were to keep the viewer ‘involved’ with the foreshore, I still had to raise my tripod to its full height in order to get some of the river between the Thames’ foreshore and Tower Bridge. I felt this retained the context of the river as the linking factor between the landmark and the foreshore.

So the technical information for Photograph 2 was:

Darker exposure – f11, 56s, ISO 100, focal length 11mm. Filters used: 10 stop neutral density filter

Lighter exposure – f8, 38s, ISO 200, focal length 11mm. Filters used: 10 stop neutral density filter

My first shot for the assignment (Photograph 1), was one I was adamant beforehand would work best in colour, because it was taken during the blue hour, which in my experience led to very powerful colours. However, I found that colour detracted from the uncertainty instilled by the foreshore’s relationship with the landmark, whereas the black and white treatment added to this intrigue and the relationship was more apparent. Therefore this treatment I felt was more suitable for my intentions of creating a sublime photograph.

Photograph 1 – Assignment 1 – Landscape

Technical information for Photograph 1 was:

f11, 20s, ISO 100, focal length 11mm

The landmark (The Shard) was reasonably recognisable and I felt the eye was drawn automatically to it as it dominated the skyline. The foreshore’s components were placed in such a way that they formed a kind of triangle of leading lines up to the Shard. Although this pair of diagonal lead-in lines was subtle in angle, they were still present and led the viewer’s eye from both sides of the frame. Also, the photograph was basically split in two; the foreshore and everything above the bridge intersecting the river (Southwark Bridge). This meant the divide between the old (the foreshore) and the new (the Shard landmark) was very obvious. This contrast was augmented further by the foreshore having much darker components than the sky and the Shard in the distance and so for me the eye darted between the two, trying to make some sort of relationship form in the mind. I felt the vertical stumps of the eroded jetties of the foreshore in the foreground were quite menacing in character and contradicted the well-known landmark of the Shard in the distance well.

While I was shooting this photograph, I (quite soon) found that the tide came in quickly. This seemed quite unfortunate to me while I was shooting; I had to shoot quickly before the water was at my feet.  As mentioned I had been shooting during the blue hour at that time so my exposure lengths were naturally quite long; more than few seconds. This meant the tide’s current and therefore small waves created a ‘misty’ effect to the water nearest the shore when the camera used a long exposure (more than a few seconds). This was something I thought added to the sublimity of the eventual photograph. Admittedly, although my exposure times weren’t long enough to ‘record’ the tide coming in, I found that when passing boats went by, there were (slightly bigger) waves produced a few seconds later. This further pronounced the ‘misty’ effect I was looking for and was a kind of silver lining to the ‘problem’ I had encountered of the tide coming in so fast.

My aim for this first assignment was to show the sublimity of London’s river; specifically the stark contrast between the lavish new of famous landmarks by the Thames’ side and the old, much forgotten yet still (sometimes) present foreshore of the Thames. I chose to use a subjective, low viewpoint as it has the potential to evoke emotion. My intended audience for this set of photographs would ideally be tourists of London or those less well versed in the circumstance of the Thames’ foreshore appearing when the tide is out. This would be because I felt it would make the photographs more sublime if part of the ‘puzzle’ wasn’t complete within each photograph – that of the foreshore.

I had stumbled (almost literally!) on the Thames’ foreshore quite accidentally a while ago. I was out taking photographs in my favourite place to photograph (London). Of course, I knew the Thames had a tide but it hadn’t occurred to me what this river might ‘reveal’ when the tide was out. I discovered a lot of mysterious objects when I climbed down one of the (conspicuous and hard to climb) stairways leading down to the foreshore, when I decided to investigate. Since then, I have visited the various stretches of the foreshore quite a few times; intrigued by this ‘other side’ to London. I also did a bit of research regarding the Thames’ foreshore and although the amount of information on it was quite minimal on the internet, I was able to discover what the foreshore primarily contained.

My findings were: the larger objects were eroded jetties and wharves. I found it fascinating that some of the history of London was present; although only revealed when the tide was out, which I felt only served to add to the intrigue. Also, I felt it was important to note that a lot of trade in London in those times when the jetties and wharves were still active, was carried out a lot by river, which made them an integral element of trade. So it was a visual reminder of how trade had changed in London; from being a vital part to London’s wealth to becoming ‘badly damaged and eroded, with only the stumps of the timbers protruding from the foreshore’ – (Thames Discovery Programme, 2010), found at: https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/30513687?access_key=key-7k56o5f8pjba21v0xsa&allow_share=true&escape=false&view_mode=scroll (accessed 4/2/2015).

It was the contrast between these once vital, now largely forgotten jetties and wharves, which made up the Thames’ foreshore and the modern day landmarks residing on the river side which I would try to portray together in a sublime manner. I would do this primarily through the use of juxtaposition between these two elements, along with the use of long exposure to create somewhat otherworldly effects in order produce a set of photographs, which would be linked in a theme of subject matter and viewpoint.

References:

Thames Discovery Programme, (2010). Jetties and Wharves. [online] Scribd. Available at: https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/30513687?access_key=key-7k56o5f8pjba21v0xsa&allow_share=true&escape=false&view_mode=scroll [Accessed 4 Feb. 2015].