<<< o >>>digitalcolour 7 comments + add yours

This was taken on the same trip as my previous entry, and the sign is about six feet to the left of the doors in yesterday’s entry. And, as with yesterday’s entry, I don’t have a great deal to say about this shot, other than that I like it – for two reasons.

Both reasons are to do with the colour, and I’ll tell you the first, but I’m interested in whether anyone else will spot the second (or respond in the same way as I did). The first is a fairly obvious response to the vibrancy of the colours used – the sign is very eye-catching, and the contrasting colours make for a lively image. The second is related to that point, but is a little more obscure ;-)

And finally; if anyone has any suggestions for this week’s Photo Friday challenge – Morning – I’d like to hear them … I’m really not a morning type of person ;-)

capture date
shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
focal length
image quality
white balance
optical filter
Canon G5
1.25pm on 17/3/04
aperture priority
B+W UV 010
comment by sciac at 11:57 AM (GMT) on 20 March, 2004

Thanks for your comment on my site, nice fotoblog!

comment by myla at 01:38 PM (GMT) on 20 March, 2004

I guess for me it would have to be that the previous post everything looked sort of monochromatic, and professionally done. And this one looks more, well, like a kid put it together. And the color choices make this sort of stand out. You know, like a carnival ride. :)

comment by myla at 01:39 PM (GMT) on 20 March, 2004

and as for MORNING -- (ahem) -- I'm sure that your girls would provide you with the answer. A picture of them sleeping (before they get up) would be pretty special. :)

comment by d at 02:42 PM (GMT) on 20 March, 2004

i think i like the irony in this image.. digital colour.. when i often associate digital photos with this kind of colour vibrancy due to contrast boosting etc..

comment by pixpop at 03:39 PM (GMT) on 20 March, 2004

Yeah, I'm going with the theory that it's a comment on digital photography as well. And maybe also the idea that digital photography is somehow "cheap". In the great film vs digital debates, economy is one of the factors cited in favor of digital. But the film camp tends to say that the ease of making large numbers of images and then throwing away the ones you don't like cheapens the art. Me, I don't care. I love shooting both digital and film.

Re 'Morning' challenge: I would say photograph the light. There's something special about the hardness and clarity of morning light.

comment by Joseph Holmes at 06:06 PM (GMT) on 20 March, 2004

I like the contrast between the flat, artificial sign and the cracked, natural granite it rests on.


comment by djn1 at 11:39 PM (GMT) on 20 March, 2004

Thanks for the great comments.

What struck me about this sign, especially since it's there to advertise a service, is that the colours seem i) ridiculously unsubtle, and ii) very dated (they remind me of adverts from the 1970s). So I suppose it just struck me as odd.

If I were attempting to advertise digital printing I think I'd probably go for something with a cleaner, more contemporary feel - blues, greys, silvers, perhaps.