I guess this blog post is in defence of editing. How many times have you taken a photo, and not captured what you saw? As the Pink Floyd lyric says – the grass was greener, or the light was brighter. The problem is the camera just captures whatever is in front of it, whereas our eyes work with our brain to selectively enhance the parts we find attractive or interesting. I remember reading that a photographer once said you should isolate the parts of a scene that initially drew you in, and make an image that focuses on that aspect.
Whilst I was failing to see any kingfishers yesterday… and I have a plan for that… apparently (and logically) the kingfishers are more active in finding fish when they have young to feed. D’uh! Not rocket science I guess, but I had not thought it through. So now I will wait until May to try again. But I digress.
Whilst I was failing to see any kingfishers yesterday I thought I would take some photos anyway, as the camera needed exercise. My eye was drawn to a yellow tree contrasting to the darker trees in the background, and looking isolated. The reed beds made a nice foreground. That is what my eye and brain saw. This is what my camera saw:
You can just about make out the tree I was looking at, but in my eye the tree was standing out more, and the background not so obvious. This is more what I saw:
Now, you might prefer the first one, I don’t know. To be honest I don’t really mind either way, it is all subjective. But the second image is what I “saw”, even though the reality is it was not there.
One final image for you though – because not only were the kingfishers not around, but it seems word had got out, and even the swans were making a run for it! If you click on the image to enlarge it you should also be able to see a face in the water being kicked up. Spooky….