Fun with Silhouettes

[Tim Seaver]

One of the things I love about keeping a point and shoot handy is that for me, their unserious nature encourages experimentation and stepping outside my normal shooting habits. I don't usually shoot many silhouettes, for example, but having my SD800 out and ready on a hike of Mount Mansfield with my family let me play around with that theme while puffy clouds sailed by.

This was my favorite, which required a minimum of "art direction":

(This is easy with most point-and-shoots, just make sure your subject is backlit, and expose for the sky or a bit under {I shot this one at -1 stop} so that your subject appears "black".)

 

[hikingnclimbing]

Love it!

I love this one. Although seemingly minor, I love that his arms are away from his body and his silhouette is so detailed. I also like that you included as much ground as you did. The placement is very close to the 1/3rd line as is your son's silhouette. I am now inspired to go shoot some of my own. Oh, dangit for the rain. Makes it a bit harder.

 

[Grumpy]

I like!

The child's body posture is just right -- I can feel the wonder, anticipation and excitement. Beautifully dramatic sky, good dynamic composition for an essentially static subject. (Can any detail in that one bit of blocked up cloud be recovered?)

No surprise here: I experimented with cropping some off the bottom, and liked the result. Your eye may not see it my way, though.

G.

 

[kmorgan]

Love it! You can do a lot with a shot like that. Really lends itself for postcards and such.

Kevin

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Very nice. Earlier, I assumed he was facing the camera. Now I think he is not. One of those images that can flip back and forth.

Out of curiosity, I played with the curves in GIMP and his nose appears after a while, so I'm now pretty sure he's facing the camera.

Reminds me of my 5 year old.

Tim

 

[Mark Schaefer]

It is a great natural pose. A good moment. The details of the curved fingers and the ear really make the shot interesting. The technical details are all well executed in the photo.

It might be interesting to see this at a slightly different location, without the conifers appearing near his feet -- to give the image greater simplicity and cleaner lines. But the trees do give us the knowledge that this is not some stark desert landscape or rocky crag, so they are useful in the image.

 

[Tim Seaver]

The Momzilla Variation

I had Isaac stand further away to make him seem even smaller in comparison to the Almighty Momzilla.

 

[NewHampshire]

Man, I love how the deep blue and white clouds contrast the balckness......waaaay cool!

Brian

 

[Grumpy]

My first reaction to the ”Momzilla” silhouette was that it is not as successful as the one of the child alone. That impression has persisted for a bit, now, so it may be worth noodling out why.

First, the dark cloud in the upper right is imposing itself more fully in Momzilla, robbing the scene of simplicity (to a degree). It becomes another, perhaps enigmatic element to contemplate. So the picture loses some of its immediate “punch.”

Second, while the big-mom-little-boy theme is nicely depicted, Momzilla seems to lack the spontaneity of the little boy alone. It’s like “the decisive moment” has escaped, and with it a good bit of the scene’s evocative power.

Third, I’m given to wonder if my reaction to Momzilla is really a matter of overload. Someone mentioned picture selection (editing) in another thread recently, cautioning about including too many closely similar images in a given set. I think that’s the case here. Silhouettes are dramatic, by nature. But they also have a tendency to look alike, by nature, so the “too many” threshold can be reached and crossed fairly quickly.

In a related vein (third-and-a-half) what might my reaction have been had the sequence in which I was exposed to these photos been reversed?

Had Momzilla come first, I’m fairly sure I would have thought/said something like, “Wow! Nicely done silhouette. Interesting.” And then when the child alone was added, would I have said, “Oh, another silhouette”? Or would it have been something more?

I’m thinking, I might have said, “Yes! The child alone ‘brings it on home’ in your exploration of the idea!” In short, although I like both shots, I think my first impression that the child alone is the stronger image would hold up.

G.

 

[NewHampshire]

Good points Grumpy. For me I think the first shot has the kid as the main focus whereas the second the main subject is split between two (and perhaps weakens a strong main subject)???????

I don't know. But either way I think both photos worked out very well.

Brian

 

[Tim Seaver]

Had Momzilla come first, I’m fairly sure I would have thought/said something like, “Wow! Nicely done silhouette. Interesting.” And then when the child alone was added, would I have said, “Oh, another silhouette”? Or would it have been something more?

I think that is probably how most people would have reacted to the sequence, and would agree that the image of Isaac alone is a bit stronger.

One of the reasons I did a second take with Elisabeth is that I never know what I am going to get as photo requests from magazine editors, so I like to shoot variations of whatever promising scenes present themselves. (The second image would be a possible submission for a request depicting the strength of motherhood, mother/child bonding, etc.)

Thanks to all for your comments!

 

[forestgnome]

I like it. Refreshing.