# Looking back



## mysteryscribe (Dec 18, 2006)

a candle makers tools.


----------



## terri (Dec 18, 2006)

Love this one!! My only nitpick is that if you hadn't told me what it was, I don't know if I could have made it out...would have loved it if you could have gotten in closer. But, eh!

Lovely composition and toning here, Mistah Charlie. :thumbup:


----------



## mysteryscribe (Dec 18, 2006)

thanks but i didnt want to chop it up so much as to zero in on it.  If you dont give a little of the flavor its like just things...


----------



## terri (Dec 18, 2006)

Understood!  It's the wall here that gives it a special "flavah" for me, actually....looks so nice!


----------



## mysteryscribe (Dec 18, 2006)

yes the wall dates it I feel/


----------



## terri (Dec 18, 2006)

mysteryscribe said:
			
		

> yes the wall dates it I feel/


But in a really good way.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Dec 18, 2006)

Okay now I'm going to wax philosophical run quick and hide the children.  Lots of people who shoot photographs have either tunnel vision or can't seem to concentrate.  Not anyone here of course you understand.

Let us take this one table top shot.  Okay you don't have to take it. but it is there as a easily accessable example.  How would the feel have been different without some of the elements.

Without the wall you would have lost two things.  The line leading you into the picture giving it depth if you will, and you would have lost the first hint that this is an old thing.

This is one of those shots that could have used something to tell you what it was about as well.  I didn't do my usual naming but I should have.  Im not sure what I would have called it but maybe wicking.

Forgeting all that, what would have happened if there had been more in the picture not less.  Well I'm sorry I didn't think i was going to wax (I hope you did get that terry wax... candle) so I didn't shoot a wider shot.  I made three shots of this and in my opinion it needed at least two.  The table and the fire shot that wound up in the bloopers because i over exposed it.

The third was just the fire which I will post right this very minute.  One shot of it all would have lost a lot of focus.  One of those failed to focus shots I spoke of.  Now please remember who is saying this and its just an opinion.  Sometimes the parts of the scene are bigger than the whole.  Drama you know.


----------



## windrivermaiden (Dec 18, 2006)

I like this shot. yes...it needs the surroundings for time and place. I only knew what it was because I saw similar stuff at Williamsburg. Well done.


----------

