Straight, Strong, Simple
[同僚Aiコメント]
Three "S"、さらに "Something"があれば、といわれる
じっさい直球で、少ない要素で空間が立ちあがっている
左の影がいい。もうひとつの黒い花、
“Cute flower photo” に落ちず、不穏さ、グラフィックな緊張感
(=Something) をもたらしている
[Comment from my photographer friend, Ai]
Straight, Strong, Simple
“Three ‘S’.
It would be perfect if there were just one more ‘Something’.”
It would be perfect if there were just one more ‘Something’.”
And in fact, the image is very direct.
With only a few elements, it still creates a convincing sense of space.
With only a few elements, it still creates a convincing sense of space.
What really works is the shadow on the left.
It doesn’t function merely as a supporting detail, but almost as another black flower.
It doesn’t function merely as a supporting detail, but almost as another black flower.
Because of that, the image avoids becoming just a “cute flower photo.”
Instead, it introduces a subtle uneasiness and a graphic tension —
Instead, it introduces a subtle uneasiness and a graphic tension —
perhaps that is the “Something.”
Is that true?
主題を明確に
よく言われる
本当か？
慣用句になっていないか？
右上の花が強すぎる
主題を明確に
OK、でもそれではただのスポットライトショットにならない？
右の闇から現れた顔面傷だらけの凶暴そうな男
気配を感じ振り向く男（主題）もその目の鋭さ尋常ではない…
その2者の緊張感こそが主題なんですけど....
よく言われる
本当か？
慣用句になっていないか？
右上の花が強すぎる
主題を明確に
OK、でもそれではただのスポットライトショットにならない？
右の闇から現れた顔面傷だらけの凶暴そうな男
気配を感じ振り向く男（主題）もその目の鋭さ尋常ではない…
その2者の緊張感こそが主題なんですけど....
Is That True?
“Make the subject clear.”
People say it all the time.
But is that really true?
But is that really true?
Hasn’t it become just another cliché?
“The flower in the upper right is too strong.”
“Make the subject clear.”
“Make the subject clear.”
OK.
But if I do that, doesn’t this become just another spotlight shot?
But if I do that, doesn’t this become just another spotlight shot?
Imagine this:
A man with a scarred, brutal face emerges from the darkness on the right.
Another man, sensing his presence, turns around.
He may be the “main subject,” but the sharpness in his eyes is anything but ordinary.
Another man, sensing his presence, turns around.
He may be the “main subject,” but the sharpness in his eyes is anything but ordinary.
The tension between those two figures —
that is the real subject.
that is the real subject.
So why not here?
