A couple of days ago, I talked about street photography and its element of danger. That statement made me think (unusual, I know). What, then, is the safest form of photography? Though this question may seem silly at first, let us explore the possibilities.
Portraits? Well, it may seem safe enough, but with all those cords, wires and lights, it's easy to trip on something and have a spotlight crush sensitive parts of your body.
Landscape photography? Oh, it may seem pretty innocuous, but when you're up high enough taking a picture of a valley below, there's always a boulder looking down on you, ready to pounce on your fleshy substance.
Macro photography? Looking at bug or flower or what-have-you, your concentration is far from anything else around you, except for that little piece of something. The time is then ripe for you to be smacked by a truck, or scalped by a crop-duster. This hobby is not so safe now is it?
I could go on, but the consequences are pretty clear. I suppose, then, that we can all agree that photography is probably the most dangerous hobby in the world.
That silliness is now over, so let's see what dangerous work has been produced today.
Frank
His note: Tried a little Warhol imitation. Although it didn't turn out, the idea is there.
Mandy
Her note: The sun decided to shine brightly in the afternoon, despite the late unexpected snow. It made for a really great high key antique-like portrait done in sepia.
Shannon
Her note: Hmmmm wonder what a cow is worth?
Pat
I walked outside for a little while today and saw this old, weathered garage door. I like the texture and figured it would be a nice picture.
No comments:
Post a Comment