This image is a perfect example of the dilemma I face these days. Being a relative newbie (in a middle-bie body), I struggle with very basic issues right now and this image demonstrates my clear lack of tokens for the clue bus heading to ...how much STINKING COLOR - ville !!?!
Of course, it's the choices we make that define who we are as artists ... yeah, yeah ... and I should always wear clean underwear in case I get hit by a car. I know, mom, I know.
It is Kathleen Connally's work (see the last post or go here) that has me really thinking about this. As I continue to study her work and shamelessly copy elements of it, I realize that it varies in it's level of saturatedness (saturation being such a boring word). The pieces I like most, however, come across as rich and full but somewhat desaturated. My head is trying to wrap itself around this magic spot where less is more in photography. Where pulling color out ends up releasing richness and vibrancy.
I think color is often used to mask other problems. It's like ... hey, this is a picture of a dead leaf ... but if I crank up the color it kindof grabs your attention. Sortof like ambulance flashers at a crash scene.
I think it's more like salt ... too much is nasty and too little is bland. But the only measure for the right amount is ... well ... 'a dash'. Ok, I guess I'm still figuring out what a dash of color means in photography. I know that the image above is too much. I guess I'll just have to keep tasting till I like it :)
Love and peace,
Glen
