photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
Phil Douglis | all galleries >> Galleries >> Gallery Twenty Two: Black and white travel photography – making less into more > St. Baafskathedraal, Ghent, Belgium, 2005
previous | next
14-JUN-2005

St. Baafskathedraal, Ghent, Belgium, 2005

The contrails of jet aircraft lace the sky over Ghent's gothic cathedral that was built during the middle ages. The great Flemish painter Jan van Eyck's remarkable 1432 "Adoration of the Mystic Lamb" is on display here, the first masterpiece ever to be painted with oils. By converting the sky from blue to black, I’ve made the dissolving contrail plumes seem less real and more symbolic as they diagonally crown the cathedral and the statue that stands in the plaza before it. They celebrate the splendor of this place, and salute the force of the sun as it emerges from behind the bell tower.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20
1/1600s f/8.0 at 6.0mm iso80 full exif

other sizes: small medium large original auto
share
Phil Douglis16-Dec-2008 19:36
Thanks, Kal -- as I said in the caption, the contrail plumes seem to celebrate the splendor of this place, so your mention of celebratory fireworks fits the scene as well. And yes, I hope will be able to spend more time in my galleries. We are now displaying nearly 2,500 images here, and each of them is intended as a learning resource.
Phil Douglis11-Dec-2007 19:24
I too, have a thing for churches and graveyards (and statues as well), Vera. (My wife tells me its because they "all stand still and don't talk back." ) I am glad you read the dialogue I had with Zane Paxton about noise -- it gave me a chance to express my feelings, which are similar to yours. I have used Neat Image, and now use Imagenomics, to remove noise when it is truly distracting viewers from the point at hand. In this case, it hard to know where the cloud pattern ends and the noise begins. It is irrelevant to the idea here, and if anything, it might even enhance things a bit, given the mystical nature of the picture. ( I don't usually agree with Paxton's ideas, and he does not agree with mine. See our final dialogue athttp://www.pbase.com/pnd1/image/75092603 )
Guest 11-Dec-2007 12:35
Perhaps studying your galleries is wearing off on me...but, I must say I do have a thing for churches and graveyards. I liked the light on the steeple in mine. With yours, I have read the comments with interest, especially the conversation on noise. I have used Neat Image, which I think sometimes does a nice job, but other times not. Sometimes I feel it makes things artificially smooth looking.
Vera
Phil Douglis18-Jul-2005 21:21
You make your point very well, Zane. From one gray haired guy to another, digital imaging comes to us as a refreshing breath of fresh air. And I try to bring a fresh view or feeling to every image I make. I don't cater to my viewers expectations -- I look at my picture as an expression of my own ideas and feelings. I actually did remove the noise from this sky with Neat Image, and it just did not look right to me. I liked the feeling of the texture it gave to the sky. I don't concern myself if that texture was actually there or not there -- it simply makes me feel the sky more -- and so I kept the noise there. Neither of us right or wrong on this point. Photography should a matter of expressing our own intentions, and not gratifying our viewers own expectations. We have a right to say whatever we want to say, and say it however we prefer to say it. Selfish? Perhaps. But old guys like us have earned the right to make their own images, and in their own way. (And young guys have, as well.) If their viewers are moved by what they see, all the better. I thank you for adding to your earlier comment here, Zane. You gave me still another chance to grind one of my favorite axes -- the expression of content over form.
Zane Paxton15-Jul-2005 21:21
Hi Phil,

This is a fine point for sure, but I think it does impact the expression. I agree that ultimately the issue of noise needs to be judged by how it impacts "meaning". The issue of whether or not we are more or less comfortable with noise is perhaps irrelevant in that conversation of "meaning". It is worth considering that visual expectations will/are shifting towards the new digital standards rather than what us gray haired guys (that can actually remember Tri-X) are used to . Basically I'm saying is that our eyes don't see noise; it's added by the machines we use to take pictures. And it is easily removed, so why include/express a by product of under exposure when the human expectation would be for it to not be noticable? Ansel Adams and Edward Weston were masters of their craft par excelence; should we do less just because we use digital cameras? So, for me noticable noise is generally a distraction and not helpful as an artistic expression per se. To argue a point that you have used so well in your work , the opposite of clouds as (in the sense of a physical presence) would be to contrast them against the void that is the sky.
Phil Douglis11-Jul-2005 01:29
Thanks, Zane, for your comment. The only color here was blue, and by removing it, the image becomes less real and more symbolic. As for reducing the noise in the sky, I have no problem with it. Noise is texture, and the texture of the sky complements the texture of the clouds nicely. The only time I find noise objectionable is when it obscures meaning. I was weaned as a photographer and photojournalist on Tri-X black and white film in the 1960s -- accepting its gritty look as part of the character of the picture itself. So I have a somewhat different view on the presence of noise in my images. The texture of the sky is the real story here -- you can almost reach out and touch those clouds that stream across the heavens. The subtle texture behind those clouds created by electronic noise is, as far as I'm concerned, just another part of my expression.
Zane Paxton10-Jul-2005 21:22
Phil,

This image probably didn't have much in the way of color to start with except for the sky. Since the sky is not the primary subject of the image, the color wouild have been a distraction from the subject. The B&W does better shift the focus back to the primary subject.

Quite dramatic shot, BTW. On a technical note, I might have run Neat-Image on the sky to reduce the noise as
Type your message and click Add Comment
It is best to login or register first but you may post as a guest.
Enter an optional name and contact email address. Name
Name Email
help private comment