too few fenceposts

[Isaac]

...trying to nail down what it is that makes subjects like weathered wood (and rusting metal) attractive in the first place.

I'd like to know whether others would even bother photographing a lone fence post like this one; and if you would, how your approach would differ?

(I don't think I ever figured out what such a photograph could be about.)

[shutterpup]

Based on your three photos, I'm inclined to go macro on the stringy quality of the moss. But then, I'm a macro person, through and through. That said, I like #1 because it gives definition to the space that this one, lonely fencepost inhabits.

[luxborealis]

And I'm quite the opposite of shutterpup - while I do love macro, I would prefer to see the fencepost set in its environment. So, go wider than photo 1 and give us some context. Perhaps even a horizontal format with a wideangle, the fencepost being a dominant foreground element to get the wonderful detail that's there. How about a black and white and/or with lower angle to reduce the area of bright grass behind.

[jjj]

Terry basically said what I was going to post. 

I'd like to know whether others would even bother photographing a lone fence post like this one; and if you would, how your approach would differ?
(I don't think I ever figured out what such a photograph could be about.)

Issac, if the post is indeed all on it's own, emphasising that aspect would seem to make sense.

[Richowens]

One way.

[Bryan Conner]

I would photograph an old fencepost.  Maybe it is because my mother used to tell me that I would argue with a fencepost.  LOL.   Seriously, I love looking at old things such as these fenceposts.  They spark my imagination and I think about how long ago the post was put there etc.  It is sort of a portal into the past for my imagination.  As far as a full shot or a macro, I am on the fence on that one.   

[Rob C]

One way.

Very nice shot.

Basically, asking questions about whether one would or would not photograph such subjects is pointless, and perhaps the only comment it really makes is about the person posting such questions. Not that that has to be a negative comment at all - simply that as with everything in life, some things appeal to one and not to another. Look at couples. People, not posts; posts generally appear better-suited one to the other.

Rob C

[Isaac]

Basically, asking questions about whether one would or would not photograph such subjects is pointless...

Pointless to you, but to me the replies were interesting.

[Isaac]

One way.

I think that's a great example, because it's a fence post connected to other fence posts - so we have those nice intersections of horizontal wire (or in other situations horizontal wooden rails) with the vertical post.

There's so much less going on with a fence post that's not connected to other fence posts - not even notionally as a line of fence posts.

[Bryan Conner]

I agree.  I find the varying opinions interesting.   The only pointless (stupid) question is the question not asked!  Actually, I find it pointless to describe this particular inquiry as being pointless.   

[Rob C]

Pointless to you, but to me the replies were interesting.

Indeed? And what did you gain from them that's made you a better snapper than you might otherwise be?

Rob C


P.S. Isaac, where can we look at your photography?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I'd like to know whether others would even bother photographing a lone fence post like this one; and if you would, how your approach would differ?

(I don't think I ever figured out what such a photograph could be about.)

Agent provocateur?

[Rob C]

Agent provocateur?

Yeah, but the interesting one of that name, for me, was an exotic lingerie chain... was, because I'm not sure if it's still around. That's what happens when you lose your interest in fashion...

By the way, I've just spent the past while this evening looking through Jennifer's website again: boy, is she gifted!

;-)

Rob C

[Isaac]

Agent provocateur?

Troll.

[Isaac]

@shutterpup @luxborealis @jjj -- Yes, trying to make something of the very fact that this is a left-behind decommissioned fencepost should have been possible.

@luxborealis -- Yes, black and white! What seems to have interested me was the contrast in tone and the contrast in texture, so it's a bit strange to keep the colours, although this conversion is a bit heavy-handed ;-)

[ckimmerle]

Sorry folks, suggesting wider, tighter, left, right, sideways or backwards ridiculous. You don't know what the OP was trying to convey with this image (nobody asked), therefore you cannot possibly know how to make it "better".

So I'll ask the only relevant questions: what were you trying/hoping to say with this image? What peaked your interest in this particular fencepost? Which of your images most closely realizes that interest?

Look, I'm all for critiques and such, ask Rob (we've argued over it many times) but when someone asks "should I?" or "how can I make it better?" we really need to be asking questions more, and stating personal opinions less. THAT is how to help someone.

[BernardLanguillier]

It has been my feeling for many years that lone fence posts don't get the share of photographic attention they deserve.

I even considered starting an NGO or a fundation focusing on this topic.

Cheers,
Bernard

[tom b]

Single fence posts rock.



Cheers,

[Rob C]

Poles rock!

Rob C

[Isaac]

So I'll ask the only relevant questions: what were you trying/hoping to say with this image? What peaked your interest in this particular fencepost? Which of your images most closely realizes that interest?

While I agree with your emphasis on being more interested in discovering what someone was trying to do, than in offering our own approaches; in-this-case I explicitly asked for others to offer their own approaches, so we can't really beat them up for doing so.

The first problem is that I never did figure out what I was trying to say with those images - that's where I wanted to be very open to other peoples ideas.

The second problem is that although the thing that piqued my interest in the scene was the tonal/textural contrast, colour detracted from that and for reasons unknown I hadn't checked what the photos could be like in b&w. Doh!