Shattering The Illusion Of Depth

[canuck1941]

SHATTERING THE ILLUSION OF DEPTH

Height, width and depth are how we define objects in three dimensional space, but when we reproduce those objects as images (3D movies aside for the moment) depth is an illusion you need to create in the mind of the viewer. The actual depth of a printed or, as is more often the case these days, an electronic image is for the purpose of this consideration insignificant.

Leonardo DaVinci set me on the road: (paraphrasing) To create the maximum separation, place the light against the dark and the dark against the light. This principle was at work when some ancient ancestor discovered that a piece of charcoal from last night's fire could make a mark on the wall of a cave.

A photographer can develop this simple-sounding insight to a high level merely by considering reality and images of that reality from the point of view of separation. The old pros I trained with back in the 60's used to say if you could separate the tones in black and white of an object, you were ready to shoot color.

The classic exercise in those days was to shoot a white cup and saucer on a plain white background. What was wanted was not photographs of beautiful things, but beautiful photographs of ordinary things, sometimes even to turning them into something else, a ­trompe d'oeil. Practicing this eventually produces a greater awarness that inevitably colors (pun intended) everything you see afterwards. Once you see the world in a new way, you never go back to the old way simply because it is not as exciting.

It is the position of shadows in the image, black and white or color, of course, that contributes to creating that vital illusion of depth, the idea in the viewer's mind that this image has something in the foreground, the middle ground, and the background.

For example, better images of landscapes are usually obtained when one places something –in or out of focus, with or without information— in the foreground. Think palm trees in silhoutte against a tropical sunset. You know what I mean. Out of focus foregrounds are common Without that foreground, the images goes flat. These three planes, FG, MG, and BG, are the tools one uses to delude the viewer, content and point of interest notwithstanding, into believing he or she is seeing the third dimension -- in essence engaging the viewers mind.

When you engage the viewers mind, when you have his or attention focused (pun intended) on the photograph you created, your images produce a sensation and thus acquire a life. The greater the sensation by whatever means, the more 'life' your images have. Make images live in your viewers' mind.

Once upon a time, I made a black and white self-portrait on a Polaroid print with seven distinct planes of separation, not counting the viewer, each plane with information, to illustrate this principle, but, alas, I no longer have it, much less any kind of camera anymore. As you know, a picture is worth a thousand words.

So, perhaps, some of you might contribute images, with or without IMHO distracting technical information, but which I nevertheless acknowledge is appropriate in this instance, and we can all enjoy the results.

Edited November 9, 2010 by cdnvic
removed text formatting for readability

[IanForbes]

Good topic. It's one reason why portrait photographers like to use a 100 mm lens (film cameras) and slightly blur out the background so it does not distract from the subject. It's also the reason for those incredible panorama photos today by the experts who stitch 900 separate photos of the same subject together.

[MRToMRT]

I am as lost as you are.

[canuck1941]

Soohk has posted an image which perfectly illustrates the concept of foreground, middle ground and background on the Daily image thread, page 11, #256. I do not feel I have the right to post it here and my own troubles with crappy software continue to frustrate me. Anyway, Soohk"s shot has an intriguing centre of interest in the middle ground, the mysterious silhouette of a woman. Perhaps with some Photoshop magic, one more layer of depth could be added, ie: the silhouette of a man on the left side.

Edited November 1, 2010 by canuck1941

[cdnvic]

This is an interesting topic, so I clipped out all the arguing and we can start again.

The comment "if you could separate the tones in black and white of an object, you were ready to shoot color" is especially true. I've noticed that people adept at shooting black and white have less issues with saturation when they shoot colour.