Evidence-based photographs has been shown to reduce stress and pain perception in patients. As we saw in the last blog, nature sounds can produce similar effects. Are the benefits additive? If so, how do we add sound to still photography? Should we?
Visually chaotic, this forest appears to be a very quiet place—especially in the carefully composed still photograph. However, this scene is on top of a steep stream bank, just above a noisy cascade. I added the audio of the cascade I recorded at this scene. Alas, the audio starts and ends automatically, but you can replay it an any time. Does the audio add to the image or detract? Would you like to have audio as an option ? Photo: © Donald J. Rommes
For the photograph above, I waded in a shallow forest stream in a deep and wide channel towards a small waterfall. The surrounding forest was attractive, but a photograph from the stream bed would contain too much distracting bright sky and the trees would appear to converge unnaturally.
I needed to get higher for a successful photograph. After climbing the opposite bank, the camera was still pointing up a bit, but the small amount of convergence that would create could be easily corrected in post-processing. The lower part of my composition is the top half of a moss-covered nurse log that bridged a dark gap in the stream bank below.
To my mind, the photograph succeeds because it creates harmonious order out of the forest's visual chaos. It eliminates visual distractions that could have intruded—like dark stream bed gaps, patches of bright sky, and contrasty elements on the edges.
Composition is a much about what is eliminated as what is included—and for good reason. I wanted to communicate a feeling of tranquility and light in the deep forest—a feeling that would be ruined by harsh light and impenetrable shadows.
Yet, even if the composition is successful as art, it necessarily eliminates some content and leaves the context up to the imagination of the viewer. That's not necessarily a bad thing in still photography—in fact it might be an advantage over, say, video.
You be the judge. I have attached a video of the stream, to give you an idea of both the visual context and the natural sounds of the environment. Does knowing the context and hearing the sounds of that environment help the still photograph, or hurt it by taking away the element of viewer imagination?
In this blog, the audio plays automatically. I would have preferred all controls to be up to the viewer. Imagine a photo frame with a sort of button that could play some length of the accompanying nature sounds if and whenever the viewer wants. Would that benefit the still photo by adding a natural soundscape, or would that detract from the photograph by removing a bit of what can be imagined?
My own view is that still photography should not be accompanied by audio. I think it's better to let the viewer's imagination and memory create her own story and context. Better to leave the natural soundscape (and odorscape?) to audio and virtual reality. But we're thinking about it.
Comments