Architecture 497d - Architectural Photography
| Field Assignment 1 | Fall Semester 2004 |
| Due September 14, 2004 | Professor Gary L. Catchen |
Critique of photographs
|
The purpose of this assignment is to write a brief critique of several photographs. Specifically, you shall analyze the photographs, indicated below, according to elements of aesthetics that include composition, perspective, lighting, sharpness, and contrast. In other words, you address the question of what makes a particular image good or poor. In class, we have not yet either defined these terms or discussed them. However, you can sense the quality of these elements intuitively. Moreover, your initial thoughts about the importance that each of these elements give to a particular picture provide a basis for a more didactic discussion of them. To complete the assignment, write a narrative several pages in total length in which you respond to the questions and comments given below. For many of the questions and comments, a priori, no correct or incorrect answer or response exists. Instead the "correctness" depends on the strength of the arguments with which you support your opinion.
Go to the restaurant, Eat ‘n’ Park, which is located along North Atherton St. not far from Walmart. In the entry way, a picture of the Nittany Lion Shrine is hanging on the wall. A particular type of distortion characterizes this picture. Identify the distortion and speculate on its cause. In the main dining area, a variety of photographs decorate the walls. The photographs show buildings located on the University Park campus. Comment on the lighting. Does the use of light and shadow make the pictures interesting? Are light and shadow used to emphasize any architectural elements? Comment on the composition. Do the pictures evoke your interest? Do they include too much or too little information. For example, are essential parts of buildings cut off or are the pictures more interesting, because unimportant parts of the buildings are not included in the composition? Comment on the perspective. Do the buildings appear distorted? If so does the distortion add to the quality of the picture or detract from it?
From the archives, I have selected photographs of several buildings located on the University Park campus. I have not significantly cropped or digitally enhanced these images, although I have adjusted their sizes to fit conveniently on a web browser, (when the monitor has a resolution of 768 x 1024 pixels). For the same buildings, I have selected contemporary photographs, which I present as a side-by-side comparison. In addition, for two of the buildinigs, I selected two different views of each.
For the photographs of Armsby Building, comment on the following. Which view gives a feeling of more depth to the image? What natural barrier limits the viewpoints or perspectives accessible to the photographer? How does the lighting differ in the two photographs? Comment on the effects of the clouds, the shadows, and the landscape in the two photographs. Have the images been effectively cropped?
For the (contemporary and archival) photographs of Burrowes Building, comment on the following. Which view gives a feeling of more depth to the image? What natural barrier limits the viewpoints or perspectives accessible to the photographer? How does the lighting differ in the two photographs? Comment on the effects of the clouds, the shadows, and the landscape in the two photographs. Comment on the perspective
For the two contemporary photographs of Burrowes Building, comment on the following. Does the image of the Oswald tower emphasize the architecture of Burrowes Building? If so, how? If so, why not? In which picture did the photographer use perspective to de-emphasize the effect of the Oswald Tower? How did the photographer do it?
For the (contemporary and archival) photographs of Sackett Building, comment on the following. Which viewpoint more effectively emphasizes the architecture of the building (as opposed to the trees)? Comment on the perspective shown in the archival photograph, i. e., are any distortions visible? How does the lighting differ in the two photographs? Comment on the effects of the clouds, the shadows, and the landscape in the two photographs.
For the (contemporary and archival) photographs of Electrical Engineering East, comment on the following. Does the images of students enhance the archival photograph, or not? Which viewpoint (east view or west view) more effectively emphasizes the architecture of the building? How does the lighting differ in the two photographs? Comment on the effects of the clouds and the shadows in the two photographs.
For the (contemporary and archival) photographs of Electrical Engineering West, comment on the following. Comment on the lighting and perspective used in each photograph. What natural barrier limits the viewpoints or perspectives accessible to the photographer?
For the two contemporary photographs of Electrical Engineering West, comment on which viewpoint more effectively emphasizes the architecture of the building.
For the two frontal views of Carnegie Building, comment on the perspective and on any distortions.
For the two oblique (easterly) views of Carnegie Building, comment on the following. Which view more effectively emphasizes the architecture of the building? How does the perspective differ in the two photographs? (Consider the rate at which horizontal lines converge.) How does the lighting and contrast differ in the two photographs? How do these difference affect the mood that the image evokes?
|