critique-April06

Now it's your turn to evaluate an image

Black-and-white works well here. If the sky were a vivid blue and the structure and canyon walls a typical sandstone red, it might come across as a garish postcard. As a single image it's a skillful use of light and shadow, and to a lesser extent, of texture in the canyon wall as well as the walls of the building.

The image would be better in color because color is more natural—it's the way we see things and it would be good to see this site as it really looks. There is also nothing here to give one an idea of the scale or size of the structure, so it just doesn't seem that monumental or impressive.

No. 1 April 2006

The subject is a small portion of a ruin (Bonito) at Chaco Canyon in New Mexico. The structure dates to about AD 1100 and is constructed of stone, with mud used for mortar. It was built by native Americans we refer to as Anasazi. In addition to these large free standing pueblos--some, like this one, with more than 800 rooms. The Anasazi later built the cliff dwellings at Mesa Verde and many other sites in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah. And then about 1285, they abandoned them, although Chaco was abandoned by AD 1150. We don't know why it was abandoned, or even what the structures were used for. Chaco has been designated a World Heritage Site by UNESCO—a designation shared with the Egypt's pyramids, England's stonehenge, and Peru's Machu Picchu.

It is often useful to ask What is the photograph about? A specific ruin? the method of stone construction? about light and shadow, or perhaps permanence and decay? What do you think moved the photographer to point his camera in that direction? He was in the middle of lots of ruins, so why this particular wall? Is it an image that you'd like to see hanging in your own room, or one you'd return to again and again? Is there anything there about the subject or about the formal composition--shapes, lines, texture, patterns, etc that really moves you?

Are there any aspects that distract from the strength of the image:
foreground too light? too much detail? not enough detail in the shadows?

  You are probably right about the
lack of anything to indicate the
  scale of the ruin—it's about four
stories high. But a color image
somehow looks garish—the sky
  seems too blue and the contrast
  with the warm sandstone of the
  rock is maybe a little too
  picturesque for some tastes—like
the barn or old mill that is a little
  too red or to perfect to be
convincing.

   Other images taken that day in
   color do have a certain "reality"
   to them, but some look too picture
   postcard-ish for me. With black-
   and-white we have to concentrate
   on the pure form and texture.