I’m sharing two views of the same plants growing in a long border beside the Kitchen Garden at Hampton Court Palace. Their moods are quite different.
If I asked you to guess when each of them was taken, would you be fairly confident or not?
When we take pictures, we have choices and it’s funny how striking the effects of these can be. One picture is more commonplace but both versions have their strengths. Setting aside the difference of lighting and composition, the taut echinops flowers growing among diffuse allium seed heads would make a good ‘compare and contrast’ exercise.
The blue of the echinops is more striking in the second shot and they seem more floriferous, but the echinops in the first image seem to have more power within the scene. They tower. When I look at the second picture, my imagination turns the flowers into something less imperious, almost with their hands up in surrender. I suppose that’s an effect of the angle.
The second picture lacks the … (to be continued) effect of the top one, created by the glow of flowers glimpsed further up the border.
Both were taken within one minute of each other, at 18.35 and 18.36 (the second was actually first). Though I clearly remember taking them, with just an idea, a turn and a step or two between them, I still find their differences surprising.
The top shot shows the effect of backlighting; the second is under the soft, direct, even light of a summer evening. In this steady, revealing light, we see everything at once which means that our minds have little curiosity gap to fill. The contrasty backlighting is harder to process. It triggers feelings that seem to pre-date us. What’s hiding in the shadows? We may have some sense of awe.
It may be a daft question, but which is the ‘true’, most accurate scene? Neither? Both, and a myriad more that I did not capture?
How much we experience in a garden where our eyes, feet and mind can turn and play at will. How little of this we typically can share, try as we might. Here, by posting two moments, I’m trying to give a sense of the gap.
Susan Rushton 
The photographer really can control what we see, as you demonstrate here. What struck me is that the first, backlit shot emphasizes the allium, whereas the second, the echinops. I personally prefer the later. Perhaps my eye likes chronology?
I wonder if your botanical eye likes to see the details that the darkness hides.
Perhaps!
Excellent post! I was drawn to the first photo, and until I read your piece, I didn’t really know why. This certainly falls under the category of learning something new today.
I prefer the first too.
It’s true. Both photos establish quite different moods, and have a different feel. But seeing both gives a fuller understanding of the impression they make in the garden where they are. What an interesting post.
Another reason for us to enjoy the lighter evenings – more time to play!
A great ponder, Susan. And so true. Sometimes I tell myself to wait to get a photo of my garden for the different moods I might capture, but every moment of everyday has a story to tell.
The camera never seems to captures exactly what the eye sees, but can do a better job of capturing what the mind sees (a mood) than you’d expect.
yes…
A good lesson to remember to take that step, get down on the ground, whatever you need to do to mix up the shots!
I spent yesterday at a flower show, where my main reason for taking steps and moving around was to try to get a shot without a stray foot, arm or head in it!
Those are very pretty together!
Thanks, Dawn.
I would say the bottom one is the “true” (as in realistic) one, and the other one the more artistic, or moody. Interesting post.
My first instinct would be to agree, but strangely enough the top one did look like that too.
I totally agree with your description of the impressions created by the two photos. Great post and beautiful shots of these flowers in your garden.
I would have answered, ‘I wish it was my garden!’ except there is no way I could maintain Hampton Court Palace Garden.
😊
Both photos confused me. My initial perception was marine — life underwater! Were it not for the flowers in the background of the first, I’d still be thinking that. The second one struck me as a photographic negative whose color had been tweaked. I had more than a mere gap of curiosity; I had an entire chasm. I would have had no idea a step and a twist could have such an effect on light. These high-personality subjects contributed, of course. Such a thoughtful study!
High-personality subjects is quite right. I find plant communities interesting – plants that you often see together – both the natural ones and the ones gardeners choose.
The first one is magical, the second realistic. It’s hard to believe they were taken only a minute apart!
I find it surprising too!
The reactions to your shots are interesting, Susan. I love the drama of the first. The second, I would probably discard at some point. Looking and sharing are two different things, aren’t they?
They are. I wasn’t expecting anyone to like the second one best, but Eliza did. The pictures are not improved by The Reader.
And which will stick in your mind more? 😉 An interesting thought about the myriad of other moments we may have missed or simply not noticed.
The backlight scene, for me.