-Tennyson
Maud, pt.1, sect.22, stanza1, l.850^9.

Still growing daffodils from bulbs. Such a cheery sight against the snowy windows.

“From December to March, there are for many of 
us three gardens:
the garden outdoors,
the garden of pots and bowls in the house,
and the garden of the mind’s eye.”
-   Katherine S. White

• • •

The name Daffodil is derived from an earlier “Affodell”, a variant of Asphodel. The reason for the introduction of the initial “d” is not known, although a probable source is an etymological merging from the Dutch article “de,” as in “De affodil.” From at least the sixteenth century “Daffadown Dilly”, “daffadown dilly”, and “daffydowndilly” have appeared as playful synonyms of the name.

Does the sharp detail err on the side of masculine? A quick perusal of others’ photos reveals shallow depth-of-field photos, blurred intentionally using the Orton effects, and then covered by a layer of texture. Softness seems to be in style, whether the original were in focus or not. As wikipedia states about the Orton effect:

“Photography enthusiasts, such as groups on Flickr, have embraced the technique and used photo editing programs, like Adobe Photoshop, to replicate it. Some have modified the technique to selectively apply the technique, producing images that have regions of crisp focus and high detail and regions of intense blurriness.”

Pssh. I was pleased that I didn’t touch the RAW photo with Photoshop, except to convert to a jpeg. One assumes that softness sells, but that’s not the aim here. I aim to see in new ways every day. Okay, sales are nice. My accountant likes them.

Or softer, perhaps, with a vignette and lighter background, as in the next shot? Perhaps this looks less clinical and more romantic. (Photo links to sales site.)

A metaphor is an implicit comparison of one thing to something else: “my love is a red, red rose”. A simile, of course, is a kind of metaphor that makes the comparison explicit using “like” or “as”: “my love is as beautiful as a red, red rose.”

Thus writes Harold Davis in his article Myths, Metaphors, and Digital Photography. Unfortunately, Davis concentrates on the links between film and digital cameras and processing. I’m more interested in the subject and when or if photographers use metaphors to convey a story.

For example, in this photo shot by Howard Marsh, the metaphor could be love of dogs, sharing a moment (the Labs love it when I sit at their level or point of view), or the viewer might see nothing of the kind.

In expressive photography, we rely on visual symbols to represent abstract ideas. A symbol stands for something with a larger meaning. We may also call them metaphors. Some of the most famous photographs endure because of their symbolism”

Thus begins a tantalizing article in pbase.com entitled Using symbols and metaphors to express meaning. The writer accompanies each photographic example with text explaining his reaction to the metaphor — far better than I could here. But I’ll give it a go.

For those familiar with rutting moose in the fall, this photo might convey autumn, an end to a season, and, had I left the suburban sight of powerlines in the photo, wildlife accommodating to life in the ‘burbs of Alaska. Or, in this case, not man versus nature, but man and nature, and especially nature and people with cameras coexisting. The hedge can always be replaced, while the moose are necessary for the balance of diversity in nature. But that’s fodder for another post, perhaps.
(© Photo by Jan Timmons. Photo above by Howard Marsh)

However, because Onexposure.com seeks photos with emotion that convey a story and have some sort of effect (or what they term “impact”), I did a dumb thing. I submitted it. 1x screeners eventually rejected it. One man wrote that it was “propaganda” and “not Art”. I need to research rejection and dismissal and ways to manage putting my soul into an image and have it dismissed as “not Art”. Not suitable for framing. But ’tis I! My story. My history. My past. How long must I remain quiet with my secrets? I will research this.

‘Twas just a wee photo challenge – flowers in a vase. And these weren’t even technically in a vase; rather, the tulips (image, far left) grew from bulbs in the vase. Still, apparently the challenge winner won a spot on the RedBubble home page.

That short appearance resulted in more than 2,000 hits or views and several hundred comments. This felt quite strange at first. However, similar to selling a print to someone I didn’t know, gradually the shift in my perceptions settled back to normal. When new images replaced mine and others on the home page, my five minutes of fame ended.

No sale occurred as a result of that fame. But the point of posting a print of some tulips awash in sunshine was to enhance my own pleasure and capture a moment of pleasure. In that, I succeeded. The rest was lagniappe.