10 wedding or engagement Photos I love to hate (but sometimes do anyway)

Yes, it's overdone (and I even toned it), but I did it anyway and I like it. Read more to find out why.

My wife tells me that I hate these photos because I see them all of the time, whereas most people don't spend so much time around wedding photography. It may be true in part, but sometimes the psychology of the shot rubs me the wrong way.

I wanted to recreate all of my pet peeves with the help of a Barbie and Ken bride and groom, but my daughter doesn't own a set and I'm not about to seek them out in Paris, so descriptions with have to suffice. Sorry. You will just have to imagine the photos.

But before I mock, let me say that (almost) every one of these photos has its place. I have done and will continue to do a few of them, because I think that detail and nuance can make all the difference. In other words, this isn't entirely about flat-out rejection. It's more about pausing to look at what a photo says.

1. The" kiss under the veil"
The recipe: Bride's veil covers both bride and groom as they kiss.

The problem: Too little veil and it looks silly. Too much veil and it looks like they are 6-year-olds building a fort or that they're in Africa trying to hide from mosquitoes carrying malaria. And then there's the kiss...too much and it makes the viewer feel like a voyeuristic perve.

A solution: The reason I like the photo at the top of the post is that I took it in December and I like how it shields them from gently falling snow. I also like how the folds of the veil hide the lips in just the right way. The kiss is not too much, but don't think I didn't have to delete some that were before ever showing them to the clients.

2. The "swan princess takes a bow"
The recipe: The bride (usually in a very full-skirted gown) sits on the ground with her gown spread all around her. She looks up demurely as the photographer snaps a shot from above.

The problem: The pose is so contrived that only a prima ballerina can get away with it. Unless you're wearing toe shoes, don't go there. The angle makes the head appear larger than the body which further gives a cutesy childlike look.

A solution: I can't think of one. I have never done this shot and don't think I ever will.

3. The "American Gothic couple reluctantly holding hands"
The recipe: Couple faces camera straight on about four feet apart, outer arms to the side, inner arms extended in a sharp diagonal line to hold hands in a symmetrically rigid manner. Expressions are blank as if posing for a 19th-century photo with heads held in vice determination. This is usually done as an engagement shot.

The problem: You're getting married, people! Ostensibly, you are in love! Yes, it looks good from a compositional standpoint, but it also looks like the photographer cares more about composition than message.

A solution: Smiling is OK. Having the couple look at one another is OK. Just remember that this is for an invitation to a wedding, not a geometry class.

4. The "playful piggyback"
The recipe: The bride (or usually, bride-to-be) hops on the back of her (future) hubby for a playful piggyback ride.

The problem: If the guy isn't strong enough, or is about the same height/size as his fiancée, she will end up looking fat. If the guy is more than a few years older than his fiancée, it will look like he's really robbing the cradle. If it isn't in your personality to do playful things like piggyback rides then the pose will look forced. Finally, this pose can also say "my clingy fiancée is strangling me."

A solution: In my opinion, the only way this shot works is if you take it just after she has jumped on his back or in some other natural moment that suggests real playfulness and not a pose.
In the example above, ideally her arms might give his neck some room, but I still think it works because 1. the couple requested the pose (hence, it was natural for them), 2. the groom is a lot taller than the bride and can easily carry her, 3. their smiles were natural because they were still laughing about her trying to jump up onto his back.

5. The "look at my ring!"
The recipe: A variety of potential poses, the two most popular being the engagement shot where the girl places her hand on the guy's chest in a way meant to show off her trophy of a ring OR the wedding shot of the two hands together with the rings showing.

The problem: The engagement version of the shot is such a cliché that most people mock it. The message seems to be "Look at this trophy I just scored. I'm totally a ten cow wife." What is meant to be a symbol of love and commitment can easily turn into a display of materialism.

A solution: Let's face it. We are all complicit in making the ring so important, so I understand the desire to showcase it. For the engagement shot, it's a matter of restraint. Show it, but not like you're a game show hostess. Be subtle. For the wedding shot, I think a close-up of the hands works great in the context of the whole story, and obviously the ring ceremony is something to capture.

6. The "shoe fetish"
The recipe: In the version that really bothers me, the bride's shoes are photographed perched on a nice occasional chair in all of their glory.

The problem: I know how much women like shoes, and this might be one of the cases where I hate the shot because I've seen it a thousand times, but still...doesn't it also just emphasize the materialistic side of things?

A solution: I prefer shoes on feet, preferably in a way that has more story to it. I know people who hate any shoe shot whatsoever, but I have done photos that I like of the bride and groom's feet with the bouquet next to them—it makes the story be about the couple (and also has more elements than just a pair of shoes on a chair) rather than about just an object.

7. The "lurking groom"
The recipe: Bride in front. Groom way in back and out of focus.

The problem: It's a fine line between interesting composition and a message of isolation and detachment. The groom could end up looking like a stalker or an afterthought, either way, not the best message.

A solution: The expression on the bride's face and the posture of the groom make all the difference. You need to look at it on a case by case basis. If the bride looks too stern, you're in trouble. In most cases, I would say that keeping the bride and groom close is a safer bet.

8. The "like a virgin"
The recipe: A variety of possibilities ranging from the ever-popular cleavage shot to a boudoir pose featuring cleavage and/or legs as the bride gets ready. Sleeveless or off-the-shoulder gowns are a must. Poses can be ripped from Madonna circa 1984 or from many bridal magazines.

The problem: Fashion photography and wedding photography should not (in my opinion) be the same thing. Fashion photography is meant to sell clothes by creating striking and provocative poses. Angry brides, brides with vacant soulless stares, brides with contorted postures, etc.—these are the brides that populate magazines, but your wedding isn't there to sell clothes.

A solution: If your bride's gown is showing off her décolleté, you don't need to emphasize it even more by taking shots straight down her dress while she leans forward. It's like the ring shot—keep it subtle and sophisticated. Think Grace Kelly rather than Lady Gaga. If you do a "getting dressed for the wedding" shoot, steer clear of anything that belongs in a Victoria's Secret catalog.

9. The "back-alley make-out"
The recipe: The woman has her back against the wall, the man leaning into her, possibly kissing her.

The problem: As an engagement shot, this can make recipients of your invitation feel awkward. It can easily look exhibitionistic rather than romantic, or predatory rather than passionate.

A solution: Watch the position of the legs. Does it look like too much is going on? Think twice about using an actual kiss. Keep it in playful mode.

10. The "this is all about me and my Photoshop filters"
The recipe: Bride and groom are there as props. This is all about drama and dramatic angles. The drama is heightened by the use of multi-colored gradient filters or by cgi effects ripped from films like 300 or Lord of the Rings. The more surreal the better.

The problem: If the people become only incidental to your oeuvre, then you I guess it has become the photographer's wedding. The oh-so-tired "Lord of the Rings" look is dramatic, to be sure, but it can often lead to photos that look like they were taken on Mordor. If "with this ring I thee wed" turns into "One ring to rule them all," you've got a problem.

A solution: It's like jewelry. Even if the trend is to wear a dozen strands of pearls and/or wrists full of bracelets and/or rings on nearly every finger, you probably wouldn't do that on your wedding day. Wedding photography, in my opinion, shouldn't be so trendy that you would be embarrassed to look at it in five years. If you want to do something really trendy, do it for the engagement pics, but for the wedding, it's better to use effects in moderation.


What do you think? What are your own pet peeves when it comes to engagement or wedding photography? If you've been married a while, what photos have stood the test of time? which ones have not? Comments?

I'm back! July Monthly Special: Weddings

Beautiful Polynesian couple kissing by the Salt Lake City Temple

OK. So my short break turned into a two-month hiatus during which I began to wonder where I ever found the time to do a blog in the first place. One of the many things keeping me busy was wedding season, so I figured, Why not do the July Monthly Special on weddings?

If you're not interested in wedding photography, you will still find posts on other topics this month, including my first interview in a long time and who knows what else? I will be in Seattle and then in Paris during this month, so you can expect some photography or inspiration from there.

But back to weddings...You have no idea how much I want to do a post on the worst engagement photos ever or on some of my pet peeves in wedding photography. But I try not to be mean. Still...I might just have to do a not-so-mean version.

Although I have no actual data on the matter (which never stops me from making wild assertions—just ask my wife), I bet Utah is the wedding capital of the world and BYU is the epicenter. If you know Utah Mormon culture, you're aware of the cliché of 21-year-old LDS men fresh off their missions, hormones ablaze with virtuous lust, zealously in pursuit of an eternal companion (usually blond) while studying for their pre-med, pre-law, or pre-MBA future. If your only contact with "Mormon" culture is Big Love, you should know that you would have to go to some freaky fundamentalist splinter group compound in Southern Utah to see polygamy and that the people won't be nearly as attractive. If you want a look at the equally strange monogamous mainstream, get your hands on a copy of the poorly-executed Mormon comedy "The Singles Ward" and then read the satirical Mormon mommy blog "Seriously, so blessed!" which is seriously, so accurate a satire of a certain Utah type that readers will either be offended or die laughing depending on their sense of humor.

This month, I will give some advice to photographers who want to do wedding photography and will do a tutorial (that can apply to other things than weddings) on making your own Photoshop templates.

And what about those of you who want to participate by posting something on your blog and then linking it back on this post? Why not share your favorite or least favorite wedding photo? Or do a post about what you love/hate about wedding photography. Go ahead and be opinionated. I will.

Dancing feet

My sons and I looked like paparazzi today at the "So you think you can dance?" auditions in Salt Lake City—at least that's what the publicist and security guys seemed to think. We were respectful of the request not to photograph Cat Deeley even though she's my favorite 12-foot glamazonion TV goddess AND even though I'm quite certain (thanks to my regular reading of the Photo Attorney blog) that anything in public (such as a bunch of fame-hungry dancers in a line) is fair game. Even the mother of a a jazz belly dancer (what the?) was asked not to take photos of her daughter being interviewed. That's taking it a bit too far.

But my boys and I hadn't come there to take paparazzi photos anyway. I was more interested in doing some fragmentary portraiture of dancers' feet.

The dancers were all so friendly. The boy with the amazing turnout in the blue Nikes told me he made it to Vegas last year. Maybe he'll go to Hollywood this time.

I couldn't resist a shot of these dancing feet.

The proud owner of these feet is already on the "hot tamale train."

Call me crazy, but I'm not sure that flip-flops are the best choice for ballroom dancing.

The body and things directly attached to it...

Eva with her "nibbley blankie"

Trying to clean up my hard drive and found this photo of cuddled up to what she calls her "nibbley blankie." We bought an identical one as soon as we knew how attached she was to it, but that one remains pristine, pink, and neglected while this one apparently gets better as it gets more ragged and dingy.

This is pushing my definition of "fragmentary portraiture," but I will argue that it fits into "the body and things directly attached to it" part of the definition.

Think about ways to portray someone through something that is always attached to their body. A piercing? a ring? a pencil they keep behind their ear? a name tag they have to wear at work every day? Try it and post your results.

Composition 101: Strong Diagonals

Still swamped with work and neglecting the blog (even my fortune cookie is two months past expiration date), but here's a quick tip for composing and/or cropping photos:

Look for strong diagonal lines.

I'm the first to want to ignore all rules (just ask my colleagues), so let's not call this a rule. It's more of a helpful tip that will make you aware of what you already know on an instinctive level: our eyes like diagonal lines. You may or may not have noticed that fact before, but once you start paying attention, you will notice diagonal lines everywhere. Let's just look at, say, some album covers:
Notice how Sheryl Crow's album cover portrait basically creates a triangle? The ground is the base of the triangle, the tilted guitar is the right side, and her tilted body is the left side. The dark background is simple so as not to compete with that main shape.

Less obvious at first glance, the Jamie Cullum album cover also forms a triangle. Jamie's head is the tip, and each arm points toward invisible lines that extend to the base made up of piano and horizon.

The Red Hot Chili Pepper's cover art has very strong diagonal lines. The negative space in between the heads creates a giant "X" (an appropriate letter, I suppose, given the "parental advisory" label) right through the middle of the album.

We may as well look at an MJ cover. Notice the strong diagonal line that sweeps from bottom left to top right?

Not a photo, but Coldplay owes the strong diagonals on their album cover to Delacroix (and they owe their music to any number of litigants, if you believe in frivolous law suits).

Another "X marks the spot" composition demands attention on this Horehound album cover.

This portrait of Crosby Loggins wouldn't be half as compelling without those strong diagonals.

I could go on and on and on....

If you happen to have iTunes open, try flipping through your album cover art for diagonals and see what you find.

But wait, you say, wasn't Music and Photography last month's theme???
Uh, yeah, but the point here is that when doing this month's special—fragmentary portraiture—you need to pay attention to composition more than ever.

Look at the photos in my last two posts and you'll see what I mean.

If it's seeming clear, give it a try by taking a photo and cropping it to achieve different strong diagonals.

In conclusion, I want to emphasize that this is by no means a rule. Plenty of great photography can be found with very straight lines. We also tend to like grids. And circles. But the more attention you pay to the shapes in your images, the more you will be able to get photos that appeal to your eye's love of geometry.

Photographing Hands

Hands hiding from a portrait can become the portrait

I hope to get back to more frequent posts soon, but this is the busiest season for photography (the kind I actually get paid to do). Just a thought or two about hands and portraiture...

Remember that great photo of hands making bread in my interview with Brad Slade? No? Well here it is:
It shows how much meaning is conveyed in a person's hands. Brad's photo also teaches a good lesson about how to do a portrait of hands: show them in action. Capture the mechanic at work. Capture the child finger painting. Show hands turning the pages of a book. Hands holding a favorite possession. You get the picture.

The photo at the top shows a kind of playful shyness as the smile peeks out through the hands. My son's hands also suggest that he can be both playful and stressed (a nail biter like his Dad).

Try doing a portrait that focuses on the hands of someone you love. And when you do, share your results.

July Monthly Special: Fragmentary Portraiture

Our son, Lucas, has his mom's lovely pout...

...and his dad's playfulness.

Introduction
Have you ever noticed that one of the first things parents, family, friends, and sometimes even strangers do when they see a baby is to play a "match that feature" game? Oh, she has her father's eyes! That chin is definitely from our side of the family. He looks just like you! Your great uncle had that exact same hair! Sometimes relatives from both sides of the family seem to want to stake their claim on as many parts as possible, each set of grandparents insisting that junior is the spitting image of someone on their side of the genetic tree. But I don't believe this tendency is actually a turf war, because casual acquaintances and complete strangers are just as likely to participate in it. I know I have. Have you ever told someone how much their child looks like them only to find out that they're adopted? I have.

In other relationships, we also focus on the parts more than the whole. If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, maybe it's because each beholder focuses on different parts. At the wedding I shot last Saturday, the groom described meeting the bride in a history class where she was seated next to him. "The first thing I noticed was her perfect little nose," he reminisced.

Facial features are a pretty safe bet if you want to recognize a person's physical qualities without coming across like a pervert of a sexist pig. The line between "appreciating" and "objectifying" is often found just below the neck.

Because love and sexuality have so much impact on our choices in life, we can understand how easily a part-by-part look at a person can slip into connotations beyond our intentions. But looking at the part as it relates to the whole need not be about love or attraction. A person's hands say a lot about their occupation (manual laborer?), their personality (meticulous? stressed out?), aesthetics (quirky? minimalist?). A compelling portrait does not necessarily need a complete face. In fact, it may not need a face at all.

The challenge
This month we will look at what I am calling—for lack of a better term— "fragmentary portraiture." Had I wanted to wax literary (as I am prone to do), I could have chosen "metonymic" or "synecdochal" portraiture. But people tend to find the terms confusing. If I wanted to create a painfully stupid yet descriptive pun, I could have called this "partraiture." But then, to many people in Utah, that pronunciation just sounds like the local dialect. I also could have chosen "extreme close-up," but that's not what I'm going for. "Fragmentary portraiture" is a portrait through an isolated part of a person, and that doesn't have to mean it will be a close-up.

Fragmentary portraiture, as I am choosing to define it:

• conveys a sense of the person through a depiction that is limited to a single part
• includes the body and things directly attached to it (i.e. clothes count, but a car—even if you are almost always in it—does not).

That's it. The basic idea is simple, but allows for a lot of possibilities (but let's keep it family friendly, shall we?).

Hopefully, I will get this whole link problem sorted out in the next few days. If, for any reason, you want to post and share your results but can't get the link to work, just email it to me.
UPDATE to link problems: almost completely fixed! feel free to post your results whenever you have them (don't forget to use the permalink URL of your post—and check the "TOP monthly special" box when adding a link" but not just for a comment)

The ABCs of Paris

The Intro (be patient)
Continuing our theme this month of Text+Photo, I want to share a very special project with you. Twelve years ago, we were living in Paris. I was finishing the research for my PhD and teaching at the University of Versailles. Michelle and our year-old baby, Max, spent their days exploring the city. As a souvenir project, I worked on a series of black-and-white photos featuring the beautiful and ubiquitous wrought-iron of Paris. I soon finished the project and wanted to move on to something else. Then one day, our scary-smart baby gave me the idea...

I was playing blocks with baby Max and discovered that he had learned—without our help—the letters of the alphabet. I don't know how he managed that, but it gave me the perfect organizing principle for a new project: the time-honored tradition of the abécédaire. Remembering Victor Hugo's assertion (From Notre Dame de Paris) that "When ones knows how to see, one can find the spirit of a century and the physiognomy of a king in a door knocker," I set out to create an architectural primer on the ABCs of Paris. I photographed details of the city I love—details that resemble letters—and then later, I selected a word and quote from France's rich literary and cultural history to accompany each photo.

The project continued for years. I have done it and redone it. I have taken multiple versions of most letters. I finally made the whole thing into a mock-up of a book, using Asukabook. For me, it represents the perfect sampling of the city in an ABC book for lovers of Paris young and old. I submitted the book to Artisan books, but it didn't work. I tried Chronicle and I don't think the book made it past an intern in the mailroom (but I still love you anyway, Chronicle). Would the third time be the charm? I tried Assouline, a New York/Paris-based publisher specializing in beautiful luxury editions. Score! Or so I thought. The Manhattan office seemed to love it. Can I hold on to it and show Martine Assouline (co-founder) when she returns from Europe? Hmm. Let me think about that—Yes, of course. But no! Ultimately the dreaded We really love it, but it's not right for us at this time, response came. Finally, this July I walked into the offices of Parigramme and an elegant, polite, but blunt man told me that people just aren't buying books like this anymore. OK, if he says so I can't really argue that maybe ABC Paris would sell better than that book about the doors of Paris they put out last year.

So the project is in limbo. If you know a publisher that wants it, send them my way. Otherwise, I may end up trying to do a gallery showing, selling prints, making the whole alphabet (sans quotes, of course) into a poster...who knows?

The silver lining, however, is that I used my energy (born of frustration with the ABC project) to create take-out photo—a blog that gives me a chance to explore new ideas and themes each month. Since my ABC project combines the architectural theme from July's Monthly Special with the text theme of the September Monthly Special, I couldn't resist sharing some of my favorites:



Thoughts? Comments?

Yaquina Bay Bridge in Newport, Oregon

As inspiration for this month's architectural detail project, here are a few photos of the Yaquina Bay Bridge in Newport, Oregon.

I pulled over to the side of the road in a precarious spot only to learn upon leaving that there was a safer (and official) place to pull over about 50 feet away. Oops. The stepped sides of the pillars screamed Art Deco to me, probably because I had just spent two weeks in Paris studying archives related to the origins of Art Deco for part of a chapter in my book project.

The view from underneath the bridge makes me think of what historian David E. Nye calls the "technological sublime." The arches and the beam of light coming from the upper right of the photo mimic the view from inside a cathedral, except that in place of stained glass we can look out to admire the complex geometry of steel.

This final photo is a detail of the staircase leading to the main road and the top side of the bridge. I was tempted to use Photoshop to clean up the signs of graffiti tags at the bottom, but decided against it.

Be sure to check out what other people have been posting this month, and add your own if you can.

Yaquina Head Lighthouse, Oregon

I'm now on the Oregon coast--a far cry from Paris, but not without its own architectural beauty. Today we visited the Yaquina Head Lighthouse and I snapped a few pics and put them together in a grid (click on the photo to enlarge it):

The iron staircase (top middle) is as beautiful as it is hard on the knees, but I also noticed the appeal of the lighting mechanism. Even the floor in the top of the tower caught my eye for its signs of age. And the simplicity of the windows compliments the serenity of the coast.

It's not too late to participate in the Monthly Special. Think about a building in your area that you can better appreciate through photography and share it by linking back here.

Two more architectural photos from Paris

With three out of five of us in our family having names beginning with the letter "M," this balcony not far from the Centre Pompidou has always caught my eye. I also like the simple white curtains against the brown window frame. What's not to like?

Like my taste for the films of Guy Maddin (I know other fans must be out there, but I have yet to meet another person who likes, for example, the film "The Saddest Music in the World"), I don't expect my love of this photo to be shared by many. It's minimalist, modern, and it was taken outside the IRCAM building, which in the wonderful book, Paris to the Moon, Adam Gopnik describes as a "modern music institute, which sponsors contemporary composers who write music that so far no one has ever heard." It just makes it all the more appropriate, doesn't it?

This post will likely bump the July Monthly Special off the main page, but even if it's out of sight I hope it won't be out of mind. I'm still hoping to see a lot of you take up the architectural detail challenge.

More architectural detail from Paris

I was out taking some pictures this morning. Here are a few photos--all from a calm residential neighborhood. How would you like to have these ornaments carved into the side of your house? (click on any of the photos for a larger view)

Escargot anyone? Leave it to the French to immortalize a snail in stone.

Are you familiar with Jean de La Fontaine's fable of the Raven and the Fox? I bet the residents of this house know it by heart.

The Lion King, French style?
Just like certain fashions, these details look perfectly at home in Paris but would be a bit ostentatious back home.
So, even though you may not have snails, fables, and lions carved around your neighborhood, you can still celebrate the architectural detail that surrounds you by participating in the July Monthly Special.

Room with a view

I'm not sure if I love this photo I just took, but here are a couple of things I do like about it:

1. The signs of aging: the chipped paint, the faded edges of the street sign. Now if I could just appreciate signs of aging on my face as much as I do on a building.
2. The hint of red and white awning that gives some color and let's you know that a café sits below.
3. Last but not least, the reflection of the Eglise de la Trinité that tells you what kind of a view the person living in that apartment wakes up to every day.

The church, by the way, is a relatively new construction by French standards. It was built during the time when Napoleon III (Napoleon Bonaparte's nephew, who was elected president of the Second Republic and then, when his term was up in 1851, decided to proclaim himself emperor--Don't let this give you any ideas, George W.) had given free reign to Baron Haussmann to modernize Paris. And nothing says "modern" like a 19th-century church built in the Italian Renaissance style, right?

I'll try to do more frequent posts while I'm in Paris, but meanwhile, I hope to see more links of your own architectural photos on the July Monthly Special.

July "Monthly Special": Architectural Detail

This month I'm leaving behind software and portraiture (don't worry, they'll be back) for a project aimed at appreciating our surroundings. My own example will come from Paris, which may seem unfair given how easy it is to find beauty there, but my goal is to inspire you to look more closely at the structures around you and to discover the beauty in them.

Detail of a bridge in Paris.

The story behind the project

Twelve years ago, while living in Paris with my wife and our one-year-old son, I was in need of a creative photo project. I didn't want to take the same touristy photos that you see on all the postcards, probably because I didn't want to think of myself as a tourist. When you've gone through all the work of finding and furnishing an apartment, you want to think of yourself as something more than a visitor. You want to believe you love the city more deeply than someone running through the Louvre, stopping by the Eiffel Tower, and then hopping on a plane or train to their next destination. Paris is not fast food, you think. Slow down. Take in the subtleties. You knew you liked the Eiffel Tower before you left home, but what else do you like now that you've spent some time here?

I remembered taking a class on Renaissance poetry and learning about the blason--a kind of poem devoted to praising a woman by describing a single body part (e.g. the eyebrow, the lips, the nose, the tooth (I kid you not), the thigh, etc.). The result could range from comical to seductive to downright nasty, depending on the body part and on the skill of the poet.

With the blason in mind, I tried to identify what specifically I loved about Paris. At that time, it was without a doubt the ironwork. Had I moved to Paris from New York (which has some beautiful examples of ironwork) rather than from Seattle, I may have taken it for granted. But I had never before been surrounded by so much beautiful wrought iron. I loved looking at the variations in balconies, gates, bridges, and staircases. And so began my photographic ode to ironwork.

I wasn't shooting digital back then, but here are a couple recent shots:

Detail of a gate at Palais Royal.

I love the silhouetted curves of this gate.

The challenge and why you should participate

This month, I want to invite you to photograph architectural details around you. This could be your home, your work environment, your city, a place you like to visit, almost anything as long as it is an architectural detail.

I am giving a broad definition of architectural detail as human-made structures or things more-or-less permanently attached to them. For example, your fireplace mantel would qualify, but the knick knacks sitting on top of it would not. Your antique door knobs and locks would qualify, but your keys would not. Sound clear?

If you do this month's special I believe you will begin to appreciate your surroundings on a deeper level. Keep a camera with you when you go out and new things will come to your attention. This month is all about seeing rather than about software. I hope to see even more people participate. Pick your favorite (or favorites) and post them on your blog or photo site and link back here to share your results. I can't wait to hear the stories behind your photos. I will have more posts coming through the month, but you can always find the Monthly Special in the menu bar at the right.

A teaser for July's Monthly Special

(Just for eye candy--the fireworks from July 14, as seen from my precarious perch on the rooftop of the apartment where I will be staying)

I will be in Paris for half of July (boo-hoo. poor me, right?) so I'll post the July Monthly Special tomorrow before I leave, with more posts to come from Paris. But before doing so, here's a little teaser...

A few weeks ago I stumbled upon this beautiful grid, by architectural photographer Andy Marshall. Check it out for a major clue to the July Monthly Special (and no, it's not more grids). I think his work is great, but he apparently doesn't like to post comments since he never allowed mine (or anyone's?) to be posted. Oh well. In any case, I love it when people post their comments, so please, don't just lurk and leave. Let me know what you're thinking.

One more hint for the upcoming July Special....check out the fortune cookie message at the bottom of my blog (it changes each month).