The classical method that we’ve been looking at up to now is to separate the planes and balance them in the image in a way that satisfies expectations, with the proportions of foreground and background staying fairly similar. The result is that we know where we are, and there is an understandable movement from near to far. The foreground either anchors or frames the distance. But it’s also possible to play with the relationships in interesting and counter-intuitive ways. If we either reduce one kind of contrast, such as lighting, or make the foreground occupy less space, then this introduces some confusion, and the eye has to move repeatedly between one plane and the other in order to work out the relationship. The result is flipping—a to-and-fro change of attention—and this can have a special value because it can hold the attention longer. Of course, make it too subtle or too confusing and you lose the viewer, but in all kinds of departure from the expected this is a normal risk. Included here are some illustrations of ambiguously separated planes, each of which encourage flipping.
web search
• Claude Lorrain • J. M. W. Turner • John Constable
FLipping From tone reversaL #2
a giant Buddha image enclosed in a brick temple, seen through the narrow triangular opening, which conveniently frames the head and its finial. a telephoto lens (400mm) compresses the perspective, a small aperture extends the depth of field throughout, and the brighter frame set against the darker interior all combine to confuse the eye slightly, so that it takes a second or two to work out the subject.
118
FLipping From tone reversaL #1
a Japanese garden, arranged to include this precise, structured view through an entrance (a common technique in Japanese garden design) has a slightly unreal feeling photographed with the foreground frame lit more brightly than the scene beyond. this is the opposite to what we are used to seeing, and the effect is compounded by full depth of field from a small aperture and an exact, squared-up viewpoint.