Double exposure photographs can produce some fascinating and unpredictable results. But Erin’s shot above is aligned so well I’m suspicious that she planned this shot (which is possible, though quite difficult). In her shot, the viewer’s eye is drown to the statue centered in the picture, nicely framed in the black strip. Then the graffiti on both sides of the statue gives the photo a level of texture as well as more material for the viewer to explore. These two exposures, though very different, were well chosen to complement each other. It’s also a very complicated shot, with a great deal of material for the viewer to take in. Great work!
A “happy accident” is an interesting experience for a photographer. While we like to project an aura of technical know-how, the truth of the matter is that good photography is measured in fractions of a second, which leaves much to chance. So when you get a result you didn’t expect, and it’s better than what you were aiming for, an unusual sense of accomplishment is felt. You get the thrill of taking a good photo but the dread of possibly being asked how you got the shot. Or worse: asked to try to get the shot again.
Robb’s picture above is a great “happy accident” photo. It’s a double exposure, which is when two shots are taken on the same film frame (see more examples in our Flickr pool). For obvious reasons, it’s a difficult shot to get right and is prone to the happy accident phenomenon.
Robb’s photo works so well because the two shots align perfectly; the tower in the second, bright shot, fits exactly in between the towers of the first darker shot, giving the Cathedral a castle look. As well, the brightness of the two shots contrast just right and it requires the viewer to take a moment to realize it’s a double exposure (at least, that was my reaction). All around good job! And fear not, I will not ask for it to be done again.