A few people seem perplexed by the somewhat abstract 'Reflection' series, whilst others really like them. I find them extraordinarily absorbing and educational to make. It is play, I guess.
For one thing, I never quite know what I am going to get. That's a reality with many kinds of photography involving movement, but is one that photographers tend to gloss over. Sports, street photography or even photographing someone talking at a lectern involves a certain amount of chance. Someone will always blink, even with a static group. But it's not just chance, you know when you have got the best possible or blown it. That's odd, if you think about it, a cultivated instinct. Water and light is so dynamic that there's negligible hope of getting a predictable result. But the usual things apply : find the right place with the right light, compose, shoot.
They are straight pictures, by the way.
Editing is enormously engaging too. It forces me to think very hard about composition and why I prefer one image over a similar, or consider some a success and others not at all. Usually subject matter has a central importance that intrudes and you have to compromise composition with considerations of what the picture says. Here, subject matter is incidental. Other qualities come to the fore. Movement, colour, mood, allusion.
The other thing is how amazingly fractal many of the images are. They are little worlds that can be cropped and zoomed and made into umpteen sub-images, each with their own feel and form. Landscapes, faces and creatures seem to live there quite often, unseen until frozen in time.
There are other attractive aspects too. Nobody says 'oi, you can't photograph that water without permission'. In fact they give me a wide berth as a harmless nutcase. Which is nice.