Explaining a photographs meaning???(help)

[Jim Chinn]

As I think about all of my favorite photographers, I can't think of one that does more then either list place, object or date or "untitled".

 

[bjorke]

This was a statement about the eternal nature of God's word ... used tampons floating in a toilet bowl...

Not sure why you think these concepts are antithetical. Just another example of the misogynistic old-school patriarchal order that so infects the art world. Goddess bless!

 

[John Koehrer]

I would think that the ability to describe an image verbally is a great advantage to marketing/salemanship also. Since I'm not a verbal person, this would be very difficult for me.
I have seen many images, that without three paragraphs to describe it are just snapshots. After reading the attached description & still not understanding what the hell was going on, I figured it was the old BS/MS/PHD trick(bulls**t/Mores**t/Piled Higher & Deeper) & walked on.

 

[papagene]

I think it was Dylon Thomas, who when asked to explain his symbolism in his poetry, he said (and I paraphrase) that if he explained the symbolism he used in one poem, people would use that to explain the symbols in all of his work, when he may change the use of certain symbols from poem to poem.
Very rarely do I talk/explain what my work means. I leave it to the viewer to form their own interpretations.

gene

 

[Donald Miller]

My personal opinion is that if a photograph needs to be explained to a viewer then it has failed miserably.

 

[c6h6o3]

"Criticism is for the artist as ornithology is for the birds".
--Barnett Newman

 

[steve]

Hello to you all. I have a problem. After six years of college and university doing photography, I still find it difficult to explain my work to others. I know what I mean and what I want to portray but I cannot put it into words. I don't know whether its because I'm shy? or simply because I feel silly talking about particular personal projects. Am I the only one who feels like this? I suppose the question to you all is do you think a photographs meaning needs to be explained by the photographer? Baring in mind that I am supposed to be a photographic "Artist"........??????????? Sometimes I feel that mystery goes a long way-but surely I should have the ability to explain myself!!! Why can't I??? HELP!/QUOTE]


I find this really hard to believe. You know what you mean, but you can't explain it? There's somwhere in the neighborhood of 400,000 words in the English language and YOU can't find the right ones to put into sentences to describe your work? This either means you haven't thought about it enough, or you have no idea why you're making photographs.

Why do you feel "silly" talking about your photographs? Do you feel silly showing people your photographs? I don't get it. You can't explain in words what your motivation was to make the photo? You can't tell people what excites you about your own images? As for interpretations - everyone will have their own. But, if you can't give a rudimentary explanation as to what motivated you or why the image is of interest to you - I don't believe you know much about your own images.

Shy? Are you nude while attempting to talk with someone about your photos? Put a photo in the gallery. I'll ask enough questions about it to MAKE you discuss your work.

 

[Lee Shively]

Back in the days when I shot color transparencies, scanned the film and printed bright, eye-popping inkjet color scenics of beautiful places and natural wonders, nobody needed an explanation of my photographs. They were just pretty pictures.

Nowadays, I shoot black and white and I guess my photography is more "difficult" for my friends and relatives to enjoy. They want explanations.

There's a magic to photography. The spell around a photograph is fragile. You can break that spell with too many words, too many thoughts.

Since so many people are quoting, here's one for you, from Elliott Erwitt--"Photography is not about thinking--photography is about seeing."

 

[TPPhotog]

... There's a magic to photography. The spell around a photograph is fragile. You can break that spell with too many words, too many thoughts.

Now that Lee is very profound and I like it Maybe the trouble with todays minimal attention spell public that have to be told and lead by the hand, that they can no longer think for themselves.

Here's another quote "I’m not responsible for my photographs. Photography is not documentary, but intuition, a poetic experience. It’s drowing yourself , dissolving yourself, and then sniff, sniff, sniff – being sensitive to coincidence. You can’t go looking for it; you can’t want it, or you want get it. First you must lose your self. Then it happens - Henri Cartier-Bresson"

 

[Rio]

STEVE......well for someone who seems to be a very confident person i'm sure you'd have no problem talking and discussing your work! BUT....and i stress 'but'..not everyone has the ability to express themselves verbily whether or not there are 400,000 words in the dictionary, that has no relavance. I mean take the word love, that one word no way near describes the feeling of love does it. Words are an understatment for the visual.

And as for accusing me of not thinking about my work.....how did you figure that?? alot of effort and thought goes into my work which you probably couldn't comprehend, someone like me does nothing but think, and thinking + dreaming is how i come up with my images....and guess what mate....we don't dream and think in words....we dream and think with images. My probelm is translating images to words...thats what i find difficult. Someone once told me that to properly interpret an image it must be done so with other images...and i think part of this makes sense to me.

And for your information me being shy! I get a bl**dy stutter when i try and explain to others my meanings, would that make you feel silly??????? I think that my nervous stutter is my body (and mind) telling me I am a visual person who needs to find herself in the verbal word of the visual. BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!

Well thankyou so much for such a lovely reply Steve and a great help it was too. Its people like you that make people like me look stupid when viewing my work, It makes people assume SILLY ideas that no thought has gone into photographs, just because the photographer lets themselves down with the explanation.

Good night!!!!!

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Dear Rio,

Could I offer a small piece of advice?

Firstly, Steve may have meant to help, but his reply was heavy-handed in the extreme. I think, too, he may be grossly overestimating his ability to elicit information from artists - the Gestapo method has its limitations!

Secondly, do not in any way doubt the validity of your work. Whatever it is, you have as much right to make work the way you want as anyone. No need to be arrogant about this, but there are people around whose only pleasure is trashing other people's work. Ignore them!

Thirdly, it is quite natural to expect your work to speak for itself. Even though I have been associated with photography for a long time, being asked to speak about work was something new for me. The advice given in another posting, to keep things simple, is very sound. Just try, by yourself and in your own time, to answer the questions "What attracted me to this subject matter?", "What made me decide to give it this treatment?" and "Was I influenced by any other photographer's work (or work in another medium)?" Having done this, recount your answers to a friend. Explaining your work may seem unnatural at first, you can get used to it, and above all the process may lead you to new insights, which is what it's all about!

Regards,

David

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Hi again Rio,

Steve has only 399,999 words to draw from...I think he missed empathy.

Writing things down helps me organize my thoughts. I keep a darkroom journal that I write in while printing and while the prints are washing. This forces me to slow my thinking down and be very deliberate about what I want.

It sounds like you take your work very seriously and have pondered over it at great length...this can only improve your images...keep it up!!!

Murray (stutters too)

 

[sergio caetano]

Art is to be felt, not to be said.

 

[smieglitz]

... someone like me does nothing but think, and thinking + dreaming is how i come up with my images....and guess what mate....we don't dream and think in words....we dream and think with images... Someone once told me that to properly interpret an image it must be done so with other images...

Ahhh Rio. We are kindred souls. You are so right on. Imagination has at its root "image."

I might suggest you read a bit of James Hillman, especially his book "The Dream and the Underworld." I think you'll enjoy it.

Joe

 

[bjorke]

After six years of college and university doing photography, I still find it difficult to explain my work to others.

I hate to jump on the mean old bandwagon here but un-empathic Steve does have a point. At least when I went to art school, technique and the like was quite secondary -- the core of the curriculum was talking about ideas and about pictures and iconography and history and context. It does seem hard to have gone through six years of university photo without a grounding in that!

Still, remember, you don't need to explain to everyone, only a few. And often the explanations can be more of a conversation, which makes limiting the scope that much easier. Just remember to let the photo speak first, and never over-explain.

It's a lie to think that photos live without words, or that they should. They need context. We should know the tale of St Matthew to appreciate Caravaggio's trio of paintings. We need to know that the smudge in the lower corner of the otherwise anonymous group shot is young Corporal Scheckelgruber. It's not just a bunch of tones and shapes!

 

[MurrayMinchin]

At least when I went to art school, technique and the like was quite secondary -- the core of the curriculum was talking about ideas and about pictures and iconography and history and context.

The first art school I went to was like that. A student wrapped part of the basement in plastic, (already an old idea), and spun such a convoluted, art-speak riddled yarn about "distillation of the Cosmic Isness" that she received the highest of praise. I left before the first semester was finished. The next art school I went to believed an artist needs a solid foundation of technique (and art history) on which to grow from.

Don't sweat this stuff Rio. Pursue your path. Your images speak for you. There will always be people who'll offer their negative opinions of your work without opening themselves to it. Your work sounds mysterious, don't explain away the mystery.

Murray

 

[Jim Chinn]

After reading through the original post, I think you are suffering from art school overload. I think the easiest way to discuss your work is to simply explain why you are drawn to the subjects that you photograph. As you discuss your motivation with others I think you will begin to flesh out what your particular vision is and the message that you want to convey to others.

 

[steve]

And as for accusing me of not thinking about my work.....how did you figure that?? alot of effort and thought goes into my work which you probably couldn't comprehend, someone like me does nothing but think, and thinking + dreaming is how i come up with my images....and guess what mate....we don't dream and think in words....we dream and think with images. My probelm is translating images to words...thats what i find difficult. Someone once told me that to properly interpret an image it must be done so with other images...and i think part of this makes sense to me.

And for your information me being shy! I get a bl**dy stutter when i try and explain to others my meanings, would that make you feel silly??????? I think that my nervous stutter is my body (and mind) telling me I am a visual person who needs to find herself in the verbal word of the visual. BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!
QUOTE]

Heee...heeee...heeee...you see...you CAN talk a bit about your photos when forced to do so. I was purposely confrontational because everyone else was being so patronizing to you, and quoting from other photographers (yeah, like that's relevant to you personally) to make you feel better about not wanting to talk about your photos.

Look, when I grew up, I had a very, very bad stutter to the point my mother took me to a speech therapist for two years (I'm not sure it really did any good). I still stutter a bit when excited, but I got over it by forcing myself to talk in public by getting into theater and acting. It was funny, when I was on stage as another character - I never stuttered. That convinced me that I could control it and for the most part I do.

If you want to be able to talk about your work you just need to practice. What I mean is, sit down and think about your work, and as advised earlier, write it down.

Believe me, if you want to progress in your work and show it (especially to galleries) you WILL have to be able to talk about your work. You can call it "schmoozing" - whatever - but, galleries and the audience that sees your work will want you to be able to talk about your work. It's sort of part of the total entertainment package that's expected today.

For all of the cute one-liners from photographers posted in this thread about not needing to talk about their photography, I would point them at Adams, Weston, Strand, Minor White, etc. There are photographers who can write or talk about their work very eloquently.

You may not be one of those people, but, the interesting thing is that if you can write thoughts about your work, you will be made to think about your work in another way. It is a form of self critique about your work and as you slowly form thoughts and then sentences about your work, the work itself will be revealed to you in a new way.

I'd apologize for smacking you around - but, that made you finally respond with something meaningful about your work, "...thinking + dreaming is how i come up with my images..." - now, that wasn't so hard was it?

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Steve, you are so busy projecting your own experiences onto your perception of Rio that you have completely lost objectivity. If you try to regain this, you will see that Rio was not questioning whether she should talk about her work, she was saying that she found it difficult and and was trying to find a way to do this. This is what I was focusing on in my reply. You do suggest theater work as therapy, this could be a useful suggestion, as there are many documented cases where people who stutter in everyday life can act fictional characters (and also sing) without any impediment.
Bear in mind, too, that in an Internet forum you are judged only by your written words, and on that basis you come across as violently intimidatory (and also, particularly in the final paragraph of your last posting, as patronising, too). If postings on this (or any other forum) are to have any value, they need to be sympathetic and far more considered.

Regards,

David

 

[steve]

Steve, you are so busy projecting your own experiences onto your perception of Rio that you have completely lost objectivity. If you try to regain this, you will see that Rio was not questioning whether she should talk about her work, she was saying that she found it difficult and and was trying to find a way to do this. This is what I was focusing on in my reply. You do suggest theater work as therapy, this could be a useful suggestion, as there are many documented cases where people who stutter in everyday life can act fictional characters (and also sing) without any impediment.
Bear in mind, too, that in an Internet forum you are judged only by your written words, and on that basis you come across as violently intimidatory (and also, particularly in the final paragraph of your last posting, as patronising, too). If postings on this (or any other forum) are to have any value, they need to be sympathetic and far more considered.

Regards,

David

You'll find sympathy in the dictionary between two words ...you probably know what they are.

My response is considered from my experiences with galleries and having to talk with people about my work. You, or Rio can ignore what I say, but, it's realistic if you want to show or sell your work through a commerical gallery. If not, become an iconoclast - I really don't care.

Funny, how the people quote other photographer's statements as being "good advice," or an example of not having to talk about work. I'm encouraging this person to study their work and write about it. It has been valuable for me to do with my own work - it may not work for everyone - but, it's a start if you want to see the words you think of when you study your own work.

As for being patronizing - give me a frigging break - I was only pointing out that Rio said something very meaningful about her work - something NO ONE else elicited from her. I'd like to hear more about the work and the words I quoted are a very direct, straight to the point start.

Oh, yeah -

Best regards back at 'ya (super big smiley face)

--steve

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Just to try to make my point one last time - my reading of Rio's comments was that she DOES recognize the need for photographers to talk about their work in certain circumstances (as indeed I do) and that she WANTS to do this but is having trouble finding a way to overcome obstacles and actually do it! You may think that shock treatment works in a situation of this kind - I don't! Let's leave it at that!

Regards,

david

 

[mark]

Wow, this one got hot and heavy. I knew I should have kept reading it. Anyway, I think Steve has a point. While most may not like the way he did it, he did elicit a very good, passionate, and thought proviking statement from RIO. A statement that will serve her well in the future if she continues down the road of her art. Not every one thinks and dreams in images. Many think and dream in words, others in music, some in BW and others in Color. She made a very personal statement about how she "sees" the images she creates.

While getting my degree in writing I had a poetry professor who climbed my back in much the same way Steve climebed on Rio's. As much as I hated the old Son of a Bitch at the time, I realized, after a while, that what he did helped me more in that one instance than all of the classes I had before that.

I came back to this thread because I finally got the nerve up to show some of my photos to our artist in residence. He is a pretty well known painter and sculpter. He picked a couple of shots out and wanted me to explain them to him. There was no way in hell I was going to say they should speak for themselves and I explained as best I could. We then started talking about that whole explaining one's art. He said that if an artist cannot put their thoughts into words then their art will be just as vague and uncommunicative.

Just a thought.

 

[Ed Sukach]

You'll find sympathy in the dictionary between two words ...you probably know what they are.
My response is considered from my experiences with galleries and having to talk with people about my work. You, or Rio can ignore what I say, but, it's realistic if you want to show or sell your work through a commerical gallery.

I can't find "Shinola" in my dictionary.

Steve .. I wonder if you realize how you are coming across here. I read this as, "You are not doing it right!! ... So I'm going to FORCE you to "Do It Right". - The classic, "I'm only doing this for your benefit" intellectualization.

Some artists will talk about / explain their work, by choice. Others, by choice, will not. Some artists CAN talk about their work - others can not.
Visit a Gallery and consider how many works are labeled "Untitled" - providing NOTHING resembling a clue to the interpretation of the work. There is work in one media enhanced by another media - a poem on the wall to modify the perception of a painting, for example... but where is it written that an aid to interpretation is an absolute necessity?

All this is trivia. THe ARTIST has the right - and the only right to do her/his work in whatever fashion they choose ... and to "fine tune" the amount of mystery and wonder therein.

IMHO, the "experiencer" - viewer is part of the equation. One can only guess at what they will see ... with or without an "explanation".

You seem to be placing an immense importance on the amount of rational thought in the "Art" process, I do not hold the same opinion - to me rationalization, and over-working ... trying TOO hard ... is detrimental to the whole process.

I say my best work occurs when I do NOT think .. and work emotionally.

 

[Claire Senft]

Walker Evans Vs the yackers

I have read that when Walker Evans would be asked what his point of view was in making a photograph he would get up and point to the print and say "there is my point of view, right there". Others even so accomplished a photographer as Stieglitz would yack on and on in incomprehensible BS.

For myself I do not get upset. I am only showing something in the photo that was of interest to me and hopefully of interest to the viewer. I do not care what someone else thinks of my photography because I made the photo for me. So I photograph what I like and print as I wish, hoping only to retain for myself a piece of craft to remind me an experience in life.

 

[Lee Shively]

Excellent, Claire!