Last night, I had the chance to attend a writer's presentation on his creative process. One thing that caught my attention when he was talking about writers' approach was this idea of gardeners/architects. He explained that some writers are like gardeners in that they start writing and see how things develop, what blooms, so to speak. Instead, the architects, collect ideas, plan ahead and create a blueprint before they begin writing. This reminded me of the street photographer equivalent: hunters or fisher(wo)men (which doesn't really make sense to me, but since I don't practice any of those two things, I'll go with it).
I was wondering if there are other ideas in regards to this, either related to photography or any idea creative process. And how would you define your approach? Does it change depending on whether you're shooting a landscape, street photography or a portrait?
I agree that flexibility is a great strength to have; not only because it makes the process more enjoyable, but also because unexpected things can lead us in directions we wouldn't have considered otherwise. Have you had that experience?I tend to do better if I have some pre-formed idea of what I'm looking for, although generally not planned out to the last detail, as I think it can be useful to be flexible and willing to take a diffferent approach if a subject isn't available or the weather dictates a change etc
I bet most of us use a mix of all of them at different times. How do things get messy in the darkroom? Where is the conflict?I do all three, sometimes in unison, sometimes in conflict. It occasionally comes together in the darkroom, usually gets messy by this stage.
I also work with other media and enjoy using the randomness/starting-with-a-mark approach (surrealist techniques are my favorite). They're great for working through uncertainty and/or simply getting the process started. How wonderful that you have someone to discuss these things! It's fun to learn about how others approach their process and play. Thanks for the recommendation. I've read a bit about flow, but never actually read the book! Since you work with different media, do you find that your work in one influences your work in another?I will sometimes notice something that would make a good subject but don’t have my camera with me. I then think about it (which format, film type, lighting, etc.) and then return to get the shot. Other times I am in the mood to shoot something but have a bit of a block and at those times I will give myself a prompt. The prompt might be a word randomly selected from a dictionary or and element of composition. For example, I might select “repetition” as a compositional element and then go out and looking for that. Another one I’ve done is to look for negative space and hunt down images that reflect that.
I work in other mediums aside from photography and I bounce between the gardener and architect approaches. My sketchbooks are loaded with pieces where I place a dot on the page, followed by another dot, then another, and keep doing that until the drawing reveals itself to me. I get that from Wassily Kandisky’s quote that “All drawing start with a dot.” Other times it might just be a line or a similar mark. However, I do start some drawings, paintings, or mosaics, with a specific plan in mind, a plan that I’ve thought quite a bit about, sometimes over years, and then it’s just a matter of execution.
I regularly attend artist presentations and it is hearing their answer to the question of where they get their ideas that most intrigues me. I have a long time friend, a writer (a dozen books and 1,000s of article) visit recently and we spent quite a bit of time on this. He works in the architect mode which, I believe, is because he writes non-fiction.
For a good book on this topic, I’d suggest “Creativity” by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, who is also author of “Flow.”
When shooting, I like to walk around until something catches my eye. Of course, picking nicer spots when the light is the best is important too.
Last night, I had the chance to attend a writer's presentation on his creative process. One thing that caught my attention when he was talking about writers' approach was this idea of gardeners/architects. He explained that some writers are like gardeners in that they start writing and see how things develop, what blooms, so to speak. Instead, the architects, collect ideas, plan ahead and create a blueprint before they begin writing. This reminded me of the street photographer equivalent: hunters or fisher(wo)men (which doesn't really make sense to me, but since I don't practice any of those two things, I'll go with it).
Yes, I have frequently changed direction when reconsidering approaches, for example I now take more of an interest in the built environment photographically speaking, when in the past I'd be more focused on "nature". One aspect I find helpful is to visualise myself using a particular camera for example, in order to consider what kind of images I would like to make in a particular instance, and any technical or aesthetic limitations that I might encounter, e.g I wouldn't take out my Mamiya 7ii for a session of macro or close-up work.I agree that flexibility is a great strength to have; not only because it makes the process more enjoyable, but also because unexpected things can lead us in directions we wouldn't have considered otherwise. Have you had that experience?
I've known a lot of writers, they all had different working methods. I was one of them for a bit, until I started hanging out with other writers! Decided I could kill myself a lot slower w/visual art. The op is a braver individual than I to sit through a writer's talk, those things are not my cup of tea. Just show me the work, and shutup about it.
Writers carry that stuff around in their heads 24/7, there is never a break. Totally different than how I work w/ photography, as when something is satisfactorily printed it's on to the next thing.
My method for any image related work is to stop thinking and pay attention to what I'm seeing. That will dictate the course of any art/photography, although truthfully, painting and drawing is much less thought based. And fast. Making a series of 10 or 20 fast drawings of something will turn your brain off effectively. I have to be in the moment.
The main thing w/ photography, unless you're a studio photographer, is to always have a camera w/ you and be ready.
What? Not fisherpersons? Who's in charge of this stuff?FWIW, the non-gender specific version of fishermen seems to have evolved to "fishers" up here.
Sounds like the guy needed to collect a few more ideas before he created the blueprint for his presentation.
And I am not sure I understand the comparison of street photographers and fisher(wo)men. Is it street photographers go out on the street and see what they get and fisher(wo)men go out on the water and see what they get? Sounds sort of like what Forrest Gump's momma said:
Street photography and fishing are like a box of chocolates, you never know what you are going to get.
FWIW, the non-gender specific version of fishermen seems to have evolved to "fishers" up here. Which works, even if it sounds strange.
I have friends who plan every photograph. I have friends who hate planning ahead. Thankfully, they are able to remain friends.
I do a bit of both.
I also work with other media and enjoy using the randomness/starting-with-a-mark approach (surrealist techniques are my favorite). They're great for working through uncertainty and/or simply getting the process started. How wonderful that you have someone to discuss these things! It's fun to learn about how others approach their process and play. Thanks for the recommendation. I've read a bit about flow, but never actually read the book! Since you work with different media, do you find that your work in one influences your work in another?
So, this is my understanding of the hunters/fisher(wo)men analogy:
There are two types of street photographers: the hunters, who are chasing a photo opportunity. They are active, constantly moving, and ready to shoot. Then, there are the fisher(wo)men (I added -wo- to be inclusive), who like to find a scene they like, compose it and wait for something interesting to happen, like someone walking through, to shoot.
I have no idea of where that comes from. I found it useful because having seen street photographers' work or videos, I thought I could never do it. I'm not fast at identifying a potential photo-worthy situation and, more importantly, I don't like to be rushed. So, when I saw that composing an image and waiting was also a possibility, that gave me confidence to go out and try it. So, a simplistic way of looking at things with an arbitrary classification helped me and I'm giving it a try. That's why I find that listening to different ideas can be helpful
What? Not fisherpersons? Who's in charge of this stuff?
Yes, I have frequently changed direction when reconsidering approaches, for example I now take more of an interest in the built environment photographically speaking, when in the past I'd be more focused on "nature". One aspect I find helpful is to visualise myself using a particular camera for example, in order to consider what kind of images I would like to make in a particular instance, and any technical or aesthetic limitations that I might encounter, e.g I wouldn't take out my Mamiya 7ii for a session of macro or close-up work.
Thanks. I think of it as running a photo-realistic virtual reality model in my head from which I can select potential images.I like your visualization exercise!
FWIW, the non-gender specific version of fishermen seems to have evolved to "fishers" up here. Which works, even if it sounds strange.
I was wondering if there are other ideas in regards to this, either related to photography or any idea creative process.
If I have a project that I am working on, I am part hunter and part architect. I know what my overall plan is, but I am hunting for scenes that fit. On the other hand, that doesn't put blinders on me and I will take a photo of just about anything that catches my eye. When I work in the studio on a still-life, it's pretty much architect, it's about design and control. Street photography is all hunting, landscape can be as well. Portraits depend on whether they are candid or more posed. I know (and have done) some photographers like to create elaborate set-ups and staging (think City Sherman, Jeff Wall and Gregory Crewdson), the ultimate architect in that case, but I find that genre can be too artificial and self-serving most of the time.
That exercise sounds so good! I'll be giving it a try. Thank you!Yes, one does influence the other, sometimes very directly. Over the years I’ve made photographic prints that I was satisfied with and others that no matter how much I tried, I could not get the subject to speak to me through the print the way it did in person. What I’ve done is end up using the photograph as a reference for a drawing. I usually sit back with the finished drawing and see what the photograph was missing.
Agreed. You reminded me of an HCB quote I wrote down in an exhibition I saw a few weeks ago:Going the other way, drawing has influenced my photography in that I have slowed WAY down and spend more time looking. One can grab a quick photo of something but in order to draw it, one really has to see it, as in spending time to take in the details. I do lots of “urban sketching” and I usually spend 2-3 hours with the subject.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?