How close do you hold your ideas?

[Troy Hamon]

Some years ago I was very protective of the concept of an image that I was producing and went on to protect. While I was super protective, a good friend...another photographer asked me if that was the only idea I thought that would ever have.

Operating from a scarcity viewpoint establishes scarcity in our lives. I believe that and that is why I freely give away ideas that I discover.

Hi Donald,
This is one of the reasons that I was interested in other people's work practices, because I see the truth in this. But I'm not worried about my ideas running short, I already have too many written down and will never even complete those. I expect to do only a few of the ones I currently have in mind, add many to the list, and probably do only a few of those. As I mentioned in another response, the process of thinking about many of the points made here has made me think...I suspect that one of the primary reasons I'm hesitant to discuss my projects in progress is that I don't want input yet, I don't want to be diverted...they're intensely personal projects. And I'm happy to have my partially completed projects on display. They demonstrate the tenor of the original concept and I can refer to that, or if improvements are suggested I can decide at that point how diverted I want to get. Interesting point.

 

[Troy Hamon]

Nearly all the projects I've thought of ahead of time either didn't get started or didn't hold my attention once they did get started. My series have been the result of finding that I was drawn to a certain subject again and again; then looking through the images I realized "Oh yeah, that's what I wanted to do".
I work for a hospice and I've often considered doing a project that focuses on terminally ill patients and their family and friends. Others have done this. I have not yet pursued this particular project. However, last week I was working with the family of a 2-1/2 yr. old child and, because of the strong bond that developed with the child and her family, I did take a number of pictures. Several of them were taken just hours before the child died. When I looked back through the photos, I realized how strongly they were influenced by the relationship I had with the child and her family, as well as my thoughts about what was taking place over the 10 days I was involved with them. No one else could have taken those pictures.
I think that if I had a "goal" of taking those photos, it would have turned out very different.

Hi Mark,
When I conceive of a project, it is usually because I've seen something that immediately connected in my mind as an exciting image, and have made some connections that suggest others related. In developing the theme, I think about what images, at a minimum, would be needed to make the project complete. These then become the foundation of the project's origin. In practice, my success rate with these planned images is much higher than for others, but is still less than 50%. The process of planning these images and thinking about the project as a whole, the intended theme, and how to convey it, makes my eye very ready to see related opportunities. I end up shooting many more unplanned images than planned ones for any project. The very strongest images are usually from the unplanned ones, though many of the planned images turn out rather well also.

I wanted to explain my working method a bit more, because I think you hit the nail on the head. The strongest images come to us in unplanned ways (although for a studio master like Ralph, this may not apply...) and it is really a question of being ready for them. The planning I was talking about doesn't really seem to limit me so much as prepare me for the opportunities that arise. Eisenhower was a big champion of battle plans, but he said that the value of the plans wasn't the final plan but the process of preparing it, and how it helped you to be ready when the plan didn't really work out.

 

[Troy Hamon]

i have ongoing projects i have been working on for 20 years or so.
i know people have photographed the same things, and to me it doesn't really matter, because i am not them, they are not me, and we don't see the world through the same lens .. but as the years go by, the project shifts a little bit, and while it is the same project, it is different in a certain way.

strange thing - as i write this i am reminded of an assignment for a newspaper i was given. i went to a big fabric plant and photograph how they were doing things for the war-effort. i went there and shot a bunch of frames and the one that was published was of a guy looking at camouflage fabric after it was printed and coming down into the bin. the next day there was a story in the large daily paper on the same subject. it was shot by a different photographer, at a different plant &C, but it was the same image ( with a different person inspecting the fabric ) -- i guess sometimes different people see the same thing

i do have some techniques that i use that i won't tell in full what they are, sometimes it is the technique, that gets you to the final image, not just the exposing the film.

john

Hi John,
Your technical expertise is greater than mine...I don't really have any great technical secrets. Just a fussy eye and a nitpicky nature in the darkroom. And I totally agree that two people can see the same thing. But I also think two people can see the same thing and make virtually the same image but each image can feel completely different, though nearly identical...

 

[Troy Hamon]

I think it depends on the importance one places on the conceptual underpinings of a project. Since I believe the images themselves are more important than the concept and those images are so individually seen and derived, I don't hold my ideas all that jelously. In fact, here's an idea that's gauranteed to be good for a NEA grant that I'll throw out for anyone to take: drive through any small US midwestern town and photograph the three highest points visible -- those will always be the water tower, grain elevator and church steeple ...representing the universal requirements for commerce, survival infrastructure and (apparently) spirituality in man. Write it up in fancy words and I'd be shocked if the NEA didn't give you a bucket of cash to go from town to town documenting those three landmarks. ...of course, I could be wrong :rolleyes:

Poco,
I both agree and disagree with you...I think the images are important, but the concept of the project or a knowledge of the subject can often be very important. Dorothea Lange's Migrant Mother doesn't mean much if you don't know about the project or that the subject is a...migrant mother. In my opinion.

As for your NEA idea, I think your clear direct communication would prevent you from any chance of success.

A more grandiloquent elocution of the thematic material and its postmodern context and relevance would be of central importance; the statement you prepare in request of the munificence must be compellingly opaque, must in fact, persuade you yourself, by the sheer weight of its bombasticity and self-righteous condescension toward those unable to penetrate its vagaries. After reading the proposal, it should be so difficult to fully grasp the nature of the offering that each reviewer would cower in shame rather than suggest that they don't understand it; this should at least help get to the second round...

 

[Troy Hamon]

I mentioned an idea here once. Next thing I know my idea showed up in the gallery. I don't make my ideas too public anymore.

Hi Mark,
That's unfortunate. In my case, I'm generally not worried about individual images but about larger projects, but I can understand your feeling. There are always overlapping ideas and one benefit of waiting to discuss my ideas is that I never have to wonder. If somebody makes an image I have in mind or in negative form, I know it was completely independent. If they make one I've already printed, well, I've already printed it so I don't feel like I have to worry about it. Not sure it makes sense, but there it is.

 

[Troy Hamon]

Hi Troy,

Perhaps you hold your photographic future project cards close to your chest for the same reasons you became a biologist, because it's just the way you're made up. Maybe it's not so much having people scoop your ideas than you don't want anybody to see it until you've carefully researched, carefully completed, and come to a satisfying end to the project. Then again...

As for me? I tend to not work on projects but will try to empty myself of any preconceptions before setting out, open myself to the essence of an area, and will try to photograph more as a conduit - a 'spirit of place' documentary photographer for lack of a better description.

Later, if a project comes to mind, I'll go through my negatives and find the sequence of images that best fit the bill. I'm working on one right now...and NO I will NOT tell you what it is because you're just up the coast from me and it's such a kick-ass great idea I know you'll scoot down here, scoop me, and sail off into the sunset on the winds of fame and glory

Murray

Hi Murray,
I suspect you are pretty close to the truth with your first stab. I like to work things out, mull them over, examine every aspect to them, and present work that is substantially finished without gaping holes. I enjoy the process of thought and preparation that goes into this.

I think in the end I'm a strange photographer. As I'm strange in every other aspect of life. I'm not really interested in photojournalism. But I definitely give myself assignments and my landscapes are also often part of a project with a documentary theme in mind. One of my landscape projects involves images that resulted from a trip that I made annually for years, then finally took photographic equipment along one time. Many of those images were planned years ahead of time. Others came because I had the camera along that one time when the image presented itself...

And actually...I'm not just up the coast from you...you have big luscious trees and forest undergrowth...we are so far west that we have tundra with a few sickly stands of spruce trees that are lucky to get 40 feet tall...

But I appreciate your undeserved confidence in me, and I'll enjoy just thinking about the sunset, fame and glory...

 

[Troy Hamon]

I was at a workshop and someone had a few, maybe six pictures of a project they were working on. I said to myself, "I could do that so much better, maybe I will." But nothing has come from it since. Mostly because the idea didn't originate from within and so I didn't feel close to it. It has been in my mind but it is safe to say that nothing will come from it.

I came to realize that the best photographs come from things that are close to you. It might be a place or an idea, but it is something that you are emotionally connected to.

So, from that standpoint you shouldn't worry that other people will photograph your ideas, because no matter what, they will not make the same pictures that you would.

BUT

You are right, what if someone beats you to something specific and they have more time, energy, and money and they put a big show together and get a book published? You then come around to complete your project, but by that time you are influenced by what they did, and no matter how good your pictures might be the public will see them as emulative.

I generally don't guard what I am working on or what I plan on photographing, but I don't announce the specifics to the world either. If I am excited about new pictures I am making, or something new I am working on then I talk about it with friends. Some of whom are photographers. They might just steal my ideas, but with that in mind I usually work harder to get it done first.

Richard,
I know exactly what you are saying...I've had similar experiences, and you've pretty well defined some of the reasons I am cautious with my ideas, as well as why I often think I might just turn around and put them all out for everyone to see...though I haven't talked myself into that yet... I've encountered some other reasons that I suspect are underlying my choices through the process of replying to the various other respondents...

To everyone patient enough to have read these responses...
My apologies for the number of posts. I tried to do this all in one, but after losing that post and starting over, I couldn't risk another complete loss...

 

[removed account4]

Hi John,
Your technical expertise is greater than mine...I don't really have any great technical secrets. Just a fussy eye and a nitpicky nature in the darkroom. And I totally agree that two people can see the same thing. But I also think two people can see the same thing and make virtually the same image but each image can feel completely different, though nearly identical...

hi troy --

i don't really have any huge technical secrets, i just have a really open mind, and capitalize on all the mistakes i make, and strangely enough i like the way my mistakes "look" more than the prints that are supposed to be "technically correct" --- and believe me, i've made some really bad mistakes, some of which i have never been able to do more than once, and i am really wishing that wasn't the case
crap, i did it now, i gave away my secrets (experiment and make lots of mistakes) ...

-john

 

[Thomassauerwein]

I really don't think any 2 shooters are going to approach a subject the same way. Subject matters have been exhausted. But new ideas and aproaches are wide open so to share ideas I think there is more benefit to talking them through than holding on to tight. Sometimes just by communicating an idea it grows. Even if someone walks away with the ideas and try to create (or Steal) their instincs would never be able to assimulate and project what your own experiances have evolved this idea in the first place. Besides having an idea is only the beginning. The first of many, many steps towards a final image or a body of images that illustrates your idea. toward that end it is all yours.

 

[firecracker]

All I know is I can only learn from my own experience, and mostly of the time, I stick to the ideas I develop in the beginning all the way to the end in the process of making and delivering images.

How successsfuly or not successfuly I do it depends on how much I try, and there's no time to worry about other people stealing my ideas because they are not walking in the same path as I am.

This sounds a bit too self-righteous, but that's pretty much it for me.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

And actually...I'm not just up the coast from you..

In the Earth encircling context of APUG you are!

Murray

 

[Claire Senft]

If an idea ever came into my empty head it would rattle around and self distruct. Other than that I am not telling.

 

[rbarker]

Ralph...I love the image. How did you prop him up so he was level?

Troy - I intentionally left a clue in image. So far, however, no one has noticed it.

 

[BWGirl]

Troy - I intentionally left a clue in image. So far, however, no one has noticed it.

I think ol' Mickey looks like he met his demise in a pan of Jello! haha

 

[Troy Hamon]

I was wondering about Jello, but how would you get it so clear? Or is it always that clear?... His hands do look as if they are resting on the top of Jello, but the feet are submerged...I don't know Ralph, you got me thinking but I'm not sure...

 

[colrehogan]

Troy - I intentionally left a clue in image. So far, however, no one has noticed it.

I suppose it has something to do with the star shaped shadow beneath Mickey?

 

[Mark H]

OK, I can see where this thread is going...so I'll bite.
Plexiglass?

 

[David Brown]

David,
Does this mean you are clairvoyant or unlucky?

I've been told that I've never had an original thought. :rolleyes:


BTW, aside from the group project I'm currently on (which, of course, was not my idea) I do have ideas for two other series, but I ain't telling!

 

[blaze-on]

My guess is poor Mickey's left heal is superglued to the diving board..looks like most of him is hanging just above water.

If I'm right Ralph, do I win the Goofy award? Or does that honor befall you?

 

[Charles Webb]

Looks like the mouse might by lying on his belly after being placed on a glass tumbler filled with water and submerged in the "pool" . Thats what I see....

Charlie.............................

 

[Troy Hamon]

Charlie...best explanation so far from my view in the peanut gallery...jello just doesn't seem clear enough, the perspective doesn't seem right to have the heel connected to the diving board (there appears to be some decent separation between them)...but the tumbler...not sure it puts the shadow in quite the right spot, but it is very close...Ralph?

 

[removed account4]

hi ralph -

looks like he was set in clear acrylic resin.

but i'm usually wrong about this stuff ...

-john

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Just at the bottom and to the right of the shorts of the recently deceased, you can see the the circular foot, or round base of a small 'wine glass'...what looks like a star on the bottom of the pool is light refracted through the 'cut glass' design where the stem meets the glass. This supports his face.

[Upon further reflection...by the lower part of his left ear, is that the top of the glass? Would that make what I thought was the foot actually the shadow of the glass, and the foot is hidden under Mickey's body?]

The horizontal line to the right of the shadow of his right foot is;

a) the shadow from the clear fishing line submerged just below the surface which supports his legs, or,

b) the shadow of a small piece of glass or plexi-glass that supports his legs, where it sits on the bottom of the pool.

No Goofy prize for me please, I'll go for the inflatable Daisy

Murray

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Ralph, see edited post above.

Mmmmmmmmm...Daisy...

Murray

 

[Troy Hamon]

Just at the bottom and to the right of the shorts of the recently deceased, you can see the the circular foot, or round base of a small 'wine glass'...

The circular shape you refer to looks to me like a reflection of the shorts themselves in the surface of the 'pool'.

what looks like a star on the bottom of the pool is light refracted through the 'cut glass' design where the stem meets the glass. This supports his face.

But if this is true, the shadow from the wine glass is cast in the wrong direction...it should be off to left of Mickey's center, though not as far as his own shadow...this is why the tumbler makes sense because it puts the star pattern right down on the bottom of the 'pool'. I can't see exactly what you're referring to with your other points, and you may well be right, but so far I'm still campin' with Charlie...or wait...in Charlie's camp...are those the same thing?...