jimgalli said:Several times a year someone will come up to me and say, "I saw one of your pictures at such and such. I didn't have to look at the signature, I knew it was one of yours." That's about the nicest compliment I could be paid.
Jose A Martinez said:posted by Juan:
Tina Modotti, even that she was a very talented person, never consider herself a photographer, that's why her "photography" never matures, and not for her involvement in politics.
blansky said:Many people who don't do photography for a living, have the luxury of following their heart, or whatever, to lead them to take the pictures that enrich their soul.
As a pro, one has to attract, impress and satisfy clients, and at the same time try to grow as a photographer. Obviously, commercial work is a compromise and a collaboration, so the fact that it does not show your soul is understandable.
Michael
jimgalli said:I think thinking about this is counterproductive. Look through the current issue of Lenswork. The one with the Texas Tintypes. 3 photographers with very different visions but all three shout 'soul' to me. Several times a year someone will come up to me and say, "I saw one of your pictures at such and such. I didn't have to look at the signature, I knew it was one of yours." That's about the nicest compliment I could be paid.
MattKing said:There is soul even in my commercial work - it is just less obvious.
Andy K said:'How do you find your voice, give your images soul?'
I don't know. I photograph what pleases me, that which makes an impression on me. I have no idea if I have a 'voice', one day someone will tell me, but for now I'll carry on as I am, trying to do my best, for me.
roteague said:...it seems to me that if your photography is only about "yourself", then you will always be looking for your "soul".
Michael Slade said:One of the things I've come to a conclusion about is just that. I am not a narcisssist. Ok, maybe a bit of a narcicsssiist, but not *that* big.
roteague said:Yeah, getting the "self" out of the way is always the hardest, isn't it?
BTW, how did you get a Jackaroo in Utah? Or did you go to Australia for the shot?
Michael Slade said:One of my clients is ARB (from Australia). They have all kinds of non-US spec vehicles here that we use from time to time.
They brought over a Jackaroo a few years ago for test fitting some products, and we ended up shooting it in Moab.
Still working on getting to Australia.
You are the first person to notice that.
bjorke said:If you are showing something to people, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO SHOW? Not wander around and see something that moves you now and then, what would you actively seek, build, expose? And then the photography part comes second, though in such circumstances it's rarely relaxing.
Michael Slade said:What I think that he is asking to see is some type of political statement in my work. Some type of activist attitude or some kind of narrative that the viewer can infer meaning into.
Poco said:I think successful photography can be about much smaller things. All we do when we take a photograph is let others borrow our eyes for an instant to see what we see and, hopefully, convey why it's worth seeing. Doing that with consistent honesty can't help but be revealing of ourselves.
QUOTE]
a photograph is really just a gesture - you are pointing something out to someone, indicating something and saying "look at this".
I think he wa asking you - why do you chose to indicate that thing and not this? What are the reasons? What makes it interesting enough for you to say to someone "hey, stop for a moment, look at this"
Heh, I never consider such comments an attack. But that was Coleman's question -- what part of YOU, uniquely YOU, is there in these photographs? This is a question that has plagued artists at least since the days of Alberti. From your comments, apparently you don't think it's a big deal, and so it probably won't show up in your photographs because you don't seek it. It's pretty much that simple, imo. As for my own photographs, I do find shooting withoin my "comfort zone" to be relaxing -- I just don't often SHOW those photos to anyone because, like piano scales or jogging, they are just for me -- no need to waste anyone else's time and effort with the viewing.Michael Slade said:If that aspect of photography is not relaxing to you, then I would say I worry about your photography being a bit uptight. If you have a hard time relaxing when you go out photographing, and are constantly worrying about if it will convey what you want it to, then I would wonder what you do for relaxation.
That might sound like a bit of a personal attack, and I apologize if you are offended. Just as you might want me to look inside at my own photography, I would challenge you to do the same.
bjorke said:Heh, I never consider such comments an attack. But that was Coleman's question -- what part of YOU, uniquely YOU, is there in these photographs?
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?