how do you make boring stuff look, like ... interesting ?

[removed account4]

its an age old question i think.
person has camera,
person makes a photograph of something .. but
that something is super boring, i mean a telephone pole, a water plug, a used car lot, street scene a >fill in the blank<

but how do we photograph it to make it well, not so boring? or is the mundane, boring-ness so mundane that it overcomes
the boring-epitude, and makes it interesting ?

i mean we all have seen photographs or mundane streetscapes or scenes from "whenever" and even though
they are of a scene that probably was as interesting as watching paint dry, now, 5, 19 or 80 years later, they are interesting.
is that the point ? hope that in 80 years someone will find our boring photographs and be enthralled? or ... do we make them interesting now ..

 

[Ariston]

You use HDR, of course!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

its an age old question i think.
person has camera,
person makes a photograph of something .. but
that something is super boring, i mean a telephone pole, a water plug, a used car lot, street scene a >fill in the blank<

but how do we photograph it to make it well, not so boring? or is the mundane, boring-ness so mundane that it overcomes
the boring-epitude, and makes it interesting ?

i mean we all have seen photographs or mundane streetscapes or scenes from "whenever" and even though
they are of a scene that probably was as interesting as watching paint dry, now, 5, 19 or 80 years later, they are interesting.
is that the point ? hope that in 80 years someone will find our boring photographs and be enthralled? or ... do we make them interesting now ..

find something else to photograph.

 

[StepheKoontz]

IDK, I got a lot of compliments on these and one is basically just a water spigot and the other is a chair in front of a wall. The background, the sky, the lighting, the choice of filters etc. all are part of the image. We are painting with light.

 

[jamesaz]

Hi, jnantz. I know the answer to this! My day job for 25+ years was as a corporate/industrial photographer for a utility company. I've shot an incredible amount of images of electrical components (receiving stations, substations, switch gear cabinets and power poles) and construction documentation in 4x5 to 35mm and 3/4in. to Beta SP video. I once shot a 4 color brochure on what dirt should look like when shoreing trenches.
The answer is to simply show the images to people who WANT to find them interesting.
It paid the rent.

 

[spijker]

Add a nice looking nude person.

 

[MattKing]

You aren't really photographing the "boring" something. You are photographing the interaction between the light and the "boring" something.
And light is rarely boring.
A picnic table, that some might find boring:

 

[canongary]

Your photo's are anything but boring!! The abstract visual effect makes me think of all different things on your shots.i like them so keep shooting.

 

[dpurdy]

It is actually an age old question in commercial photography. Someone beings you a product that has nothing interesting about it but wants an interesting photo. The answer to that is the background and the lighting. There is the problem in real photography of seeing something that interests you but it only makes a boring subject even though it seems very interesting or compelling in life. That is because some things are interesting in 3 dimensions but not in 2 dimensions, like it should be sculpture not flat art.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

but how do we photograph it to make it well, not so boring?

Sometimes by creatively adding photographer's shadow into the scene as done exceedingly well by Lee Friedlander.

Sometimes by creative double exposure of mundane scenes which together give a new meaning as is the case with Stephen A. Scheer.

 

[awty]

Pictures tell a story, I always look for the story the pictures have to tell. Some stories are uninteresting so we need to colour them up, with good composition and editing. Some need little, a few word can go a long way. Some say nothing, they are empty, maybe telling you more about the photographer than the subject their taking the picture of. My favorite stories/pictures are ones that ask more questions than give answers to, keep my wondering. Its only in wonder I can escape.

 

[awty]

You use HDR, of course!

If done well it can, but a lot of people use it poorly and say a lot without telling you anything.

 

[Bikerider]

Try close up details, or a different viewpoint with an extremely wide angle lens.

 

[guangong]

As with any other art - writing, music, painting, sculpture, opera, movie, etc there is a certain something, call it knack, that some folks have and others don’t. Even employing the same basic story, for example, some movies, plays or operas flop while others are hits. Can it be taught? If a definite “yes” then every maestro’s student would be a master, although some may pick up the knack. How can Weston’s pepper succeed and mine is just a picture of a pepper?
Just do your best and see what happens. Also, keep in mind that often we only view an artist’s successes and not their flubs.

 

[Ariston]

Add a nice looking nude person.

Hahahaha! This!

If done well it can, but a lot of people use it poorly and say a lot without telling you anything.

Yeah - my suggestion was kind of tongue in cheek. Some people like HDR, and it can be done subtly and well, but I'm not really a fan. On the digital side I used to think I needed a camera with more dynamic range, but now I find that my favorite images are those with a limited dynamic range and more "mystery". But, that's just my personal taste. Others may just as rightly enjoy the opposite.




Edited: By the way, to add to the original question. The old adage is true - Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What one viewer thinks is an epic, legendary photo of consequence, another may dismiss altogether. Neither is right or wrong. People have every right to like or dislike whatever they want.

For instance, I've seen people criticize Thomas Kinkade paintings, but he brings a lot of people enjoyment. To me, that is a real accomplishment. In fact, making a great number of ordinary people happy is a far greater achievement, in my mind, than making a few miserable "critics" happy. Critics are only extraordinary in their own minds.

 

[Nodda Duma]

I squint

 

[Pieter12]

There is no boring stuff, just boring photos.

 

[markjwyatt]

its an age old question i think.
person has camera,
person makes a photograph of something .. but
that something is super boring, i mean a telephone pole, a water plug, a used car lot, street scene a >fill in the blank<

but how do we photograph it to make it well, not so boring? or is the mundane, boring-ness so mundane that it overcomes
the boring-epitude, and makes it interesting ?

i mean we all have seen photographs or mundane streetscapes or scenes from "whenever" and even though
they are of a scene that probably was as interesting as watching paint dry, now, 5, 19 or 80 years later, they are interesting.
is that the point ? hope that in 80 years someone will find our boring photographs and be enthralled? or ... do we make them interesting now ..

I suspect it matters where you are coming from. If you are creating an image for the sake of the image (call that art or whatever you want), it is probably much easier to find a way to make an interesting image containing an item- lighting, texture, tonality, color, confluence with other objects, etc.. On the other hand for a commercial photographer, there is a smaller universe of possible images available that meets the expectation of the customer. Still, both universes are transfinite, and sometimes having limitations can actually help by creating fewer choices and guiding the photographer more quickly to the right image. Here is a mundane photo I took because I found something interesting about it (do not expect anyone else to agree). I did not start with the subject, the image just appeared in front of me and I recognized it:


coiled cord by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

 

[macfred]

Did we mention the 'Schmutz' filter ?

 

[Sirius Glass]

You use HDR, of course!

If you used film, you would not need to use HDR. Find another subject.

 

[Michael Firstlight]

There are so many ways using light, motion, composition, processing techniques and so on. Unfortunately too many folks use these as a crutch to amplify visual drama, which isn't a crime, but I strive to use these to improve the strength of the message. Used right, even low contrast for example can be extremely powerful to strengthen a message given the right subject matter and message. I remember taking a photography class years ago at a major university called Mindful Photography. It might sound flaky, but it was really good. We learned techniques such as using basic meditation to change our own perception of a scene. It might sound silly, but try it. If you are looking at a subject stop and take a break, maybe sit down, close your eyes, clear you mind, focus on your senses - breathing, smell, hearing, environment etc for a few minutes then re-open your eyes and pick up where you were. I duno, it helped be see and think differently with improved sensory capability - and I was able to not only see more visually and think differently than my default knee-jerk perspectives, but also consider the message of the image more deeply and then decide on the best treatment for it. Sure, maybe still new age junk,but if it works....

 

[Lee Rust]

Since I've never taken photos as a job or for any particular audience or client other than family, it all comes down to whatever I might find interesting when I'm carrying a camera. If it's a 'boring' scene I try to reveal whatever it was that got my attention by means of perspective or focus, and that's the challenge. My pictures are a personal diary, but I am aware that the passage of decades may make the images more important from a historical perspective, so I try to print and label my best work and use film as much as possible.

 

[removed account4]

find something else to photograph.

If you used film, you would not need to use HDR. Find another subject.

its got nothing to do with a different subject. most subjects are pretty boring.

no HDR ? its the same as velvia.. but not 36$ a roll ( film+processing)...

 

[Bill Burk]

I was looking for a print I made of a telephone pole with a strand of fox tail sepia toned... left a print of an old girlfriend on the desk. My wife walked in and asked who is that?

That’s one way to make a boring print interesting.

 

[jtk]

There are so many ways using light, motion, composition, processing techniques and so on. Unfortunately too many folks use these as a crutch to amplify visual drama, which isn't a crime, but I strive to use these to improve the strength of the message. Used right, even low contrast for example can be extremely powerful to strengthen a message given the right subject matter and message. I remember taking a photography class years ago at a major university called Mindful Photography. It might sound flaky, but it was really good. We learned techniques such as using basic meditation to change our own perception of a scene. It might sound silly, but try it. If you are looking at a subject stop and take a break, maybe sit down, close your eyes, clear you mind, focus on your senses - breathing, smell, hearing, environment etc for a few minutes then re-open your eyes and pick up where you were. I duno, it helped be see and think differently with improved sensory capability - and I was able to not only see more visually and think differently than my default knee-jerk perspectives, but also consider the message of the image more deeply and then decide on the best treatment for it. Sure, maybe still new age junk,but if it works....

That's a fundamental Minor White lesson.