I'm changing my philosophy on photography...

[ChristopherCoy]

When I think about the word "photography", I only think about a camera and a lens and the act of clicking the shutter. I never think about it's meaning beyond that.

Through casual browsing this morning, I happened upon the George Eastman Museum's videos of the photographic processes. I've seen the cyanotype episode before, but never watched any more than that. So I went back and watched chapter 1-12, starting with the drawing of silhouettes, through the camera obscura, Daguerreotype , Calotype's etc. etc. etc. What I noticed is that there seemed to be only one singular way to obtain an image (light through a lens, or hole in a box), but there were multiple ways to produce an image. (daguerreotype, wet plate, calotype, cyanotype, gum prints, etc)

It's probably going to sound strange to some of you, but I've never thought about 'photography' this way. For me, all of my knowledge and thoughts have been 'focused' on the actual task of capturing an image, and the tools and skills used to do that. Lenses, cameras, etc. But, if I look at photography as a whole (I'm tempted to start referring to it as "imagery"), it's quite an expansive art form. There are so many methods of getting the image recorded on paper, and it really makes me wonder why my focus has always been on the camera, instead of on the actual production of the image, i.e. printing. The camera is only one step, the first step of many now that I think about it in these terms, and in the grand scheme of things ends up playing a rather small part. Sure, without a proper camera and capable lens, there would be no image to produce, but without any tools or skillsets to print the image, you still wouldn't have an image anyway.

I'm not sure if it's my views that have been distorted by media, both social and advertising, or if its the way it actually is, but it seems like the teetertotter is heavily weighed in the direction of the tools for obtaining an image, and less on the tools for producing the image. It's almost like I've been cheated out of half an art form from the very beginning because all the emphasis has been on actually shooting images, instead of the various methods of printing them. Maybe that's my own fault for not looking into it until now, but maybe it isn't.

I'm not sure if it's this new book and program I'm reading and participating in ("The Artists Way" by Julia Cameron), or if it's my meds, or what, but this is a light bulb moment for me. I can't really explain how I'm feeling. It's almost like excitement, but a bit of a "duh!" kind of feeling also. It's like someone just peeled another layer off the creativity onion.

 

[BrianShaw]

Your eyes are opened! Now enjoy more than you once enjoyed!

 

[rick shaw]

Perhaps you would enjoy Brook Jensen's book "Letting Go of the Camera"
Also available as an eBook, if that is your thing.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Perhaps you would enjoy Brook Jensen's book "Letting Go of the Camera"
Also available as an eBook, if that is your thing.

Thanks for the suggestion! Looks like a good, quick read!

 

[paolod]

Check this out: https://printedpicture.artgallery.yale.edu/
8 hours of really interesting lectures by Richard Benson covering every method of printing in existence.

 

[lecarp]

Christopher, If you think about what you have written in this post and the vast possibilities, I believe you will find you have answered both the questions in your thread about choosing film.
Of course it matters!

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Christopher, If you think about what you have written in this post and the vast possibilities, I believe you will find you have answered both the questions in your thread about choosing film.
Of course it matters!

You know, you're right. And if I think about it, I've effectively been stuck half way through the process for years now. I've got the camera, had plenty of them. I've produced the negatives (or files), but I've rarely ever gone beyond that point.

 

[lecarp]

The truth is, its all about the end product, the print in my case. Every single choice you make in arriving at that print plays a part in the ability of the work to express your intent successfully.

 

[Sirius Glass]

For me it has always been about the light. Filters, lenses, cameras, film, development, printing are all steps in the chain of capturing the light. The chain is only as strong as the weakest link. When the cameras and lenses are the best I can afford, if there is a problem, I can only blame me and I have to work on the next weakest link.

 

[MattKing]

If you used slide film and projected the results, your concentration on the "capture" would make total sense. If the method of presenting the result is both controlled for you and constant, you only need to worry about the "capture".
A lot of us here have shot a lot of slides. It is actually a really good way to learn the "capture" part, because it is relatively unforgiving.
Sending film to a lab and getting scans or machine prints back doesn't give the same benefit, because of all the built in "automatic" adjustment systems inherent in that procedure.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you used slide film and projected the results, your concentration on the "capture" would make total sense. If the method of presenting the result is both controlled for you and constant, you only need to worry about the "capture".
A lot of us here have shot a lot of slides. It is actually a really good way to learn the "capture" part, because it is relatively unforgiving.
Sending film to a lab and getting scans or machine prints back doesn't give the same benefit, because of all the built in "automatic" adjustment systems inherent in that procedure.

I agree. I took slides for decades and it is unforgiving. All one can do is remount and crop or have a print made. It taught me exposure, composition and tightly crop in the viewfinder. It was a great way to learn and the learning continues.

 

[rick shaw]

Here’s a thought.

Have you considered, creating a folio/portfolio? A tangible collection of your best work, both current and future. It can put everything into clear perspective. Every choice you make, from the selection of subject matter through to the final print, is about producing images worthy of the portfolio. Every step in the process can be specific to each image. Don’t become locked into anything—equipment, processes, media, etc. Nothing is sacred it it doesn’t serve the image.

Again, just a thought. I could be blowing smoke.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Here’s a thought.

Have you considered, creating a folio/portfolio? A tangible collection of your best work, both current and future. It can put everything into clear perspective. Every choice you make, from the selection of subject matter through to the final print, is about producing images worthy of the portfolio. Every step in the process can be specific to each image. Don’t become locked into anything—equipment, processes, media, etc. Nothing is sacred it it doesn’t serve the image.

Again, just a thought. I could be blowing smoke.

I do not have a portolio. What I do have is 1.5TB of digital files, and a 4" binder full of negatives. I don't have the darkroom right now to print contact sheets, let alone final prints, but I do have a nice Epson 4990 scanner. I need to figure out a way to scan "contact sheets" so that all my negatives are in the same image so that I dont have to sit there and scan every single 35mm negative.

 

[Luis Filipe]

I feel a bit in the same boat as you. But start changing my mind some time ago watching Genius Of Photography from BBC.

Always been shooting in digital and that feeling of "it can't be only this" was always there.
I never had space to set up a darkroom, and still don't have, but this time ill convert my toilet and start with the minimal, from scratch.

 

[awty]

I was taking a picture with my 8x10 pinhole camera, when an onlooker asked me whot I was doing.
"Tacking a photo"
Then I took the film back of to show her how it worked.
"But where's the camera "
I tried to explain that the box was the camera, the little pinhole at the front was the lens and there was film to record the picture in the film holder I just removed.
She had no concept of what a camera was and walk away thinking I was obviously delusional......which maybe the truth.
Once you understand what a camera is, it becomes the least important part about making a picture.

 

[removed account4]

Hi Christopher
Sounds like you are seeing the light and the possibilities..
Looking forward to seeing what fun you do
John

 

[mshchem]

I do not have a portolio. What I do have is 1.5TB of digital files, and a 4" binder full of negatives. I don't have the darkroom right now to print contact sheets, let alone final prints, but I do have a nice Epson 4990 scanner. I need to figure out a way to scan "contact sheets" so that all my negatives are in the same image so that I dont have to sit there and scan every single 35mm negative.

Lay them on a light table and shoot the group with a DSLR. YOU will need to take it from there as I'm not a digital journeyman.

I've noticed how much people involved in "imagery" 2D, or 3D appreciate light, color, texture etc. I remember back over 15 years back taking my RZ67II to my day job. One of our wonderful assistants, had only ever looked through a Canon Rebel with a dim 4.5-5.6 kit zoom. I put the RZ on a tripod with the 110 2.8 standard lens, I have the AE prism. We had some sunlight coming in the windows, she looked through that and was amazed. It was like she noticed more clearly the color and depth that was always there.

I'm always finding something new. And as you have noticed it may be old.

Check out the GEM episode on the real original Technicolor. It's enough to bring tears of joy.

I will have to look at these e books. I received a 2nd edition (1925) The Science and Practice of Photographic Printing, by Lloyd L Snodgrass. There's an inscription at the front a name and date July 3rd 1927. The year Lindbergh flew the Atlantic . Wonderful stuff

 

[MattKing]

I do not have a portolio. What I do have is 1.5TB of digital files, and a 4" binder full of negatives.

So it is time to create one.
Arguably the secret of all great photography is curating/editing.
Immerse yourself in your own past work, pick out what resonates with you and then do something to make sure that you print (in some way) that which resonates.
You need to pick out several/a few. It doesn't matter if they aren't the best examples, it only matters if they are good examples. A really fulsome portfolio evolves over time, and can include several sub-categories.
A portfolio made up of postcard size prints can work great.
I have a feeling you are approaching this by expecting to know what your philosophy is before you take your photos. It rarely works that way. A photographic philosophy is usually something you find about yourself, after making a lot of photographs.
By the way, I should mention that so far I have avoided the temptation to respond to your thread title with the rather cheeky "What, again!?

 

[ChristopherCoy]

By the way, I should mention that so far I have avoided the temptation to respond to your thread title with the rather cheeky "What, again!?

I know right! It’s changing exponentially over the recent weeks.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Some are living to philosophy and lengthy posts. And editing. Some are using mobile phones in the right time at the right moment.
Google Dmitry Markov photo auction. This is where photography is, IMO.

 

[removed account4]

Some are living to philosophy and lengthy posts. And editing. Some are using mobile phones in the right time at the right moment.
Google Dmitry Markov photo auction. This is where photography is, IMO.

agreed , Thanks for the name !! I love looking at work made by people using a camera!

it really makes me wonder why my focus has always been on the camera, instead of on the actual production of the image, i.e. printing. The camera is only one step,

Christopher you have touched upon something interesting. Don’t think it is only you!, most people who "do photography" don't realize its a vast and deep conspiracy, and have been infected by the same shutter-bug, and the illness we've been sickened with has been around since IDK 1886.. that's when humans began "KODAKING". a handful of peoiple got a sick made exposures, sent the box away to get their photos, and then their friends saw and also got sickened by this shutter-bug and so on and so on, as we can see from the interweb, insta , yougloob, FB ( the list is endless ). the shutter-bug is more addictive than crack or heroin or nicotine. (just look at a teenager's camera roll and see how many selfies there are !) they have armies of advertising agents ( who don't realize they are advertising agents ) in every corner of the inter web, magazines, and print media showing how easy it is &c, blathering on about xyz camera and lens, xyz film and developer and exotic process, ..
so just realize it isn't just you its pretty much everyone looking for the magic box with its silver bullet, and most people don't make prints either. LOL

 

[ChristopherCoy]

in every corner of the inter web, magazines, and print media showing how easy it is &c, blathering on about xyz camera and lens, xyz film and developer and exotic process, ..
so just realize it isn't just you its pretty much everyone looking for the magic box with its silver bullet, and most people don't make prints either. LOL

I had another bit of a lightbulb moment yesterday. "Photography" is a popular search term that I used on youboob, and since I watch so many related videos, my feed is always inundated with 'My favorite camera' videos. Even worse are the 'review' videos. At some point, while looking at all the thumbnails of videos, I realized that 90% of them were of the type, but virtually none of them offered any information that a manufacturers brochure didn't. Most of the videos were, what I'm now calling, 'overhype'. The creators tout what the camera 'does' instead of what they themselves do. They are more fascinated with the features of the camera, than they are the artwork they create with it. Their fandom over autofocus, feel, speed, and build quality overshadows the actual art they are able to create. They never say things like "this is my 1.4 lens, and it helped me take this wonderful photo of my baby sleeping in its crib with only the small lamp on." Instead they say things like 'its build quality is superb, it feels heavy, and its sharpness is superior to XYZ brand's lens. You definitely need this in your camera bag." Well maybe a 1.4 lens would nice and make things easier, but if I just use a longer shutter speed with a tripod I can get my own version with this 2.8 lens, and it will mean more because I wont have to worry about the debt made to buy said 1.4 lens, and I can use the money to buy the baby diapers instead. (btw... I dont have kids, nor will I venture into vaginaland to create one.)

Later in the day, I started researching if 6x6 actually did offer anymore IQ than 645. I ended up on a very old thread here on Photrio regarding the matter, and the third post in, someone ignorantly posted that 645 wasn't much better than 35mm, and that the OP should "just shoot square". His post was met with mathematically correct factual information, and a host of opposing opinions. At that point I realized that I was reading information that was irrelevant for me, because most of the information (aside from the one with mathematical calculations) was nothing more than pure personal biased opinions, and that if I truly wanted to know, I would have to experiment for myself. Additionally, I realized that the IQ of a 6x6 negative, and a 645 cropped to 4.5x4.5 would be a minuscule, and that I was doing the same thing I've always done. (old habits die hard.) So I took a moment and stepped back, closed my internet tab, and formulated a plan to go out and shoot a roll this morning using equipment I already have. As long as everything is light tight, I'll be able to create something.

 

[BrianShaw]

if I truly wanted to know, I would have to experiment for myself.

Yes... so you can form your own opinion!

 

[rick shaw]

@ChristopherCoy

What is your end-goal, objective, purpose, or desire regarding photography?
Put another way, what does photographic success look like to you? Gallery? Publication? Tinkerer? Forum guru? ???

There is a multitude of reasons people love photography; family snapshots, love the technology, build or repair gear, express their vision of the world, visual creativity, teach, get published, be represented in a gallery, sell stock photos, commercial (make money), collect and/or invest, and the list goes on.

Somewhere along the line, many of us have to delve into these questions. And it is an ongoing evolving process. I was in photography for about 35 years before I realized I was doing nothing more than collecting random images and wasting a lot of money in the process (gear acquisition syndrome). That is when the above questions began to surface. Then it took another 10 years for the light to finally come on.

I don't know your age, but you can likely shortcut this process by thinking about it now.
Otherwise, IMHO, you are on a journey, destination unknown, and without a map.

In rereading the above, I am a little concerned about the tone but do sincerely hope that it might help you find the answers you seek.

RS

 

[eddie]

Sure, without a proper camera and capable lens, there would be no image to produce, but without any tools or skillsets to print the image, you still wouldn't have an image anyway.

Actually, film is so flexible you don't even need a camera or lens to produce images. Look at jnanian's Gallery images. I've also been making cameraless images for a few years. You can see some in the Gallery. The only limit to the possibilities of film is imagination...