Mental machinations as viewer vs photographer

[MattKing]

I'll bring a camera to a couple of jobs next week and see if I can make any magic happen.

Emphasis added.
No - you want to let the magic reveal itself to you.
Don't look closely at the subject.
Open yourself to experiencing the light instead.

 

[Chuck1]

Well put

 

[4season]

@MTGseattle , you raise some interesting thoughts, and I've spent some time pondering. And decided that my own thought process is pretty basic: Something captures my imagination, and I want to photograph it. I don't always start off knowing what I hope to achieve, but sometimes with enough repetition, things start to make more sense.

Regarding nostalgia: I'll take whatever pleasantries I can get, whether borrowed, or even fictitious. I think if we could transport ourselves back to our youths, we might be shocked at how bored, restless, and sometimes angsty we often were!

 

[MarkS]

As the late Bill Jay wrote, "The Subject Matters". Photography's purpose is to make pictures. Find a subject that compels you (you probably know what it is already) and make pictures of it. Eventually your pictures will tell you what you should do next. It will take some time and many pictures, but you'll get there eventually if you keep at it.
For example, David Plowden wanted to photograph the (then disappearing) steam locomotives. His teacher, Minor White, told him "Go ahead and photograph your damned trains and get them out of your system!" Which he did... and that project led him to a lifetime of work.

 

[Don_ih]

Find a subject that compels you (you probably know what it is already) and make pictures of it.

Good advice. However, to an extent, existing, well-regarded photos and photographers have a lot of influence and power over what kinds of things one may or may not find compelling - and therefor the kinds of subjects suitable to be photographed at all. The idea of a "traditional subject" for visual art is quite strong. You have the big rocks, the nude women, the flowers, the cats and dogs, the children, the decaying rural landscape, the decaying urban landscape, the cars, the beaches, the birds... All of those are potentially compelling subjects but possibly because one knows those have been compelling subjects for others who have highly regarded work. "People like pictures of ____" is also a powerful motivation for someone with a camera and an itch to point it at something.

I think once you get fully wrapped up in it, what's compelling for a lot of people is just taking photos. So very many people remain directionless. And I think others just direct themselves in the taking of "nice" photos (described in the paragraph above).

What I think is rare is when the attitudes and ideas of the photographer truly determine what the subject should be and how it should become an image. So it's not so much that Plowden went out and took photos of trains - he went out and made those photos to express the ideas that he had about those trains. So that's serious work.

Maybe a lot of us are not really serious enough to do such work.

 

[snusmumriken]

Good advice. However, to an extent, existing, well-regarded photos and photographers have a lot of influence and power over what kinds of things one may or may not find compelling - and therefor the kinds of subjects suitable to be photographed at all. The idea of a "traditional subject" for visual art is quite strong. You have the big rocks, the nude women, the flowers, the cats and dogs, the children, the decaying rural landscape, the decaying urban landscape, the cars, the beaches, the birds... All of those are potentially compelling subjects but possibly because one knows those have been compelling subjects for others who have highly regarded work. "People like pictures of ____" is also a powerful motivation for someone with a camera and an itch to point it at something.

That's a very good point, although I believe society will eventually have had enough big rocks, if it hasn't already.

The advice that rings true for me is to photograph what interests you, and then if you look back at a few years’ worth, you will see who you are and how you differ from other photographers. Neither may be quite what you want, but at least you have a reference point for change.

 

[Vaughn]

...

What I think is rare is when the attitudes and ideas of the photographer truly determine what the subject should be and how it should become an image. So it's not so much that Plowden went out and took photos of trains - he went out and made those photos to express the ideas that he had about those trains. So that's serious work.

Maybe a lot of us are not really serious enough to do such work.

What I believe you are saying is that some approach photography as an art form, while most do not.

 

[Don_ih]

What I believe you are saying is that some approach photography as an art form, while most do not.

And in the case of the latter, they may end up with something that can be considered art (that doesn't mean it's not art) but was not the result of an informed reflective practice.

The advice that rings true for me is to photograph what interests you, and then if you look back at a few year's worth, you will see who you are and how you differ from other photographers. Neither may be quite what you want, but at least you have a reference point for change.

And you would probably learn a lot about why that subject interests you. Significance can arise out of what you do. Style and theme would establish themselves pretty much necessarily. So maybe it's less important to worry about why you want to photograph this or that subject, why you find it compelling, because the way you approach it will probably be more telling.

 

[Vaughn]

And in the case of the latter, they may end up with something that can be considered art (that doesn't mean it's not art) but was not the result of an informed reflective practice.
...

Agreed, one does not have to consider oneself an artist to make beautiful work.

 

[Pieter12]

informed reflective practice

What do you mean by that?

 

[snusmumriken]

What do you mean by that?

I take it to mean that you’ve seen some other photography and thought about what you are doing yourself.

 

[MTGseattle]

What I think @Don_ih means by "... informed,reflective practice." means knowing something about the subject, considering what the subject means to you, and then making the image. Not just photographing willy nilly.

I've read Bill Jay/David Hurn "On Being a Photographer" through twice. I find something that sticks out each time.

Some of my conflict right now is that I do have a "style" of sorts when I look back at 20+ years of negatives, and I can't reconcile that "style" to the current objective of a small body of landscape specific work for my class.

 

[Pieter12]

I take it to mean that you’ve seen some other photography and thought about what you are doing yourself.

I would love to hear from the originator rather than others' interpretations.

 

[Don_ih]

What do you mean by that?

In context, "informed reflective practice" refers to the directed activities of the artist, attempting to create a specific work of art through applying his or her own ideas and skills to whatever his or her work object is, toward whatever the subject is, which implies an awareness of the efficacy of technique and material choice and method.

So not taking photos willy-nilly.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Good advice. However, to an extent, existing, well-regarded photos and photographers have a lot of influence and power over what kinds of things one may or may not find compelling - and therefor the kinds of subjects suitable to be photographed at all. The idea of a "traditional subject" for visual art is quite strong. You have the big rocks, the nude women, the flowers, the cats and dogs, the children, the decaying rural landscape, the decaying urban landscape, the cars, the beaches, the birds... All of those are potentially compelling subjects but possibly because one knows those have been compelling subjects for others who have highly regarded work. "People like pictures of ____" is also a powerful motivation for someone with a camera and an itch to point it at something.

I think once you get fully wrapped up in it, what's compelling for a lot of people is just taking photos. So very many people remain directionless. And I think others just direct themselves in the taking of "nice" photos (described in the paragraph above).

What I think is rare is when the attitudes and ideas of the photographer truly determine what the subject should be and how it should become an image. So it's not so much that Plowden went out and took photos of trains - he went out and made those photos to express the ideas that he had about those trains. So that's serious work.

Maybe a lot of us are not really serious enough to do such work.

Picking a subject to photograph as an essay of sorts helps when you also think about how you want to present it when you're done. Photo book, video slide show, individual pictures in a gallery. etc.

Just like a story, you want a beginning, a middle and an end. For example, I enjoy putting together vacation trips into video slide shows to present on my home TV. So I'll shoot some shots showing a beginning like the baggage, getting on a plane, landing, then the middle of all the things and places we visited, and then the end with us getting on a place again to go home. If we visit different places, the first shot at each location identifies the place to the person watching the show. Tell a story. Pictures that aren't connected get boring. The viewer will lose interest.

This is particularly helpful when people you know are in some of the pictures. Here's an example of my daughter and me visiting Coney Island to eat Nathan's hot dogs and see a baseball game and enjoy some of the rides. Tell a story. Even if you visit Iceland to capture some those great photos, tell a story there as well. Draw the viewers into the action.

 

[Pieter12]

In context, "informed reflective practice" refers to the directed activities of the artist, attempting to create a specific work of art through applying his or her own ideas and skills to whatever his or her work object is, toward whatever the subject is, which implies an awareness of the efficacy of technique and material choice and method.

So not taking photos willy-nilly.

Thank you for the clarification. Otherwise, it comes across as art-talk. Not sure where the "reflective" part comes in, but that's OK.

 

[MattKing]

Not sure where the "reflective" part comes in

Perhaps as a contrast to "reactive practice" - which might better describe people who are more into "street" photography, and the like.

 

[Pieter12]

Perhaps as a contrast to "reactive practice" - which might better describe people who are more into "street" photography, and the like.

Street and photojournalism for sure. And some react to light and composition without necessarily thinking about it. If a scene produces dopamine, I'll photograph it and think about it later.

 

[Don_ih]

No - reflective is not really contrasted to reactive, but more in line with Schiller's idea of "sentimental" poetry, rather than naive. I didn't really want to get into that. But "reflective" more has to do with self-awareness and the characteristic of agency through the whole "making". I'm trying to avoid laden terminology....

 

[Pieter12]

No - reflective is not really contrasted to reactive, but more in line with Schiller's idea of "sentimental" poetry, rather than naive. I didn't really want to get into that. But "reflective" more has to do with self-awareness and the characteristic of agency through the whole "making". I'm trying to avoid laden terminology....

Seems like it rules out experimentation. Once again, not criticizing or arguing, just observing and trying to understand the statement.

 

[Don_ih]

Seems like it rules out experimentation. Once again, not criticizing or arguing, just observing and trying to understand the statement.

I don't think so. You experiment with a mind to getting a result of a type. And the result of an experiment can count as "raw material" that you then decide how to use.

 

[Chuck1]

When it comes to the mundane try an unconventional point of view, low angle...
You never know

 

[Pieter12]

I don't think so. You experiment with a mind to getting a result of a type. And the result of an experiment can count as "raw material" that you then decide how to use.

Sometimes you experiment without preconceptions.

 

[snusmumriken]

Sometimes you experiment without preconceptions.

Sure, but the whole notion of ‘experiment’ involves awareness of what one would ‘normally’ do: so, reflective.

 

[Vaughn]

Sometimes you experiment without preconceptions.

How? Sounds very Zen to me.

One cannot have an experiment without a hypothesis...which is a preconception of the possible results of the experiment.