Photographing chaos - Strategies?

[runswithsizzers]

Didn't someone say "chaos is a bourgeois concept" or did I just make that up?

 

[nikos79]

I could also imagine it like this which I also like:
But then you lose the circular motion of the shoes around her

 

[Focomatter]

I do not have a strategy but I do notice interesting patterns. I rounded up several chaos pix into a gallery on my website. This was a Covid project that I should revisit. My shots are mostly of nature in various environments - we have very few people here (about 2/3 of 1 million in all of Alaska).
One of the more interesting (to me) is the arrangement of items this sea urchin is carrying. It is known as a collector urchin and they do live up to their name. They are quite common in Hawaii where I took this shot under water.
Link to gallery: https://www.salmonography.com/Phenomena/Chaos

 

[koraks]

I could also imagine it like this which I also like:

If this were my photo, I'd be somewhat annoyed at (1) it being copied by someone and reposted in their own posts and (2) cropped into something I never intended it to be. Maybe I'm the only one who would feel that way - maybe not. Still, based on that, I'd also be very, very hesitant to post something like this unless the maker of the original work suggested it was OK to do so.

 

[nikos79]

If this were my photo, I'd be somewhat annoyed at (1) it being copied by someone and reposted in their own posts and (2) cropped into something I never intended it to be. Maybe I'm the only one who would feel that way - maybe not. Still, based on that, I'd also be very, very hesitant to post something like this unless the maker of the original work suggested it was OK to do so.

Yes I can understand perhaps I should have asked. I assumed by sharing photos here is ok. Anyway it was just done for educational purposes and to support the arguments of the conversation as I thought it was a very good example, no bad intentions

 

[koraks]

I assumed by sharing photos here is ok.

I think the assumption that it's OK to copy and modify someone's work because they published it online is problematic. As said, I'd be somewhat cautious.

 

[nikos79]

I think the assumption that it's OK to copy and modify someone's work because they published it online is problematic. As said, I'd be somewhat cautious.

Yes I understand probably you are right

 

[George Mann]

One of the limitations of photography is that every photograph needs a subject, usually a single identifiable point of interest.

And this should normally be the only thing a skilled photographer is focused upon in a chaotic environment.

And yes, B&W works better for this.

 

[George Mann]

Instead of backing off the chaos with a wide angle lens, move in on the chaos with a longer lens to compose based on the specific details.

Yes. I use a 50mm lens at the proper distance 90% of the time in order to isolate my subject.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Funnel cakes and beer !

I think that's "birch beer" -- a soft(ish) drink related to root beer (some versions use natural carbonation that introduces a "near beer" level of alcohol, as does some homemade root beer).

 

[dcy]

I think the assumption that it's OK to copy and modify someone's work because they published it online is problematic. As said, I'd be somewhat cautious.

It is also worth noting that it is illegal.

Copyright law exists. When you create a work, it is copyrighted the moment it is create it. Let me highlight that this is not a local quirk of the jurisdiction where I reside; this is an international treaty --- The 1886 Berne Convention. It applies to almost every nation on Earth.

I personally would be very upset if someone took a work I posted online and then re-posted it and modified it without permission. When I wish to give such permission, I specify a Creative Commons license.

EDIT: It is slightly ironic that @nikos79 resides in the country that held the Berne Convention.

 

[koraks]

It is also worth noting that it is illegal.

Welll.....that's another tangent, as there are two things going on here that make it a little less severe than it may seem.
Firstly, there's such a thing as a 'derivative work' - although arguably, cropping an existing photo a little doesn't qualify. Secondly, and more importantly, there's no intent to commercially publish this 'derived' work. Which leads to a third consideration, which is that the intent here was evidently to illustrate a point in a discussion, in which case I don't think there's strictly speaking a copyright violation at all. Whether it's ethically sound, pleasant, wise...that's a different matter.
Btw, if you want to explore the copyright situation, I'd bid you to start a thread on that specifically as it would lead us rather far astray from the focus of this thread.

 

[gary mulder]

It is also worth noting that it is illegal.

Copyright law exists. When you create a work, it is copyrighted the moment it is create it. Let me highlight that this is not a local quirk of the jurisdiction where I reside; this is an international treaty --- The 1886 Berne Convention. It applies to almost every nation on Earth.

I personally would be very upset if someone took a work I posted online and then re-posted it and modified it without permission. When I wish to give such permission, I specify a Creative Commons license.

EDIT: It is slightly ironic that @nikos79 resides in the country that held the Berne Convention.

+1 It also shows that there is no understanding of what art is. Very depressing.

 

[Harry Callahan]

If this wasn`t the internet, but an "analog" meeting of some photographers discussing photography and presenting some of their pictures to explain an approach of taking pictures... i`m sure we`d also discuss the picture and someone would note that cropping it would be "better". He may stand up and hold a piece of paper onto the photograph to show how he would crop it and how the picture would look like if cropped like this... without changing the picture or intending to alter it.
On the internet you cannot stand up and hold a piece of paper to show everybody how you would crop it, so you copy-paste, crop, upload - without intending to alter someone else`s art.
To avoid the impression that you intent to alters someone else`s art, we may need a different way of showing how you would crop the picture. Maybe we had to leave the picture uncropped but had to draw in the area we would crop...so everybody can hold a piece of paper onto his screen at home to see what we would see in a real meeting...

 

[joho]

Nikos79-
We had the same teacher, right?
No-
but just to be specific "chaos" is not a correct term "Dynamic Symmetry" is the correct term as it relates to the Optical Composition of objects in position on a flat plane...
using a device to stop time [photograph] and show your view of it, is not "CHAOS".

 

[joho]

Photographing chaos - Strategies?​

worked on the subject, a street photo from Athens -- named, ROUGE_TOURISTS_ATH-06212025

camera -Lubitel-2-
lens- T-22 F/16 AT 1/30sec
fomapan 100asa at 200asa / R09 1-45 [27]Celsius / 8.5 min.

the image here is work in progress the final will be a silver print...

 

[foc]

Photographing chaos - Strategies?​

worked on the subject, a street photo from Athens -- named, ROUGE_TOURISTS_ATH-06212025

camera -Lubitel-2-
lens- T-22 F/16 AT 1/30sec
fomapan 100asa at 200asa / R09 1-45 [27]Celsius / 8.5 min.

the image here is work in progress the final will be a silver print...

I like the composition, the blured people in the foreground and the gap they create so we can see the subject and it isolates him. IMO an excellent street photograph.

 

[gary mulder]

In my opinion a successful attempt to visualise chaos inside the mind though equivalent chaos in the room.

The great room

 

[nikos79]

In my opinion a successful attempt to visualise chaos inside the mind though equivalent chaos in the room.

The great room

Chaos in the mind of the photographer you mean?

 

[koraks]

Chaos in the mind of the photographer you mean?

That remark might have been jusitified if your own mind had been as quick as your judgement.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

If this wasn`t the internet, but an "analog" meeting of some photographers discussing photography and presenting some of their pictures to explain an approach of taking pictures... i`m sure we`d also discuss the picture and someone would note that cropping it would be "better". He may stand up and hold a piece of paper onto the photograph to show how he would crop it and how the picture would look like if cropped like this... without changing the picture or intending to alter it.
On the internet you cannot stand up and hold a piece of paper to show everybody how you would crop it, so you copy-paste, crop, upload - without intending to alter someone else`s art.
To avoid the impression that you intent to alters someone else`s art, we may need a different way of showing how you would crop the picture. Maybe we had to leave the picture uncropped but had to draw in the area we would crop...so everybody can hold a piece of paper onto his screen at home to see what we would see in a real meeting...

My view is that if I ask for opinions on how to improve my picture, others editing it to show how it would look better falls into an acceptable process. In fact, I would want them to do that. Cropping, lightening, adding contrast, etc. A picture is worth a thousand words. PS the photo clubs that I belonged to over the years used exactly the method you described to allow members to show their prints at our meetings and then to get other's opinions on how to improve. Using cropping masks and cards was standard practice.

 

[koraks]

In my opinion a successful attempt to visualise chaos inside the mind though equivalent chaos in the room.

The great room

That's a great example IMO of how a particular chaos can be photographed in such a way as to be totally transparent, logical and accessible to the viewer. At the same time, she does so without somehow trying to reduce or eliminate the chaos. She effectively manages to visualize it as you said, but in a logical way. It takes skill as well as talent to pull this off, even if I just look at the photos without any context. Taking into account the context of the project, the accomplishment is even more admirable, given how she manages to marry the mental chaos her mom must experience with the necessity of bringing order in the visual documentation, while at the same time not relying on visual tropes like isolation of single objects etc. I find this really impressive and as said an exceptionally successful example of what we're discussing in this thread.

 

[nikos79]

That's a great example IMO of how a particular chaos can be photographed in such a way as to be totally transparent, logical and accessible to the viewer. At the same time, she does so without somehow trying to reduce or eliminate the chaos. She effectively manages to visualize it as you said, but in a logical way. It takes skill as well as talent to pull this off, even if I just look at the photos without any context. Taking into account the context of the project, the accomplishment is even more admirable, given how she manages to marry the mental chaos her mom must experience with the necessity of bringing order in the visual documentation, while at the same time not relying on visual tropes like isolation of single objects etc. I find this really impressive and as said an exceptionally successful example of what we're discussing in this thread.

Yes but not having known all the pre-context (mental condition of her mother etc.) and viewing it as simple photographs without the added conceptual layer on top I doubt if that manages to bring anything.

 

[koraks]

Yes but not having known all the pre-context (mental condition of her mother etc.) and viewing it as simple photographs without the added conceptual layer on top I doubt if that manages to bring anything.

I disagree with that. I think the pictures for the most part speak for themselves. That's how I saw them initially. Only during a second viewing after having done something else in-between I read some of the text. That kind of drove the point home, but it was there already. IDK, maybe you just don't see it, which is fine, but in that case, maybe not be so quick to judge.

 

[nikos79]

I disagree with that. I think the pictures for the most part speak for themselves. That's how I saw them initially. Only during a second viewing after having done something else in-between I read some of the text. That kind of drove the point home, but it was there already. IDK, maybe you just don't see it, which is fine, but in that case, maybe not be so quick to judge.

OK I read the texts first perhaps that's why