Photography takes a long time to learn

[Phillip P. Dimor]

OTOH, while APUG is very handy.. If I go out and take a picture instead of sitting here posting or reading posts...
Never mind.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

"This is a crucial point in artistic expression - the point where you realize that technique, while important, is totally secondary to emotional expression."

There is no crucial point or epiphany.

All I can can say (speaking of course only for myself) is that there was most definitely a crucial point for me. Nor do I feel that technique and expression are symbiotic - expression builds on technique, technique does not grow from expression. Concentrating on expression while technique is still unformed makes technique worse, not better. As the saying goes, your mileage may vary!

Regards,

David

 

[MattKing]

The thread title almost implies that there can ever be a time when one can ever know everything about photography there is to know.

If I was re-wording the title, it would be something like "Photography means a lifetime of learning".

In any learning experience, there are some moments of extreme clarity and satisfaction. They may be related to moments of interaction with photographic subjects, interactions with cameras or other tools which we have a special affinity, or observations of negatives, prints, slides or movies we have created.

As an example, the first time I picked up, handled the controls and looked through the viewfinder on an Olympus OM1 was one of those moments for me.

Matt

 

[jd callow]

I guess Different worlds.

I never stop trying to improve my skill so that I can better express myself. My aesthetic desires often drive my technical development. As an example: Wanting to express the violence of motion in a static medium drives the need to develop the skill/technique to do so. The end result is a skill set built around what it is you wish to say or depict and as your aesthetic changes so goes the skill set. It is how many young boys and girls start to learn how to create art and it has stayed with me all my life.

As a side note: I simply don't understand how one determines whether their skill is formed enough to pursue expression. Long before I ever developed a roll of film, took a class in photography or even knew how to hold a camera correctly I made some reasonably good images which were almost always attempts at expression. Van Gogh's skill/technical facility was crap he forced his passion down the neck of the medium.


On the flip side I studied painting and drawing under an instructor who followed a specific course of subject and practice without regard to my aesthetic desires. Along with things that interested me I learned how to render items, replicate styles and use mediums that were meaningless to me. He was building a foundation, not just of the skills, but how to develop skills. I would also spend 3-6 hours a week in a lecture hall looking at slides and countless more hours digesting it all. The out come is similar to the earlier example in that the skill is grown as is the aesthetic, but both are done separately


Both forms work and both deal with the same truth as I see it. You have to know how to say that thing that you probably can't articulate. The greater the vocabulary the better you'll be at expressing your self.

As one uses and knows a medium it begins to suggest applications uses and in turn begins to drive the aesthetic. For me the interweaving of what I can do and what I want to do are inescapable.

And yes my mileage does vary greatly.

 

[Steve Smith]

I have found learning photography very similar to playing guitar. You are always learning and will never know everything but it is possible to produce pleasing results from very near to the beginning of the learning process.


Steve.

 

[dferrie]

I been practicing for 27+ years now, still practicing, it is a life long journey and for me it's about enjoying the journey without worrying when I'll arrive. Recognizing your strengths and being willing to learn from others is, in my humble opinion very important.

I attended a talk given by Les McLean before Christmas and it was enthralling to hear him speak, humbling to see his work but most of all a great motivation to learn, try new things and learn some more. He's coming to Ireland in March to lead a Street Photography workshop for us and I feel like a child in the lead up to Christmas. Street Photography will be a new dimension for me and I can hardly wait to learn from Les who is always so willing to share his knowledge and experience.

David

 

[Alden]

Without making this too personal, this is an example of someone in a prison of their own making. You are half-way to a revelation insofar as you have seen that technique alone does not produce art, but you have erected emotional barriers which are keeping you from making art. Some critics' writings are BS, but most have at least something to say which you could learn from.

David,

Not to worry about too personal. I'm good at conversation without the emotional baggage. Besides you're most likely addressing the idea itself, as I have not shown you my work. I don't post many difficult things in this gallery.

I've tried hard to read criticism for many years on both painting and photography. I've found it to be too much a world unto itself. It's the money involved that lends it credibility more than anything, to my mind. Whether Damian Hirst or Cindy Sherman, Struth, Gursky, on and on are doing anything to advance art as our society's movers and shakers, I cannot say because my attention to the visual is informed and propelled by earlier influences, and that's all I've needed to begin my own journey. I'm not unaware of contemporary work and it's rational, but I haven't felt convinced or attracted to post modern concerns, and don't find too much in it that's crucial to my artistic growth. Many remarkable artists gather a small dollop of influences, then they are off. DeKooning, my favorite painter , had plenty of involvement in all the ideas of his time, but filled up soon enough and went on to do his work without worrying about the next movement of pop art. One person can just do so much, usually. Authentically anyway.

Today people are oversold on the intellectual, and have become too careerist, too academic, MFA's in hand, gallery primed. Told that without complete knowledge of the whole works and a perfectly placed advanced step, you will be irrelevant. Seems also to demonstrate how the art world has become irrelevant to society at large. (yes,was it ever) It refer's only to itself. Duchampion gymnastics to qualify appropriation, dust bunnies, and fake real, real fakes.
Media drenched commentary that dismisses experience outright.

As for technique and expression. That, I think, comes down to temperment. How each individual plays with it. How one sparks the other, when to retreat, whether or not you can bring home a fleeing insight or idea. It's as Mr. Callow said, a synthesis. A result of your very being. I read the other day how Diane Arbus obsessed and worried over her technical prowess. That itself enters into the whole that she was, don't you think?

Also, if you would like to suggest some reading, I'd welcome it. I know my knowledge is sketchy at best, so ideas, authors, let me have it.

Ken

 

[Videbaek]

Hmm, yes, art criticism and the art industry. Well, it's an industry and a guild and like all industries and guilds it develops its own jargon and concepts and uses them to seem sophisticated and exclusive. Many employees therein never really seem to come out. Unless one is oneself a professional in the area, it seems hard to take seriously (I most definitely am not). Once in a while I come across a plainly written and illuminating piece of criticism, sometimes in the most unlikely places. That's enjoyable. Good writing is always the result of good thinking.

As for photography and personal epiphanies... Well, I was keen on photography for a couple years but nowadays my interest is dissipating fast, at least with ordinary photography by which I mean pointing the lens at real things in the real world. There's just so much photography around. If there is a single defining medium of modern life, it's photography. There's a numbness. Painting is what is needed more than ever these days.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

What an interesting thread this is that I ran across. So many truths, different solutions for different people.

I never considered my technique to be very good, but I'm pretty good at pouring my soul onto paper and connect with the content. It's interesting to note that I almost feel like I had to learn some technique before I could start translating emotions. Now it's secondary on a level I never even thought remotely possible. I don't care much about the equipment, as long as it works. I am sloppy with my light meter, often times I don't even use it.

I hope that all people out there find a way with photography that make them feel like it's worthwhile, that something good or important comes out of it. That's all that matters. There are so many different ways that people enjoy the art of photography. It's sometimes difficult to remember that my way works for me, and not necessarily everybody or anybody else.

Reading this thread put a lot of things in perspective for me. I recommend you read it too.

- Thomas

 

[Ian Leake]

Thanks for finding this thread Thomas - a very interesting read. I'm definitely still learning, and still enjoying learning.

 

[Andrew Moxom]

I just saw this thread also. As someone who has been photographing since around 1987, and not developing my own films and printing until 1990, I've found that simplicity is often the right path. Experience has told me that persuing all the technical aspects can detract from the actual image making process. This was brought home to me when had the privilige of attending a Fay Godwin class at Duckspool in 1992. Fay's approach was one of simplicity. Her two film choices were either APX100 or Tri-X. Expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights was a quote... She took a very simple approach to metering and exposure and stuck with it. She found that if she had to think about things too much, it clouded the vision. In actual fact, she felt her best images were ones that she did not have to think too much about the technical details. Her cameras were also manual and simple, Leica CL, Hasselblad, and Baby Linhof 6x9 and she knew them inside out. That class was a revelation for me as I was guilty like many folks of trying multiple cameras, multiple film, multiple papers, multiple developers, gadgets that really detract from image making. Instead of learning one thing at a time I was all over the place looking for silver bullets (pardon the pun). In the end, I have streamlined my camera systems to ones I am familiar with and can rely on. For films and papers, I have two main choices, Neopan-400 and ACROS. I get to know the way they work, and focus on making images, not worry too much about the next technical, or wizbang feature that I must have to increase overall complexity. I cannot tell you how many times I changed camera systems, films, devs, along the way until I went on that class. This taught me to ultimately channel the energy I was spending on the technical aspects into more on composition, feeling, emotion, and other areas that really influence the image outcome. It also taught me some instances when NOT to press the shutter. The really great thing about photography is I'm still learning, and I will never be complacent in my approach to photography. Techniques, and equipment although important, should not get in the way. Once learned, they are tools you can take out of the shed and use with confidence to capture what you feel and want to express. It should not be a chore to make images either. For me it is something that I find relaxing, and meditative.

 

[JBrunner]

Unlike these others, I had photography figured out within minutes of the first time I picked up a camera, and had totally mastered the art and craft within a year.

 

[rpsawin]

Unlike these others, I had photography figured out within minutes of the first time I picked up a camera, and had totally mastered the art and craft within a year.

Exactly why I await the daily bits of knowledge you toss out to us mere mortals...

Best regards,

Bob

 

[jolefler]

Unlike these others, I had photography figured out within minutes of the first time I picked up a camera, and had totally mastered the art and craft within a year.

I saw this post before....over on one of those digi sites :rolleyes:

Jo

 

[memoryofadream]

I personally think that things are a lot more complicated than that. To be perfectly honest, I'm still not sure what "learning" photography entails. To me, the important part of the game is seeing, everything else is a set of skills that is relatively easily acquired, especially given the sheer awesomeness of the equipment we have today.

Which is not to say that I'm not picking up new skills as I go along. Yesterday, for example, I was covering a large charity fundraiser walk and failed to get the shot I wanted b/c I've never worked on panning. Never needed it before till last night - now I'll learn and add that to my arsenal. All of that is the easy part, though.

The hard part (and the interesting part) to me has always been capturing emotional charge and passing it on to the viewer. If there's a straightforward way to learn that, I am not aware of it. If you know it, share That, to me, is what photography is all about - about seeing the emotional undercurrents of things and being able to capture and transmit them on paper. Over the last 8 years or so that I've been an active photographer, I have succeeded sometimes, but failed more often than not. I think I got better at it. Indeed, I think I got better at seeing what is around me irregardless photography. It made me a happier and more appreciative person, I think. However, all of these gains haven't been a "learning" thing, not in the conventional sense of the word. If I had to put a label on it, I would call it "personal growth".

 

[JBrunner]

I saw this post before....over on one of those digi sites :rolleyes:

Jo

Exactly. The masters are the ones who never stop exploring. Photography isn't a set of definitions or technical standards. Real photography is in the soul, and grows as the soul grows. The questions are such that the real answer cannot be fully understood at any one time, but rather over the course of experience and life. My epiphanies are built on each other. There is not one big one.

 

[raucousimages]

I have been at it for 32 years. I gave up on trying to know everything about photography years ago. There is just too much to know in too many areas. I think of it as journey of discovery not an end goal.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Very insightful, Jason. I am approaching it from a standpoint on building on my current bank of accomplishment, like an evolution of sorts. When I have a technique down in the darkroom, I seem to be bored by it - it's not a challenge anymore. Useful as it may seem, I'd rather be trying new things.

No end all solutions, but a constant exploration. Your notion about the soul is just right for me, and I agree wholeheartedly. I really try hard to pour my soul on paper when I photograph and print. That is my ultimate goal, and of course it's a mission impossible, but it makes for a very interesting journey.

- Thomas

Exactly. The masters are the ones who never stop exploring. Photography isn't a set of definitions or technical standards. Real photography is in the soul, and grows as the soul grows. The questions are such that the real answer cannot be fully understood at any one time, but rather over the course of experience and life. My epiphanies are built on each other. There is not one big one.