Please add your $.02 worth...

[bobbysandstrom]

Being as there are so many talented/creative/knowedgeable/experienced members of this great website, I propose a new forum heading entitled "Creative." A forum which people can contribute creative ideas from picture making strategies to mounting the final print. I thought of this because I wanted to share the way I study photographs, whether mine or someone elses, in order to consciously gain something from them. It really helps me with my own awareness when setting out to make a photograph. So here is my $.02 worth:


I ask myself the basic what, when, where, why, and how questions. For example...

what time of day is it
what time of year is it
what angle is the light coming from
what does the photo invoke from me emotionally if anything
what lens was used
what was the photographer trying to show me
what makes up the dark tones
what makes up the light tones
what makes up the mid tones
what makes up the negative space
what do the edges look like
what is the subject
what are the supporting elements
what would I do to make the photo different or better
etc

when was the photo shot (in terms of years)

where was the photo taken
where are the dark tones
where are the light tones
where are the mid tones
where was the camera placed
where did the photographer crop
where are the lines, shapes, forms, textures
where is the subject
where are the supporting elements
etc

why is the photo pleasing
why is the photo displeasing
why are the tones arranged the way they are
why is the subject placed like it is
why is the photo cropped like it is
why was the photo shot when it was shot in terms of light

how can I incorporate what I see into my future photos
how might I crop the photo differently (if it bothers me)
how might I re-frame the subject and or tones


I think you get the idea. I don't actually go through this list by reading it, I simply ask myself as many questions as I can think of when I look through photo books or at prints etc.

As a result of doing this, it makes me so much more aware of these details when I'm actually shooting. It's sort of like thoroughly checking the edges of your frame. When starting out, most of us are initially unaware of the edges. We quickly learn to look out for them. The more we shoot the more we learn from our mistakes and the more our mental list of things to avoid or look for when making a photo begins to grow. I find by asking myself these questions, the process is sped along. You begin to do things on more of a subconscious level.

So, if you have anything to contribute that might be helpful in terms of accomplishing something more creatively, I'd love to learn from you.

Thanks

Bob

 

[Ray Heath]

g'day Bob
my guiding consideration is always the subject
what is the subject?
how can i present it in an interesting way?
what are the techniques that i could use to enhance it?
how do i want my viewer to perceive it?

i suspect you'll get few postings for this thread, it seems the people here have a lot say when it's to do with opinions on materials or equipment, but they have clearly stated, in other threads, a distain for art

 

[ann]

Ray,

I think your statement regarding a distain for art a bit harsh for someone who hasn't been here for long.

Here is just one thread where postings regarding some of these issues are discussed.

There are others as well, and from time to time this discussion takes place in the chat room.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[gnashings]

g'day Bob
my guiding consideration is always the subject
what is the subject?
how can i present it in an interesting way?
what are the techniques that i could use to enhance it?
how do i want my viewer to perceive it?

i suspect you'll get few postings for this thread, it seems the people here have a lot say when it's to do with opinions on materials or equipment, but they have clearly stated, in other threads, a distain for art

Ray,

I think that is a very sweeping statement to make about a community of 10,000+.
Also, there is far less in the way of definitives on the subject of art - due to the very nature of the subject - than there is, lets say, about the developing times for a film in a specific developer. Its a lot harder to give a "yes" or "no" answer. It is also a lot easier to offend someone, hurt their feelings, or make them feel excluded when making a criticism of their creativity, than it is when commenting on proper or improper technique or equipment. Most people here know that. If I tell you that your photo is overexposed, or improperly developed, I am simply stating a technical fact, one from which you can hopefully learn to make you a better photographer. If you wanted to know how to make the sky darker in a photo, or how to print a particularily contrasty negative, there is a wealth of knowledge that can give you a definitive answer.
On the other hand, if I tell you that your image is pointless, lacks content and originality (or taste, or creativity, or impact, etc.) - then its a whole different story. All of a sudden I am not making a factual diagnosis of technique, I am attacking something that hopefully was born of your artistic toil and contains large parts of your heart and soul, creative essence and probably a piece of you as a person. So people tread lightly, and generally don't offer their opinions of that sort unless they are requested, i.e.: in the critique forum. They don't want to come across like know-it-alls who make sweeping satements doomed to inaccuracy (imagine that...).
If you feel the shortage of artistic content, take a "stroll" through the galleries.
Also, the word is "disdain". Look it up. While you're there, look up "pretentious".

*****

As to the original topic of this thread, I can't say I have an approach that is quite as thought out. To me, what separates art from just a representation of something is its ability to convey (and evoke) emotion. For example, your driver's license photo is not really a portrait - but it does fit all the criteria on the most technical level. The first (and as such most crucial) judgement I make is the ability to captivate me, capture my attention and make me look again. That is the bulk of it. Then, I ask myself what I would do differently to make it better - the shorter that list, the better the work. This includes the technical aspects - only in so far as looking if the technical ability or lack thereof in any way detracts from the impact. Then I tend to sleep on it. If I still think of the image (or whatever the work is) the next morning, if I want to revisit it again - then I know I am truly taken by it.
This explains some of my cryptic comments that I am sure puzzle people when left beneath their postings in the gallery. Things like "I just had to see it again today - still love it!".
And the longer that lasts, the more I love the work of art. I can still remember the first time I saw a Van Gogh picture. The night sky, the swirling stars... wow. I know it was great, not because school taught me that, but because over twenty years later, I still get a shiver of excitement.


Cheers,

Peter.

 

[rbarker]

Bob, I'd tell you all my creative secrets, but then I'd have to shoot you. ;-)

Seriously, I think both the process of creating images and the process of examining and responding to the work of others has a lot to do with one's personal style or "vision", and how well-defined that vision happens to be. That is the filter through which we tend to see things, and it tends to be pretty personal, I think.

Your list does, however, provide a good basis for objective analysis. But, I think it's what one does with the answers to those questions that really matters.

 

[avandesande]

usually I get a manic excitement about photographing something. that is my criteria.

 

[df cardwell]

Great stuff Bob

I get to the answer in a more intuitive way, but usually have an 'analytical' check list to cut down on disasters...

1. Is there a tree growing out of the subject's head ?

My Intuitive Two Step ?

1. Cover one eye to see how the image will look in 2 dimensions. The transformation of 3 dimensions to 2 was hard for me to learn.

2. Squint. As the subject darkens and gets a little blurry, I can see if what I think the picture is about is the strongest element-- or not.

- Composing upside down helps

I have a couple viewfinders ( Linhof, for example ) with a 90 filter in inside. Just to be sure I'm not letting the conceptual, intellectual value of the image overwhelm the visual quality.

And I talk to myself !

Weird.

.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Even in high school when using 35mm I used to use a tripod for my nature images, so working slowly comes naturally to me. When I got into 4x5, for the first 5 or 6 years I used to take only one image of any one subject matter...this meant I would slowly walk around and move away or closer in until I found what I thought was the strongest composition. That demanded of me to question all the whys and hows before the image was taken. I've since lightened up and realize that strong subjects are few and far between, so I'll now take a few variations.

Not for everybody, but it worked for me...

Murray

 

[blansky]

Not to be negative on this but I think that intuition and unconscious thought are my criteria for photographing anything. In other words, see it, enjoy the emotional response, and photograph it.

I do also believe that critique is necessary afterwards when viewing the print and then incorporate that into your subconscious for the next picture. But I think over thinking at the time of exposure makes for a too deliberate picture.

Also by the time you've pondered the thing, the magic may have already left the scene. Magic is shy, it doesn't like being stared at.

And like that......................it's gone.


Michael

 

[BrianShaw]

Too many quesitons; too much thinking; too cerebral.

If it works for you, I'm happy. It certainly won't work for me.

 

[bobbysandstrom]

Please don't misunderstand. When I'm photographing I'm working more on instincts and emotion. My list of items is for when I'm studying photographs whether mine or someone elses in a book or print. I find by deliberately asking questions I am able to learn in a way that would otherwise take a lot longer if done by happenstance. I wanted to share this exercise because in the field I caught myself doing/seeing things instinctually that I wasn't even aware of before I started asking questions. It was a very cool experience. In fact, the more you do "right" instictually, the better apt you are to quickly capture that elusive magic moment in a way that'll be to your liking.

 

[avandesande]

I don't want to be cliche (i know many of the masters have said this) but I seem to learn more about visualization from looking at paintings and other art.
Looking at photographs depresses me a bit because there is so much great stuff out there.

 

[df cardwell]

good stuff bob

d

 

[BrianShaw]

Yup.. good stuff.

But, Bob... my response remains the same. I think so much at work and have to be analytical that I try not to think too hard about "art".

Here's my list of questions:

Art analysis:

1. Do I like the picture (yes/no)
2. Do I like the way it was rendered (yes/no)

In response to question 1, I decide if I look longer... or move on.

Only occasionally do I conciously ask a third question: "would I like to make art like this."

Photographing:

1. Do I see something I'd like to make into a picture (yes/no)
2. Am I rendering it to the best of my abilities and the circumstances (yes/no)

In response to question 2, I decide if I trip the shutter... or move on. Too often, I trip the shutter no matter what.

Maybe I can benefit from using more of the questions you suggest!

 

[jovo]

Though my strongest response to a subject is usually an emotional one (and very mysterious to me at that), I do try to look at what's in front of me in terms of value, contrast and design. In fact, I've come to the point that almost everything I look at that isn't overly familiar gets at least a fleeting assessment in those terms. It's certainly not the best thing to be doing when driving, but it happens more and more often while doing so. As many have said, and will say, when something looks right...gels I suppose...it's intuitive and immediate. The longer I do this, the more satisfying and successful (at least to me) my vision gets to be. My biggest regret is that some of the best photographs I've ever 'made' just didn't happen to occur when I was able to use a camera.

 

[bobbysandstrom]

I tell you it's a lot of fun. Try this. The next time you are looking through a photo book ask yourself a few simple questions. Ask those same questions with every photograph you look at in the book. Really look and focus.

1.) WHAT are the low tones in the image. In other words, what comprises the low ones. Do the same to the highs.

2.) WHERE are the lows/highs in terms of location
That's it!

Do this for a while.

Now when you're in the field you will find you have an increased awareness of these tones and can incorporate this knowledge into your picture taking. I can't tell you in what capacity you will apply this knowledge but I bet you will apply it in someway. Even if its by doing something you avoided doing in the past because you found you liked Joe Smoe's photo and he used that tone in the way you normally tried to avoid. Whatever the case, I believe by doing this you are making a conscious effort to grow and will be rewarded with more photos that are to your liking.

 

[MattKing]

My Intuitive Two Step ?

1. Cover one eye to see how the image will look in 2 dimensions. The transformation of 3 dimensions to 2 was hard for me to learn.

2. Squint. As the subject darkens and gets a little blurry, I can see if what I think the picture is about is the strongest element-- or not.

- Composing upside down helps

And I talk to myself !

So if we come across someone standing on their head, covering one eye, squinting through the other, and talking to himself, we will know it is you!

 

[Charles Webb]

I don't have a check list or anything like that, I simply look at something, a photo opportunity, a finished print, or painting and I have an instant something that makes me stop and investigate that something that triggered my "like" or "dislike" mode. That second glance or thought seems to happen automatically, or is beyond my controll. It does give me the information instantly that something wonderful or awful has come to my attention. I have never had to study an image to discover or decide weather I like it or not, I simply do or don't. If I don't like an image, that forces me to try to decide why? Then the study of the image begins. I may then make a mental check list of all the likes or good points and the same with the points that bother me. I seldom change my mind after the study period. It seems that my instant or first view triggers something in me that for some reason has been very accurate for me in my many years. I just cannot anylize what happens when I see something that shouts "beauty", I simply react..

I have seen and been in wonderful places when it was all happening, but found that the camera to record it was safely at home in a closet.

Wish I had the answers for "Why"


Charlie........................

 

[Kino]

1. Cover one eye to see how the image will look in 2 dimensions. The transformation of 3 dimensions to 2 was hard for me to learn.

2. Squint. As the subject darkens and gets a little blurry, I can see if what I think the picture is about is the strongest element-- or not.

- Composing upside down helps

I have a couple viewfinders ( Linhof, for example ) with a 90 filter in inside. Just to be sure I'm not letting the conceptual, intellectual value of the image overwhelm the visual quality.

And I talk to myself !

Weird.

All great techniques!

I would only add a small bit of dark smoked glass; flip it in and out of your field of vision to get a good sense of how your light values will end up in b&w (if you are shooting b&w).

Oh and the talking, not a problem, as long as you don't answer back... ;-)

 

[joeyk49]

I'm sort of with Brian in my approach to photography.

When I view a photograph for the first time, I tell myself if I like it or not. Do I linger on the photo? Does it draw me in? Then I start to ask myself, what it is about the photo that causes this? Only then do I start to think of technical aspects of the image; how did he/she do that?

When looking at a subject, I ask myself, "Do I like what I see? Why?" and then I go through a process of how I think I would like to make the photograph...composition, exposure, etc.

My lack of technical proficiency may be the cause of my reliance on a lot of intuitiveness. But I also fear spending too much time on the technical nature of the image at the risk of diminishing the excitement of the activity(Sort of along the lines of Blansky's commment). This is especially true when attempting street photography or doing candid work.

But the thread has really gotten me to think on different aspects of the art, which until now when unconsidered by me....thanks Bob.