pleasing photographers, or pleasing the general public (viewers)

Ed Sukach · Dec 15, 2006

flash19901 said:
... I mean, you gotta be true to yourself. Ansel Adams came back to a negative years after originally made and did it totally different and wondered why he didn't do that from the start. So don't get down by the words of others. It's easy to criticize someone else's work if asked, because you may not be aware of the BS&T going into the work. Much harder for oneself. Also much more valuable. Be your own worst critic.

I WAS agreeing ... up to that last line. I would suggest that the goal is to be your own BEST critic - not worst.

We should all push ourselves to improve ourselves whenever possible.

Now I'll disagree - big time! "Pushing" can only lead to "overworking" ... and that is a bad thing in photography, driving in the winter, flycasting, or pencil sketching.

One must be "delicate", and let things flow.

I have *VIVID* memories of really TRYING!!! - *Pushing!!* in trying to make the **perfect** cast with a fly rod... complete with death grip, lots of arm strength and all. Not pretty. About as "pretty" as a severly overworked pencil sketch.

catem · Dec 15, 2006

It's a tricky one to answer - yes, you need to be your own best judge. No, you shouldn't pay undue attention to others and doubt yourself or put yourself under pressure.

but....listening to others can be instructive, and even if what they've got to say is not particularly welcome, it doesn't mean it's not useful.

The key is - do you like the way the print is, is that what you wanted, or did you want something diffferent but ended up with it like that because you didn't know how to achieve what you wanted?

I have prints from years ago that I was delighted with at the time, and now I look at them and ...well, I know that I have moved on. In the same way, often with negs I leave it for a few months before printing, because I'm too close the work to decide which ones I really like. Prints also get left frequently for a period, and when I go back to them, I know if they have worked or not.

You'll know the answer to this one if you put a print away, and bring it out again later when you can see it objectively.

Cate

blansky · Dec 15, 2006

What other photographers bring to the table is critique that is generally technical in nature. What the subject brings is something else all together.

You as a photographer have to decide what, if anything you wish to have influence your thinking about your work. The halo effect is generally a sign of incompetent (not competent) work and it sounds like once it was pointed out to you, you realized that it probably was substandard.

So what do you do about it? Well you can do nothing, and say you like it that way, or you can learn how to deal with it.

Because in the end whether we admit it or not, we all wished to be appreciated by not only the great unwashed public but also by our peers as well. And the fact is, that the public or your subject usually knows nothing about the craft and only what strikes them about a picture. You as a photographer owe it to youself to advance in your craft.

However if you are satisfied with the picture (which it doesn't sound like you are) then leave it be.

Michael

jovo · Dec 15, 2006

I don't recall exactly, but I don't think you stated whether or not you solicited the other photographer's opinion. If you did, then it seems to me you should attend to the point of his crituque unless you actually wanted to have the halo in the print. As said so often above, only you are the final arbiter of your own work, but if you don't seek critiques and then develop the techniques you need to be a better printer, you'll obviously remain at your current level until you do.

jstraw · Dec 15, 2006

jovo said:
I don't recall exactly, but I don't think you stated whether or not you solicited the other photographer's opinion. If you did, then it seems to me you should attend to the point of his crituque unless you actually wanted to have the halo in the print.

Soliciting a critique should never be construed as an expressed intent to act upon the criticism. I've been soliciting feedback in another thread for a website design. It's been valuable but I haven't changed everything someone suggested that I should...nor did I ever expect that I would.

jovo · Dec 15, 2006

jstraw said:
Soliciting a critique should never be construed as an expressed intent to act upon the criticism.

I certainly agree, but it also depends on the nature of the critique. An assessment of aesthetic concerns is a lot different, imho, from one regarding a significant technical flaw. If your website has a programming error, and it's pointed out to you, I would expect you'd attend to that directly. OTOH, if someone doesn't like the background color...well....that's a lot different.

Ed Sukach · Dec 15, 2006

jovo said:
... but if you don't seek critiques and then develop the techniques you need to be a better printer, you'll obviously remain at your current level until you do.

I do NOT believe that the *only* way to improve necessarily requires a critique from someone - anyone else.

It is a matter of motivation - and direction. I am trying to project my involvement with the photograph. I try to gauge the success of that projection from the responses I receive from those who experience my work. I am the only one who can see both the content - what I see in the work - and what I perceive to be the emotional reaction to my work.
That is the value of the information I glean from critique ... but I will NEVER allow it to affect WHAT I choose to do... and that could - and HAS - included blown highlights; "halos"; deep, featureless shadows; ... "soft focus" ... and a LOT of other supposedly "obvious defects".

In my opinion, if one listens too closely (a sub-set of "blind obedience") to the critiques of others, they will NOT "stay at the same level" ... and that new direction wil be DOWN.

Roger Hicks · Dec 15, 2006

rjas said:
i know theres always room for improvement but i think im taking the side of making my photos / prints for the general public (regular viewers and people that buy books or prints for example) rather than other photographers. what do you say?

There are two separate issues here, insecurity and improvement.

We're ALL insecure -- or if we're not, we're probably not sane. Even if we are perfectly happy with something, and think it can't be improved, we still need reassurance that worthless criticism is in fact worthless.

Improvement is another matter. As you say, there's always room for improvement, and from your own words you weren't totally happy with this print: you didn't want to use up more time and paper. All the other photographer did was to confirm your own suspicions.

If you want to produce pics that you're truly happy with -- pics where you can honestly say, "No, I like it this way, and it wouldn't be improved if I did it different," then time and paper (and study and learning) are the only route.

To reinforce what others have said, if you're really happy with it, no problem. If you aren't -- you already knew the answer before you posted the question.

As Ed says, every 'fault' in the book can be used creatively, but you can't fool yourself that you meant to do something when you didn't, even if you try to bolster your confidence with the approval of someone who probably doesn't see much photography, and would probably like a subtler burn even better than the haloed version. When it comes to 'people who buy books or prints', if they buy books of photographs, or photographic prints, they probably do know a good deal about what makes a good photograph, and their opinions are likely to be very close to yours, i.e. they'll know when something isn't really right; when it's 'good enough'; and when it's brilliant.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com -- where there's quite a lot of free material in the Photo School about printing, as well as a free module about critiques).

catem · Dec 15, 2006

I've been thinking about this.

Admittedly, my current practice of shelving some negs or prints nowadays is wholly for aesthetic reasons. I feel I know what I want technically, and more or less how to achieve it. (Of course, the two are not necessarily separate).

However, when I was less sure of my printing there is NO WAY I would have let a technical mistake pass, if that's what it was rather than a conscious aesthetic decision, because as a woman and at the beginning it is necessary to prove at all times your capability in technical areas, in order to avoid disdain from 'legitimate' male photographers.

What that means I don't know, except that in a case like this I know I would have felt mortified and instantly learnt how to master the technicalities.

When I'd learnt how to do it his way, and still liked my own better, I would have told him to s*d off.

jstraw · Dec 15, 2006

Stargazer said:
...because as a woman and at the beginning it is necessary to prove at all times your capability in technical areas, in order to avoid disdain from 'legitimate' male photographers.

I understand that many women relate to the world in this way and that many men give women cause to..but I think being new and unskilled at one's craft is enough to cope with without having to worry that people will see deficiencies of gender in the final print. I can't imagine how anyone could even subconsciously support a bias that suggests photographs will be better if their maker has testicles.

Nicholas Lindan · Dec 15, 2006

1) The customer is always right.

2) Even if the customer is wrong, he is right.

3) As soon as you tell him he is wrong, he is no longer a customer.

4) There are some customers one is better off without.

catem · Dec 15, 2006

jstraw said:
I understand that many women relate to the world in this way and that many men give women cause to..but I think being new and unskilled at one's craft is enough to cope with without having to worry that people will see deficiencies of gender in the final print.

You can say that again.

jstraw said:
I can't imagine how anyone could even subconsciously support a bias that suggests photographs will be better if their maker has testicles.

Really?? :rolleyes:

Ed Sukach · Dec 15, 2006

As I've written before, I am NEVER- or have I ever been "satisfied" with my work. I can always see something else - another reason why it is not PERFECT!!!. However, I have come to the point where I know that, imperfection or not, I have to stop, somewhere, and go on to the next one...

Cheryl Jacobs is right ... "Your journey is your own journey. You will never arrive. No one ever does."

As to some "expert" who KNOWS what is "right" and what is "wrong" ... I can only reflect on the few that I've met who claim to have that ability - and the common characteristics they share. Not good.

I've had the great fortune to have met some of the "great lights" in photography (although I don't know one who would claim to be among them) and the one thing they all seem to share was the attitude expressed in that interview with Henri Cartier-Bresson:

Charlie Rose: "What makes a great photograph?"
Henri Cartier-Bresson: "What makes a great photograph? Geometry, shape ... "
CR: "You don't know?"
HCB: "No, I don't."
CR: "And it can't be taught?"
HCB: "No ... it can't."

Now ... success as being measured by achieving "what you consciously set out to do."
- What is then to be done with the image thqt you have produced unintentionally - by some stroke of luck ... or some pre-conscious synapse ... that you discover after the contact print; that fascinates and entrances you. Would that be a "failure" - only deserving of being torn into pieces and deposited in the circular file?

What about Ansel Adams' "fortunate mistakes"?

Ed Sukach · Dec 15, 2006

jstraw said:
I understand that many women relate to the world in this way and that many men give women cause to..but I think being new and unskilled at one's craft is enough to cope with without having to worry that people will see deficiencies of gender in the final print. I can't imagine how anyone could even subconsciously support a bias that suggests photographs will be better if their maker has testicles.

Hear! HEAR!!!

catem · Dec 15, 2006

My point wasn't so much that some people support the idea that testicles = better prints. It's not as crude as that.

Sadly it's more to do with in-built bad voices that say, if you let them "you're not good enough...you're not good enough." What struck me was the realisation that at a certain point in my photographic career I would most definitely NOT have had the confidence to doubt a 'proper' photographer's word - male or female. This lack of confidence is common to everyone. (But most women particularly, at some time or another, sometimes MOST of the time at some time or another, think they are probably a fraud).

Oh yeah - some people do think testicles = better prints. I can testicle - I mean testify - to that

blansky · Dec 15, 2006

Nicholas Lindan said:
1) The customer is always right.

2) Even if the customer is wrong, he is right.

3) As soon as you tell him he is wrong, he is no longer a customer.

4) There are some customers one is better off without.

I don't know why this tired old cliche keeps being bandied around. The customer is rarely right and bowing down to them makes you both wrong.

The trick is to educate him. If you consider yourself a skilled artist there is no reason why you can't do that.

Michael

jstraw · Dec 15, 2006

Stargazer said:
Really?? :rolleyes:

Yep, really.

jstraw · Dec 15, 2006

Stargazer said:
Sadly it's more to do with in-built bad voices that say, if you let them "you're not good enough...you're not good enough."

See, the thing is, everyone has to fight those voices. Women understandably feel outnumbered in professions where they have traditionally been underrepresented. It's not hard to see where feeling judged against the prevailing standards of one's peers can become confused with being judged against the performance of men, when the peer-group is predominantly male. Especially when men compete and communicate, in general, differently than women do. I can assure you that being inexperienced and male is a substantially similar experience. Attributing one's feeling of having a lack of status to the most obvious distinction between oneself and others can lead to erroneous conclusions.

Bromo33333 · Dec 15, 2006

I think it all depends upon your intended audience - artistic work is almost always done with some sot of audience in mind (even if the audience is the artist only).

Ed Sukach · Dec 16, 2006

jstraw said:
See, the thing is, everyone has to fight those voices...
... Attributing one's feeling of having a lack of status to the most obvious distinction between oneself and others can lead to erroneous conclusions.

True. Well said.

Some photographers are so insecure that they feel the only way to survive is to hide the light from others beneath bushel baskets.

- See: "Critics"

catem · Dec 16, 2006

jstraw said:
See, the thing is, everyone has to fight those voices. Women understandably feel outnumbered in professions where they have traditionally been underrepresented. It's not hard to see where feeling judged against the prevailing standards of one's peers can become confused with being judged against the performance of men, when the peer-group is predominantly male. Especially when men compete and communicate, in general, differently than women do. I can assure you that being inexperienced and male is a substantially similar experience. Attributing one's feeling of having a lack of status to the most obvious distinction between oneself and others can lead to erroneous conclusions.

Of course men feel it too - as I said in my post. I would never wish to imply otherwise.

I was simply making the point that FOR MYSELF I would have at one time felt bound to improve my technique if it was criticised. INCLUDED in the reasons why I would have felt like that is the fact that as a woman there is pressure to prove yourself which is particularly keenly felt in technical areas. I wasn't saying whether that was a good or a bad thing, least of all that it would be anyone's fault but my own.

It was just a personal reflection. I answered the posters queries in a previous post.

I stand by my view that it is important to listen to what others say, but I do agree that to be too sensitive to others views can be undermining and unhelpful. It's hard to trust your own judgement, and it's a bit of a rocky road, but being able to make those judgements is part of 'growth' as a photographer.

Cate

Roger Hicks · Dec 16, 2006

Stargazer said:
I stand by my view that it is important to listen to what others say, but I do agree that to be too sensitive to others views can be undermining and unhelpful. It's hard to trust your own judgement, and it's a bit of a rocky road, but being able to make those judgements is part of 'growth' as a photographer.

Cate

Dear Cate,

My wife Frances Schultz completely agrees with your points about male chauvinism. Quite often, I have to remind manufacturers that she's the darkroom specialist, not me.

The most amusing example I can think of, though, is someone I hardly know and have only met a few times. She is or was an Ilford (Switzerland) emulsion chemist whose name (shamefully) I forget: we met at trade shows occasionally.

In her late 20s and early 30s she still looked like a very pretty schoolgirl, and it was always a pleasure to watch her sweet smile as she demolished those who told her that she wouldn't understand complicated things like that -- and to watch the dawning horror on the men's faces.

Cheers,

Roger

jstraw · Dec 16, 2006

Stargazer said:
...the fact that as a woman there is pressure to prove yourself which is particularly keenly felt in technical areas.

Cate, I'm not meaning to harp on this point and hope you don't feel berated but it's this "fact" that I feel bears examination.

Certainly there are men that feel women are inferior. I believe that in general though, the pressure to prove onesself has nothing to do with gender. It's not there for you "as a woman," it's just there. I think I described why I feel it's understandable that women could ascribe that pressure to their gender and why I think that's an erroneous conclusion more often than not.

Even in the days when chauvanistic males would openly state that a woman's place is in the home or whatever, I never heard that as a claim that women *couldn't* perform the tasks but rather that they *shoudn't*. For the most part, *shouldn't* or in particular the "pretty good for a girl" damnation by faint praise dealt more with tasks that are physical than those that are cerebral.

If my position is unconvincing, we can respectfully disagree and I won't belabor it further.

Michael

firecracker · Dec 16, 2006

I sometimes strongly feel I need a mentor, not a teacher or instructor on photography before having to deal with a potential audience because I already know what the general technical requirements are to produce decent prints. I think it has more to do with having some kind of emotional and psychological support that helps to achieve my goal eventually. And I seek out honest feedback.

But then I'm genrally not really a good student type, so that gets in a way. I get very hesitant when someone tells me what to do and/or what not to do.

I think just dealing with the audiences (clients/customers, gallery/museum goers, etc) who are not the mentors, can be very hard and not so helpful. The worst thing that could happen is that they mislead me and my work to a totally irrelevant and undesirable direction whether it's a business or not.

eddym · Dec 16, 2006

Stargazer said:
Oh yeah - some people do think testicles = better prints.

Not me! I have better uses for mine than making prints!

pleasing photographers, or pleasing the general public (viewers)

Ed Sukach

catem

blansky

jovo

Membership Council

jstraw

jovo

Membership Council

Ed Sukach

Roger Hicks

catem

jstraw

Nicholas Lindan

Advertiser

catem

Ed Sukach

Ed Sukach

catem

blansky

jstraw

jstraw

Bromo33333

Ed Sukach

catem

Roger Hicks

jstraw

firecracker

eddym

pleasing photographers, or pleasing the general public (viewers)

Membership Council

Membership Council

Advertiser

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency