Don’t take it too seriously… even some of us “takers” are elitist, egotistical, and pretentious. LOL. Happy New Year, folks!
It is an old thing taught that you should make photos not just take them. Implying that making photos is creative and taking photos is not. I was taught that in photo school in the 1970s and I am pretty sure you could find lots of quotes saying you need to learn to make photos rather than take photos. So maybe this discussion was not intended to be judgmental but you can easily see how it might be interpreted that way..
Neither (or both) -- a creator.
You can call me Al.Kind of like AI, then.
Take, like to take from someone or steal off the internet? In that case I'm a maker.
More like to take your medicine.
Or:
This is hilarious and hits so very close! One of the things I like to repeat in my head when I'm out taking pictures is "I take, I don't bother", which is a line that I took from an episode of The Walking Dead. The people who said so are a very mean group of people with nefarious intentions, and it cracks me up to think of the phrase yet it also rings true...I take a photo. By doing so, I actually remove something from the original scene/object/person, and appropriate it. I then hide it away and do with it as I please, as part of the fetid, fermenting mass of images and technology that I culture up in my room in the attic, without ever giving anything back to the world. I'm a surgeon with the mentality of a thief and the dexterity of a drunk elephant.
Yeah.
In the studio or in pretty specific circumstances outside where I know what I'm after - it's directed/driven by me. Guess that's "making", and it's where I'm most comfortable.
Sometimes I can get in the zone mentally and take unplanned pictures successfully - this is situational, needs a stimulus like an event or some sort of foray or visit. That feels like"taking". In part it's (personal) documentary.
What I have always struggled with is "street" photography the way it is portrayed by influencers/whatever... I have no idea or understanding or why on earth people do it, even though I can (pretty rarely) appreciate what they produce either artistically or as some form of documentary. Trying to understand it by viewing thousands of street photography "examples" hasn't yielded me any tangible empathy for the pursuit.
Apologies for any digression.
Yeah, but Duke took it from Billy Strayhorn.
In my case, a maker. Never a 'taker', except if I have my phone handy and see something worth a clumsy snap!
I cannot remember off the top of my head who this quote is attributed to, but it holds true:
'Photographs are not taken, and they certainly are not snapped. They are made.'
Was it Eudora Welty? or Adams?
If it's not a print....I haven't made anything....
Some of us prefer photographic processes and approaches that have some similarities with foraging for our food.
Some of us prefer photographic processes and approaches that have some similarities with planting and cultivating our food.
Many of us mix the two.
For all of us, there is the potential of an enjoyable feast.
What if it is a projectable slide?
After you take photographs, do you return then so others can also take photographs? Or do you just keep them?
Was Atget more of a Taker or a Maker? He contact printed his negatives, but then toned them gold. I therefore think he was mainly a Taker, but a bit of a Maker. Bresson was a Taker and no Maker. AA was a Taker, but perhaps more of a Maker.
This is hilarious and hits so very close! One of the things I like to repeat in my head when I'm out taking pictures is "I take, I don't bother", which is a line that I took from an episode of The Walking Dead. The people who said so are a very mean group of people with nefarious intentions, and it cracks me up to think of the phrase yet it also rings true...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?