- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 7,533
- Format
- 35mm RF
But he has a very valid point. The images of countless photographers before many of the theories you mention are still classics and not dependent on any theory.
How did we all get along before we had ... Chemistry theory, string theory, relativity theory, you name it theory ... ?
The prevalence of this sort of anti-intellectualism is very worrying, it seems to me.
Why think about anything?
That's been my experience too [and I was fortunate to assist with the workshops at Duckspool circa 1999, which really broadened my horizons]. I'd also recommend the previously mentioned books by Robert Adams,Paul Hill and AD Coleman, plus Art and Fear [Ted Orland], and On Being A Photographer [David Hurn and Bill Jay]. Non photography books have always been a real source of inspiration for me as well, as you might guess from my sig! For instance A Sand Country Almanac {Aldo Leopold] and Mountaineering In Scotland [WH Murray].I disagree. I think a good background in Critical theory is important and that self criticism and self analysis are key to improving your own work in any art form including photography.
I'd been making images for over 20 years and working in photography professionally, also commissioning work from other photographers before changing direction in 1986. I'd done very little personal work between 76-86 mainly die to lack of time.
So from 1986 onwards I began re-evaluating my personal work and soon decided on some major changes, th edecision, at the same timew I began reading Critical theory books. They made sense and as I began making new bodies of work I actually found it easier to make the work I wanted.
It's not just what you photograph, it's what are you trying to say, who or what is your audience, and every now and again it's necessary to re-evaluate.
Maybe the most important dedision I made was to produce bodies of work, coherent possible exhibition sets, that definitely came from reading numerous books, theory and mongraphs.
The changes in direction and reading Critical theory, then going on workshops (Peter Goldfield, Pail Hill, Peter Catrell, Fay Godwin & John Blakemore), just confirmed I was going in the right direction. About 10 yeas later I decided I wanted to learn more about contextualising my work, it was years since my last academic study and I made a decision to go back to University and study Industrial Archaeology (my work had gone in that direction). Later 2001-3 I did an MA in Photography, ultimately that came down to being able to analyse your own work, contextualise it with reards to photography/photographers as awhole, work to chosen criteria.
The bottom line is that I'd chosen the right way for myself in the late 1980's, I'm critical of my own work, edit quite ruthlessly. I'm lucky that I've mingled with like minded photographers who's opinions I respect and that has helped as well.
Ian
I can't make sense of your statement Clive, I suspect you may be chasing a straw man, or simply misunderstanding my rebuttal
Perhaps what's most important is fiding what direction to go in taking the randomness out of what you're shooting.
I doubt art criticism ever directly improved anyone's photographs.
But its funny - if you read a lot of art criticism, you start to notice a lot of things, and when you notice things, you tend to see even more things.
And sometimes, as a result, both your photographs, and other people's photographs, become more interesting.
And somehow, I think more interesting photographs are better photographs.
Back in the 1960s camera club criticism improved my composition and cropping skills.
Camera clubs are great for learning the fundamentals, but staying too long, they become stifling.
Time for you to go, grasshopper!
....On Photography by Susan Sontag. I don't want to limit this conversation by bookending it (so to speak) with these two classic texts,...
It was so good I threw my copy on the fire rather then return it to charity shop, for recycling.
Some have suggested A.D. Coleman as a good read. He's a self-described destruction critic (see his recent rants on Robert Capa). Judy Seigel (issue #5 of "World Journal of post-factory photography") provides the best antidote to Coleman's tirades and self-inflation.
A sampler of various writings on photography would be Ashley la Grange "Basic Critical Theory for photographers" . But I'm still wading thru it.
Photography is a bit like quantum physics, in the fact that you either have coherence or decoherence.
All possible images exist in our photographs in superposition until we develop them?
All possible images exist in our photographs in superposition until we develop them?
It was so good I threw my copy on the fire rather then return it to charity shop, for recycling.
When I look at a Van Gogh painting I can see sheer brilliance and genius in his depiction in paint. In the same way I can look at photographic images by Eugene Atget. I dont need to read a 28 page description of image analysis to appreciate the work. The evidence is there before me.
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?