Why are photographers so "fussy"?

[Tel]

I'm reminded of a lighting workshop a friend and I did years ago for some TV people. We lit a particular scene with my friend's favorite device: a white bed sheet stretched over a frame and mounted on a couple of c-stands. After the demonstration, a couple of the attendees (both male) came up to us and asked what brand of sheets we'd used. I still believe they were serious.

 

[Moose22]

Those are exactly the type of people that make me dislike photographers, Tel.

And I joke about that, but I really do dislike what I refer to as "photography enthusiasts", which I mean as a pejorative. People who would fight over whether Canon or Nikon is better are the obvious example. Whatever you enjoy using that works with your use case is the best, always has been, but especially so nowadays when modern digital cameras are all so darned good!

It's less hardware focused here, but even this place isn't perfect. I honestly dislike the attitudes of many of the people here, though I try not to call them out too often. I'm here to learn things, and appreciate knowledge. I tend more to praise what I like, or talk about techniques, unless I'm in a grouchy mood like today.

My point is that enthusiasts have made me not bother with photography clubs and the like. I went to one many years ago and disliked most of the folks in the room, and haven't gone back. I just don't see the hobby like they do.

Actually, here's my prime example. As a very young man in the 90s I wrote for a magazine and also did my own photography for those articles as well as freelance work. Small time stuff, I was not making my living as a photographer, but I DID get photos published quite regularly.

Worked with a guy around 2000 who let me know he was a photographer and had once worked in a camera store, so one day I showed him a magazine with my photo on the cover and one of my favorites in the accompanying article. He looked at the photos, asked what camera I used, and when I told him (it was a 4004s or an EM, which was a junker I always had in my flight bag) he started off on how I wasn't a professional because I'd used that camera.

I wasn't a professional, he says. As he looks at a photograph I sold, that was published in a magazine, back in 1991 when you actually had to print those things on dead trees. He insisted on this even when someone else pointed out that the photo was good. All because of the gear I used at that moment.

These are photography enthusiasts. I'll also note that in the 4 years I knew that guy, never once did he ever show me a photograph he'd taken. It was all about snobbery, the "right" camera, the "right" lens, or whatever.

I love my cameras, but they're tools. I like taking pictures, and I like the process, but it never seems to matter what camera I had when I look at the negatives and scans. My favorite photos all still seem to look like me. I can even tell you what my mood was or what I was trying to achieve at the time by the composition of the photo. And if anyone ever says "It's so SHARP!" as their first response to seeing a photo I failed, because I am not taking pictures to prove I can focus well and hold still.

The brand of bedsheet folks are exactly the sort who inhabited the photography club a couple decades ago. They'd probably chat with old Frank, the Nikon snob, endlessly slagging on about how terrible the off brand is when you can't get proper 300 or better thread count egyptian cotton

 

[Cholentpot]

Those are exactly the type of people that make me dislike photographers, Tel.

And I joke about that, but I really do dislike what I refer to as "photography enthusiasts", which I mean as a pejorative. People who would fight over whether Canon or Nikon is better are the obvious example. Whatever you enjoy using that works with your use case is the best, always has been, but especially so nowadays when modern digital cameras are all so darned good!

It's less hardware focused here, but even this place isn't perfect. I honestly dislike the attitudes of many of the people here, though I try not to call them out too often. I'm here to learn things, and appreciate knowledge. I tend more to praise what I like, or talk about techniques, unless I'm in a grouchy mood like today.

My point is that enthusiasts have made me not bother with photography clubs and the like. I went to one many years ago and disliked most of the folks in the room, and haven't gone back. I just don't see the hobby like they do.

Actually, here's my prime example. As a very young man in the 90s I wrote for a magazine and also did my own photography for those articles as well as freelance work. Small time stuff, I was not making my living as a photographer, but I DID get photos published quite regularly.

Worked with a guy around 2000 who let me know he was a photographer and had once worked in a camera store, so one day I showed him a magazine with my photo on the cover and one of my favorites in the accompanying article. He looked at the photos, asked what camera I used, and when I told him (it was a 4004s or an EM, which was a junker I always had in my flight bag) he started off on how I wasn't a professional because I'd used that camera.

I wasn't a professional, he says. As he looks at a photograph I sold, that was published in a magazine, back in 1991 when you actually had to print those things on dead trees. He insisted on this even when someone else pointed out that the photo was good. All because of the gear I used at that moment.

These are photography enthusiasts. I'll also note that in the 4 years I knew that guy, never once did he ever show me a photograph he'd taken. It was all about snobbery, the "right" camera, the "right" lens, or whatever.

I love my cameras, but they're tools. I like taking pictures, and I like the process, but it never seems to matter what camera I had when I look at the negatives and scans. My favorite photos all still seem to look like me. I can even tell you what my mood was or what I was trying to achieve at the time by the composition of the photo. And if anyone ever says "It's so SHARP!" as their first response to seeing a photo I failed, because I am not taking pictures to prove I can focus well and hold still.

The brand of bedsheet folks are exactly the sort who inhabited the photography club a couple decades ago. They'd probably chat with old Frank, the Nikon snob, endlessly slagging on about how terrible the off brand is when you can't get proper 300 or better thread count egyptian cotton

I got published on the cover of a magazine around 2004 using a digital Canon point and shoot. I don't know what it was and at the time I had no clue about photography. Editor of mag called me up because the mag needed someone who was familiar with the location they needed. I snapped about 10 photos and gave the editor the camera as I didn't even know how to take out the card. My photo was on the cover the next week.

A decade and a half later I get occasional work from this same publication.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm reminded of a lighting workshop a friend and I did years ago for some TV people. We lit a particular scene with my friend's favorite device: a white bed sheet stretched over a frame and mounted on a couple of c-stands. After the demonstration, a couple of the attendees (both male) came up to us and asked what brand of sheets we'd used. I still believe they were serious.

Were the sheets clean?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Sorry for the weird double-quote.

Many non-photographers, and some photographers, see a photograph and go straight to the subject..."That's a cute puppy!" ...instead of approaching the photograph as an image of a (cute) puppy. One of the many hazards of photography.

As photographer working with the light on the landscape, I have to accept that many people will treat a show of my images more as a travelogue.

I've always liked travelogues. They take me away. The artsy landscapes are not representative of what it's really like for most visitors. So a straight shot of an area is often better as it allows people to realistically put themselves in the picture.

 

[Maris]

It is possible to refute the OP in every point of his extended post. And it is possible to do so in a cogent, considered, and consistent way. But producing such a dissertation may not change any minds. So I'll just mention one point.

I associate with people who make pictures. Some of them are photographers. They may or may not be artists but they act as if they are. A central concern in their output is the medium used to make the work.
The medium is not just fussiness or affectation. It is the component that carries information to the astute viewer about the artist’s relationship to their work. And the work's relationship to things in the real world.
Thinking about the medium employed, how it's employed, and its implications and connotations, enriches the art experience for the well informed spectator.

The alternative to caring about how and why pictures are made, to be content with no more than identifying subject matter seems to be a drab and malnourished experience. Taken too far it could hazard a descent into simplemindedness.

 

[Vaughn]

I've always liked travelogues. They take me away. The artsy landscapes are not representative of what it's really like for most visitors. So a straight shot of an area is often better as it allows people to realistically put themselves in the picture.

Exzactly my point!!

....but remember I am all artsy fartsy and do not dodge, burn, or crop...

Cute little 4x5 carbon print, Yosemite National Park in the Wawona area.
Best seen, IAHO*, on the screen at 4"x5", as images can change with radical changes in size.

*In the Artist's Humble Opinion...
or A$$hat, if one prefers...

 

[Moose22]

A decade and a half later I get occasional work from this same publication.

If it was good, it was good. You got them what they needed, and there's really not much more to it. Funny you didn't even know how to get the card out, though!

A friend is a racecar photographer. He gets really snippy about the technical details these days, but nobody else cares. What he does REALLY well is get pictures of the cars where the sponsor logos just pop. His ability to pan and follow a car to blur backgrounds is magical, too. He was selling plenty of photos with a crappy camera his first couple of years, and doesn't sell any more with his modern kit, because he has a great eye and gets the teams what they really want. The new stuff just makes it easier for him.

During the lockdowns I got a look at my walkin' around photos from when I traveled all the time for work. One of my favorites was with a D70. Actually, several now that I think of it. Gently stated, that is remarkably modest gear compared to what I have now. But I like composition, and light. And sometimes expression if people are in the photo. Technique is all about getting those things into the images.

The most fun I had during the same lockdown period, which was when I went back to film BTW, was buying books on composition and going around trying to identify and make those compositions. One month it was all rule of thirds, another it was steelyards, etc. Good composition makes a better photo. And the best camera is the one you have with you when you see something you want to photograph.

This philosophy would all carry more weight if I was a better photographer, of course. But I also really have fun trying new things so it's probably best that I don't know everything yet.

 

[Helge]

It is possible to refute the OP in every point of his extended post. And it is possible to do so in a cogent, considered, and consistent way. But producing such a dissertation may not change any minds. So I'll just mention one point.

I associate with people who make pictures. Some of them are photographers. They may or may not be artists but they act as if they are. A central concern in their output is the medium used to make the work.
The medium is not just fussiness or affectation. It is the component that carries information to the astute viewer about the artist’s relationship to their work. And the work's relationship to things in the real world.
Thinking about the medium employed, how it's employed, and its implications and connotations, enriches the art experience for the well informed spectator.

The alternative to caring about how and why pictures are made, to be content with no more than identifying subject matter seems to be a drab and malnourished experience. Taken too far it could hazard a descent into simplemindedness.

Well put.
The medium is the message.
Not to a degree. It really is the message.
Of course this is looking at media in broad and non conventional way.
Inside media are nested and cascading from other media.
The understanding and perception of media is a medium in itself for example.
Mental tools and methods are tools and procedures not far removed from physical in nature.

Of course there is some degree of inferiority complex in photography because it’s perceived by the common person to be so easy and banal.

Painting is getting there with the commodification of paint tools and Bob Ross like teachings, but still has some fumes left from history.

But great painters care to a huge degree about technique and technology.
Maybe it’s not perceived as technology by most, because of the seemingly old fashion nature of most of the stuff involved.
But fact of the matter is, the pigments used today, the paint tubes, the portability of a knock down plein air easel, many of the paint techniques and styles used are all contemporary to, or younger than the invention of photography.

Technology and art are intrinsically and intractably linked. If you don’t know art history and you don’t know the state of the art, you are most likely merely plagiarizing (perhaps without knowing it) in the weakest way. And of course there are many degrees and ways of “knowing”.

But the idea of the tabula rasa, untainted, natural talent is popular fiction and often involved with both various types of virtue signaling, humble bragging and plain mental laziness.

 

[Cholentpot]

If it was good, it was good. You got them what they needed, and there's really not much more to it. Funny you didn't even know how to get the card out, though!

A friend is a racecar photographer. He gets really snippy about the technical details these days, but nobody else cares. What he does REALLY well is get pictures of the cars where the sponsor logos just pop. His ability to pan and follow a car to blur backgrounds is magical, too. He was selling plenty of photos with a crappy camera his first couple of years, and doesn't sell any more with his modern kit, because he has a great eye and gets the teams what they really want. The new stuff just makes it easier for him.

During the lockdowns I got a look at my walkin' around photos from when I traveled all the time for work. One of my favorites was with a D70. Actually, several now that I think of it. Gently stated, that is remarkably modest gear compared to what I have now. But I like composition, and light. And sometimes expression if people are in the photo. Technique is all about getting those things into the images.

The most fun I had during the same lockdown period, which was when I went back to film BTW, was buying books on composition and going around trying to identify and make those compositions. One month it was all rule of thirds, another it was steelyards, etc. Good composition makes a better photo. And the best camera is the one you have with you when you see something you want to photograph.

This philosophy would all carry more weight if I was a better photographer, of course. But I also really have fun trying new things so it's probably best that I don't know everything yet.

Until that point the only camera I ever used was a disposable.

I had a blast during the lockdown. I documented everything. I have enough stuff for a few books at least.

 

[Moose22]

Until that point the only camera I ever used was a disposable.

I had a blast during the lockdown. I documented everything. I have enough stuff for a few books at least.

I took pictures of the lizards in my yard. Heh.

My neighbors already knew I was weird. Never batted an eye at me lying prone in the driveway with a lens that looks like a cannon on my camera.

Spent a bunch of time doing sunsets and my composition studies, too.

The folks at North Coast Photo used to get reports of me sitting on on the bluffs with my ginormous camera (GX680) trying to figure out just how the heck movements worked or taking pictures of the train or whatever. I'd come in and Bonnie would say "Someone you met just came in..." I guess I drew more attention than I realized, but by that fall I didn't want to be in the house anymore so I'd drag a wagonload of gear down to the beach any evening that might have OK light and take pictures of anything I thought was pretty. I passed out a lot of their cards to people wondering where you can develop film, and heard an endless litany of people's cameras. Cameras that they didn't actually know anything about, or where it was, or if it was in their mom's attic, or remembered when they last used it, or whatever... people had gone a little stir crazy by the summer here and standing still in public just made me a target for someone to tell their life story to.

Strange time. But I learned what a steelyard is, so I guess it wasn't a wasted year.

 

[Cholentpot]

I took photos of stuff, I wanted to see how small I could go. No one around. Just me and my cameras.

 

[MattKing]

Over the years, I've probably interacted with thousands of people who have at least some involvement with photography - everything from people who might take two rolls of film a year in an Instamatic to people who use up hundreds of thousands of frames each year (cinematographers, of course).
The only thing I can generalize about those people is that they are all at least slightly different.
Some photographers are so far from fussy as to drive batty those of us who value technique and tools and detail.
Some photographers are so detail oriented as to be miracle workers.
But the level of fussiness does seem to affect the question of who photographers tend to spend time with. Those who like fussy, tend to hang around others who like fussy.

 

[John Patrick Garriga]

...To dismiss a work because of the medium that it's in is beyond dumb.

In a way, to me at least, if someone is getting super fussy over what format your image was taken in, that means that they're looking for something to argue over and they can't find anything immediately wrong with your image. If someone is talking bad about your picture because of the medium, it means you might just have a good picture.

 

[Eric Rose]

If someone is talking bad about your image, just walk away. Don't say anything, just walk away.

 

[Moose22]

I'll be honest, I don't even listen to most people when they say something about a photo I took.

I have a few who will be critical in specific ways and I can trust them to be true and honest. They're the ones I show if I want feedback, and they're treasures to have as friends. That's true of here and in RealLifetm. Good feedback gives you insight.

Others I just gauge their responses. If they react emotionally in the way I hoped, then I might be on the right track.

People who ask about the gear... I don't bother with the photos. I just tell them about my camera, or (more often) hear their story about their camera, and then move on.

 

[Vaughn]

The world seems to be filled with extroverts because they make a lot of noise relative to introverts. Same with gear-heads.

 

[Cholentpot]

I'll be honest, I don't even listen to most people when they say something about a photo I took.

I have a few who will be critical in specific ways and I can trust them to be true and honest. They're the ones I show if I want feedback, and they're treasures to have as friends. That's true of here and in RealLifetm. Good feedback gives you insight.

Others I just gauge their responses. If they react emotionally in the way I hoped, then I might be on the right track.

People who ask about the gear... I don't bother with the photos. I just tell them about my camera, or (more often) hear their story about their camera, and then move on.

If someone asks me about my gear they'd better settle in.

 

[Moose22]

If someone asks me about my gear they'd better settle in.

Poor girl at a coffee shop I go to. I gave her my work record to take on an adventure, was showing her how to load it, and another customer came in and saw. Asked her about it, told me he was a pro, spotted my other camera, and started telling me about his gear and what he used in the film days...

Girl is standing by the register, waiting to take the guy's order and finish playing with the camera, but he kept "just a sec..." ing her as he had to finish this story or that about the F3 (which I had on me) and how he used it and when he went to an F5 and everything. She was trying so hard to be polite, eyes darting back and forth betwen us, not sure what was going on, but dammit that guy had to tell me EVERYTHING.

In his defense, I did note out of the corner of her eye she quietly snapped an instagram photo of the work record to send to a buddy. She's the same, just has fewer years of being excited about the gear to express.

 

[Cholentpot]

Poor girl at a coffee shop I go to. I gave her my work record to take on an adventure, was showing her how to load it, and another customer came in and saw. Asked her about it, told me he was a pro, spotted my other camera, and started telling me about his gear and what he used in the film days...

Girl is standing by the register, waiting to take the guy's order and finish playing with the camera, but he kept "just a sec..." ing her as he had to finish this story or that about the F3 (which I had on me) and how he used it and when he went to an F5 and everything. She was trying so hard to be polite, eyes darting back and forth betwen us, not sure what was going on, but dammit that guy had to tell me EVERYTHING.

In his defense, I did note out of the corner of her eye she quietly snapped an instagram photo of the work record to send to a buddy. She's the same, just has fewer years of being excited about the gear to express.

I don't ramble but if someone asks they asked for it.

Then again, if I'm actively shooting my world narrows down to the shot and I don't process questions.

 

[Pieter12]

I recently watched a documentary about a painter, who had 20 some years experience under his belt, and he was going to attempt to reproduce the Mona Lisa using the same materials and methods as Da Vinci. Only he had given himself a 6-week deadline. Needless to say, the end result was a disaster. He had approximated the painting techniques and materials, but the painting was painful to look at. Of course, it took Da Vinci years to paint Mona Lisa and he never gave it to the gentleman who had commissioned it--but he also had talent, was a superb draftsman and had a deep understanding of technique, three things this other painter lacked.

 

[VinceInMT]

I recently watched a documentary about a painter, who had 20 some years experience under his belt, and he was going to attempt to reproduce the Mona Lisa using the same materials and methods as Da Vinci. Only he had given himself a 6-week deadline. Needless to say, the end result was a disaster. He had approximated the painting techniques and materials, but the painting was painful to look at. Of course, it took Da Vinci years to paint Mona Lisa and he never gave it to the gentleman who had commissioned it--but he also had talent, was a superb draftsman and had a deep understanding of technique, three things this other painter lacked.

Even good intentions aren’t enough in the painting world but unintended consequences might be OK:

“Botched Restoration of Jesus Fresco Miraculously Saves Spanish Town”

Botched Restoration of Jesus Fresco Miraculously Saves Spanish Town | Artnet News

A botched restoration of 'Ecce Homo', a fesco of Jesus, has bolstered a small Spanish town's economy.

news.artnet.com

 

[awty]

Even good intentions aren’t enough in the painting world but unintended consequences might be OK:

“Botched Restoration of Jesus Fresco Miraculously Saves Spanish Town”

Botched Restoration of Jesus Fresco Miraculously Saves Spanish Town | Artnet News

A botched restoration of 'Ecce Homo', a fesco of Jesus, has bolstered a small Spanish town's economy.

news.artnet.com

I prefer Cecilia's version, has far more depth than the original, not sure why anyone would think it's botched.

 

[DREW WILEY]

momus - I don't know what kind of germ-free plexiglas bubble you live in. Painters don't fuss over things, or argue over medium issues? Heck, Manet got into a sword duel with another painter due to a technique philosophy debate. And they were both Impressionists. Factor in competing schools of painting, and things have often gotten nasty for centuries. Then add in art critics fishing for attention, and it really gets interesting. I was just given a lovely picture book and biography of Georgia O'Keefe's work, which included quotes from certain art critics of her time who utterly trashed her style and brushwork as worthless. She had outspoken strong opinions of her own. The art world is inherently contentious. They have strong individual perspectives and argue over even brushes, just like house painters. Even concrete workers argue over which trowel or float is best. Why should photography be any different?

Prior to retirement, one of my job roles was distributing one of the largest selections of true high-end power tools in the country (not the kinds of toys Cheapo Depot sells). Craftsmen, cabinet shops, and contractors had differing strong opinions and reasons for those differences. That's why a real selection was necessary. Surfboard makers would even fly in from the Hawaiian Islands; and I once had to break up a fight in the line between two of them due to diametrically different philosophies. California-style synthetic board makers were performance and production oriented, and that dictated their tools. Traditional long board makers had an almost Zen meditative mentality to how they both made boards of native trees, and how they surfed. And both schools outright despised those who made uber-expensive furniture-style boards meant to be hung above mantles in rich collectors vacation homes. Just one example among many.

 

[koraks]

Drew, addressing you as a moderator for a moment: your argument would have worked the same without the first sentence of your post. Please take it into consideration, if you will.