mdarnton
Well-known
I can answer this with the context of your previous question about photographing people: I'm most interested in people, and so that's what I photograph, almost entirely, and I try to avoid simply using people as objects to place in a layout.
I also feel, for my self, that this is the way to avoid taking photographs that look like pictures of pictures, which seems to be one of the most common of photographic failings, and particularly easy to fall into in photographing things which aren't alive (counting plant life in that category). I remember writing a nasty letter decades ago to Modern Photography, regarding an article where they visited a popular place, and suggested various places to stand to shoot the ideal picture, as something for visitors to emulate, basically an invitation to imitate their own not-that-original postcard shots. Photographing people helps me avoid falling into that trap, which is everywhere.
I also feel, for my self, that this is the way to avoid taking photographs that look like pictures of pictures, which seems to be one of the most common of photographic failings, and particularly easy to fall into in photographing things which aren't alive (counting plant life in that category). I remember writing a nasty letter decades ago to Modern Photography, regarding an article where they visited a popular place, and suggested various places to stand to shoot the ideal picture, as something for visitors to emulate, basically an invitation to imitate their own not-that-original postcard shots. Photographing people helps me avoid falling into that trap, which is everywhere.
dave lackey
Veteran
John, you have started an interesting but complex thread. Too many absolutes and I don't support absolutes. But, specifically, I mentioned above that a better answer is maybe what does one NOT photograph?
I can only answer what I do not like to do: Snapshots, weddings, sports photography, anything that requires flash, and thousands of other subjects.
There are many people doing quite well shooting "what the client wants the way they want it" and plenty of people good at the things mentioned previously. But, I hate weddings. I hate sports photography. I despise flash and studio work. All of these can have great pictures produced for sure. But I don't like that type of photography anymore. BTDT...no more.
Landscape photography? Got bored with that 10 years ago. Do I still snap the occasional landscape? Sure but only if it catches my eye or something.
Portraits? Sure, if they are candid. Not studio anymore.
Snapshots? Sure, of the grandkids, etc. Sometimes, I get very experimental and occasionally am successful with some innovative images.
Vacation shots? Sure. But not of manholes. Not of dirty back alleys. Not of a lot of things unless, again, it caught my eye for some reason..
This is really a very complex question you asked.
Attachments
paulfish4570
Veteran
a particular light is what i seek. it sometimes falls on people, most often on things ...
dave lackey
Veteran
90% 'cause I like it, 10% 'cause it will make an interesting photo
Dave:
I like that photo. If I was there I would have shot it
Thank you, sir...
astro8
Well-known
Ok....I've thought about this and I've come to the conclusion that I started out as #1 and now I'm at #2.
#1 relates to me as snapshots...it is where I was and have (in my mind) 'moved on' and deleted 99% of them.
#2 is where I'm at now, trying to be more creative, whether it be a pair of legs or a dirty sink...but I have to like it to photograph it. I don't have to like the object, just the scene.
Thanks for the thread...interesting.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
A good and thought-provoking question, John!
I am in the latter category, except when it's time to select a topic or subject for a project.
I am in the latter category, except when it's time to select a topic or subject for a project.
Yes, that is a great way to approach the topic, but then I fear we'd get lists of objects or scenarios people don't want to photograph instead of real answers.
True, but it is in the Philosophy of Photography section. Philosophy is never easy.
I guess what interests me is that people make photos for many reasons. I'm trying to figure out why people, here on RFF, make photos (or won't make a particular photo). I am also trying to make a thread a week that does not involve gear at all.For example, a successful experiment with digital (IMO anyway, because I don't care what anyone else thinks about this image, it was made at one of my project construction sites):
I don't like construction equipment necessarily, but I like this finely crafted image.
Particular
a.k.a. CNNY, disassembler
The short answer is that I think I shoot more in category #1, but I edit in category #2.
Long answer:
I don't really (pretend to) know what makes an interesting image. I photograph things that I like and things that I think are interesting. I like interesting things. What I think is interesting is a bit more vague, and subjective. I think things that I don't understand are interesting. I also think things that I particularly don't like are interesting, because I don't understand why they exist or are the way they are, or why other people would like them.
So in the end I think I photograph a lot more things that I don't like, or that I am somewhat ambivalent about than that I photograph things to celebrate them. I try not to think about it too much while I photograph.
I do think about it a lot when I edit, as I firstly expect the image to be 'interesting', and secondly try to fit it into a category. Because of this I do find editing a lot more challenging than photographing. I do pre-edit up to a point while photographing, as there are subjects that I just don't bother with, but that still leaves plenty to be recorded without a clearly defined purpose.
Long answer:
I don't really (pretend to) know what makes an interesting image. I photograph things that I like and things that I think are interesting. I like interesting things. What I think is interesting is a bit more vague, and subjective. I think things that I don't understand are interesting. I also think things that I particularly don't like are interesting, because I don't understand why they exist or are the way they are, or why other people would like them.
So in the end I think I photograph a lot more things that I don't like, or that I am somewhat ambivalent about than that I photograph things to celebrate them. I try not to think about it too much while I photograph.
I do think about it a lot when I edit, as I firstly expect the image to be 'interesting', and secondly try to fit it into a category. Because of this I do find editing a lot more challenging than photographing. I do pre-edit up to a point while photographing, as there are subjects that I just don't bother with, but that still leaves plenty to be recorded without a clearly defined purpose.
Particular
a.k.a. CNNY, disassembler
I've heard of a class at the International Center of Photography here in NYC in which the Instructor did the same thing. Mindblowingly lame for a school IMO. Perfectly fine for tourism though... if your main concern is getting a good photo of what everyone else is getting.
finguanzo
Well-known
I its a subject I like, I shoot it with my M6ttl and 28, If its a subject that I dont, but find it makes a good picture, I usually use a 50mm, maybe MF.....
Just kidding...
Just kidding...
I its a subject I like, I shoot it with my M6ttl and 28, If its a subject that I dont, but find it makes a good picture, I usually use a 50mm, maybe MF.....
Just kidding...
I first read your response as ... If it's a subject I like, I shoot it with my M6ttl and 28, If it's a subject that I dont, then I use a gun.....
finguanzo
Well-known
LOL.... thats one way to think of it...
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Being a hobbyist, only things that I like/find interesting.
Bob
Bob
SimonSawSunlight
Simon Fabel
I like good photos. I don't see what difference it makes how much I like something that I photograph.
if I take a good (whatever that may be to you or me) photograph of a bird, I have a good photograph of a bird. if I take a bad photograph of a bird, I have a bad photograph of a bird. in either case, I do not have a bird, no matter if or how much I like birds.
if I take a good (whatever that may be to you or me) photograph of a bird, I have a good photograph of a bird. if I take a bad photograph of a bird, I have a bad photograph of a bird. in either case, I do not have a bird, no matter if or how much I like birds.
So, you fit in the second category then...
You don't see a difference, I don't see a difference, but many do. Another reason I asked the question is because the non-photographer always wonders why you took a photograph of that whenever it doesn't fit into what they think photography is... which to them could be beautiful calendar photos, sunset photos, family photos, memories, etc.
dave lackey
Veteran
So, you fit in the second category then...
Another reason I asked the question is because the non-photographer always wonders why you took a photograph of that whenever it doesn't fit into what they think photography is... which to them could be beautiful calendar photos, sunset photos, family photos, memories, etc.
How about what another photographer thinks of a genre? Or whether or not another photographer agrees or disagrees with what makes a "good picture"?
Very complex. Always good to have discussions and thoughts on a topic like this.
How about what another photographer thinks of a genre? Or whether or not another photographer agrees or disagrees with what makes a "good picture"?
Very complex. Always good to have discussions and thoughts on a topic like this.
Well, sure, it's all subjective and it is complex. However, it is still interesting to talk about it. Some folks might not have your experience Dave, so it could be beneficial for them to think of their work in this context.
dave lackey
Veteran
Like I said, it is a good thread topic!
I certainly hope no one has ever had my experience or think like me. That would not be a good thing, IMO.