Culling your photos? Some advice in The New Yorker

ptpdprinter said:
I don't t subscribe to The New Yorker, so I was doubtful I would be able to read the article because most of their content is behind a paywall, but I was able to read the article by clicking on the link at the top of this thread.
Click to expand...

I think you're missing Andprayforrain's point: Johnston's narrative is going to an audience that is probably not as involved in the weeds of photography as those of use who hang around here.
 
Saul said:
I think you're missing Andprayforrain's point: Johnston's narrative is going to an audience that is probably not as involved in the weeds of photography as those of use who hang around here.
Click to expand...

If so, then it is unfortunate that readers of The New Yorker received such utterly vacuous advice about how to cull the photos on their iPhone.
 
Saul said:
Care to provide us with your insights that someone would want to publish?
Click to expand...

Not at the moment. I'm bushed. I spent all day working on a blog post about snow squalls, Will Smith slapping Chris Rock at the Oscars, and Paul Gauguin giving his three child brides syphilis in Tahiti. Then I found out it was wasted effort. Mike Johnson had already covered those topics in his photography blog on Tuesday.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepa...al-men-ot.html
 
40 years ago a woman at work, who used to be a professional photographer, told me that the difference between a good photographer and a bad one is that the good photographer knew what to throw away.

That said, sometimes I keep my reject photos (often Polaroids, Pack film, or Instax) in a box and then look at them years later - often I’ve been surprised that some are very good.
 
ptpdprinter said:
Not at the moment. I'm bushed. I spent all day working on a blog post about snow squalls, Will Smith slapping Chris Rock at the Oscars, and Paul Gauguin giving his three child brides syphilis in Tahiti. Then I found out it was wasted effort. Mike Johnson had already covered those topics in his photography blog on Tuesday.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepa...al-men-ot.html
Click to expand...



I see you're enjoying some of Mike's blog entries. He is quite a good writer who can make most any subject seem at least a tiny bit interesting when he's off on his tangents. I just skip those that don't interest me very much and enjoy those that do. Now, if you wanna read--I know, not likely--a photo blogger who goes on lengthy tangents, try Kirk Tuck. I skip many of his blogs because I have no interest in swimming, Subaru, S-series Leica or his wealthy clients. But both he and Mike Johnston can be entertaining and informative when they remain on subject.
 
Over time, Mike Johnson has written less and less about photography and so I read his blog less and less until I just gave up on him. It is as if he doesn’t really want to write about photography and avoids do so by writing about anything else just to meet his daily 1000 word goal.

I looked at Kirk Tuck’s blog, but, wealthy clients notwithstanding, his photography looks pretty average so I don’t have any interest in reading him either.

RFF and a couple of other photography forums are enough. You get to read a lot of different viewpoints on matters photographic, and you don’t have to wade though the poster’s battle with bunions or whatever.
 
Back in the day, we said you could always tell a professional photographer, they had large wastebaskets…and they were full.
 
So what does everybody do with their "B" shots? I just got 2 rolls of 120 film back from the lab and have a couple A shots and nice number of B shots. I usually put B shots on Flickr but have been rethinking that right before this was posted. If I had a website, which I'm thinking about doing, I'd only post A shots. Still put B shots on Flickr? Bury them in Lightroom?
 
ptpdprinter said:
RFF and a couple of other photography forums are enough. You get to read a lot of different viewpoints on matters photographic, and you don’t have to wade though the poster’s battle with bunions or whatever.
Click to expand...

Now you've done it! Later today we'll see the "Show Us Your Classic Bunion!" thread.
 
chipgreenberg said:
So what does everybody do with their "B" shots? I just got 2 rolls of 120 film back from the lab and have a couple A shots and nice number of B shots. I usually put B shots on Flickr but have been rethinking that right before this was posted. If I had a website, which I'm thinking about doing, I'd only post A shots. Still put B shots on Flickr? Bury them in Lightroom?
Click to expand...

I have keepers, maybes, and rejects. HCB said to throw away not only your rejects, but your maybes too. It is good advice except it is easier said than done from a storage perspective. If I shoot a roll of film, unless I have no keepers or even maybes, in which case I throw the whole roll roll away, I cut the roll into strips, and stick the strips in a PrintFile negative page, one roll to a page, which then goes in a binder. At one point I thought I would go in and cut out the keepers and put them in slide mounts. On further reflection, I noted that I rarely go back and print a negative a second time, so it sounded like a make-work project, and I would be better off just taking a nap. So I've got quite a few binders with negatives neatly filed away in PrintFile negative pages that hold keepers, maybes, and rejects. I never look at them. Honestly, I don't know why I keep them. I guess I think that my negatives are like fine wine and will improve with age. Either that or I am a hoarder or something.

It is easier with slides. I would keep my keepers and maybes in PrintFile slide pages and throw away the rejects. Every once in a while I would go through my slides and throw away the maybes. If I put together what we now refer to as the dreaded slide show, I would keep the slides in the slide carousels in case I wanted to inflict the slide show on some unsuspecting new viewers somewhere down the line. A few years ago, I went through those too, sorted out the keepers that were really rejects, threw them away, and put the keeper keepers in PrintFile slide pages. I gave away the slide carousels to forum members.

I have a few museum boxes with matted prints of my keeper keepers that are not only worth keeping but worth printing. Ansel Adams said: "Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop." I have been at this about 50 years, and according to that little nugget of wisdom I should have 600 significant photographs. I don't have anywhere near 600 significant photographs so I am not doing that well, which doesn't really bother me because I have had a lot of fun and satisfaction along the way, and I have a few boxes of prints that I am not embarrassed to show people, and I actually feel pretty good about.

I guess I need to add that I was never really interested in taking photos of family vacations, birthday parties, Christmas, etc. My wife did all that and she and my daughter have all those photos under control, though I can't say I know exactly what that means.

As far as Flickr goes, only put your keepers on Flickr. Do not show your just okay photos to anyone ever. If you do, they will think you are a just okay photographer, and occasionally got lucky. Who wants to be compared to a monkey with a typewriter?

Finally, make prints of your best work. When someone tells you that you have a week to live, throw everything out except the prints of your best work.

Note: Obviously, none of the foregoing has anything to do with culling your photos on your iPhone which is the topic of the thread.
 
I toss stuff out relentlessly. It's a lot easier with digital than with film. You just hit the Delete button and send things down the poop chute. With film, I was always reluctant to toss out negatives or transparencies so I ended up with a mountain of duplicates, alternates and slightly off photos. But I also went through periods of cleaning house only later to discover I had thrown out some things I should have kept. Slippery slope.
 
To beat the machine gun, hit nothing school of photography some days I’ll load up a few 4x5 holders with photo paper and shoot them either with pinhole or ‘found’ lenses (not all of which quite cover 4x5). It’s a lot of fun, fairly cheap, takes minimal equipment and can be handled under safelight. Very slow and contemplative, and a +3 close up lens, stopped to f64 and focused at about 50 feet makes a dandy slightly long lens on 4x5. Of course you focus at f8 and then insert the f64 plate.
I have 9 film holders, 18 exposures, but seldom use them all on one outing.
 
To me the A's are something I'd spend the money to print and frame. The B's I like but wouldn't spend the money to print and frame. When I used to get drum scans I'd only scan A's. Now that I'm getting Noritsu scans for a buck a piece maybe I have to figure out how to handle the B's.

I believe it was Ansel who said if you get 12 portfolio images a year (I've seen the number 8 and 120 also) you're doing well. I don't get 12 A's a year but I'm not a full time photographer like AA. I know somebody I can clarify the quote though!
 
When I was doing my own B&W development and printing, I’d print a subset of the best. Maybe four prints from 100 frames. There likely were more good images, but I couldn’t afford to print them. Obviously, I saved all my negatives.

Now, 40+ years later, I’m scanning all my negatives from back then and seeing images for only the second time since my initial glance at those frames 40+ years ago. I’ve been printing the best ones.

Once I started working, I could afford to use color film and have it processed and get small prints. This was long before digital. Even so, I still send color film out for processing and printing (4x6). I still save all my negatives and treat the small prints as proofs. I don’t throw any of it away, even the stinkers. If I like a photo, I’ll have it printed larger (or scan and print it myself) and put it in an album or have it in a frame on the wall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom