Do You want your camera to “Create”, or “Record” an image?

[robert blu]

I agree with this, but sometimes the camera can produce a happy mistake.

it's good to document, documentation had a great role in the story of photography.

I like to look for the "happy mistakes" on purpose because I think in some cases they can give more emotion.

 

[AlexBG]

Create with film, record with digital.

Think that's why I prefer film, or at least older lenses that are not so clinical.

 

[David Hughes]

Since I make all the decisions I don't think it has anything to do with the camera.

Or is there some new, silly digital thing that decides what to take and fires the shutter and so on? Just asking...

Regards, David

 

[Bill Blackwell]

When I'm getting paid - it's to "record". When it's my hobby - it's to "create".

However, the creation is always set before me to record. Only when I've made something from nothing can I call myself a creator - and that'll never happen. The best I can do is rearrange that which is set before me.

 

[jgrainger]

Both uses.. I usually get more enjoyment from creating, or rather finding images.. recording is right sometimes too.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Nice examples 🙂
But if the second one became artsy because the camera moved itself it seems a bit spooky in my eyes 😉

Where are OOF, light leaks and else artsy "filters" as well available for those who are into creative art claiming within photography.
It could be also done by lith printing, bromoil and wet plates. Those are making photos as creative by default these days. Aslo, it seems everyone who could deal with collodion or have instax camera thinks this way...

But oddly enough to me good quality print (jet or wet) with quality content on it has meaning of art.
I have seen old school photographer just before covid large prints from scans and direct digital. Some architectural and its fragments. I can't call it just as the record. Those are sold for big money as rich homes décor.

 

[peterm1]

The trick is to create a feeling while presenting a scene to the viewer.

Yes I agree. Spot on. As for myself I always try for a photo with feeling. But I have evolved into one of those artistic "creative" types. I should acknowledge though, that some people see themselves more as a kind of "rapporteur" - a recorder of events who aim to capture a scene with veracity. I much prefer to try to interpret and image and present it in a way which creates a kind of bond with the viewer. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. And its not to everyone's taste.

An analogy I sometimes use is the difference between written prose and a poem. Prose describes events in a way which sometimes can be beautiful but is more straightforward to interpret. A poem requires the reader to interpret what the author is getting at. People usually do this by relating it to their own life and experience. If it works (and it does not always work) it can create a bond - an emotional response to the image. It is difficult to pull off but in my view it is the essence of art and when it works it embodies both artistic beauty and an accurate record. Perhaps John Keats the poet got closest when he wrote “Beauty is truth, truth beauty, —that is all / Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know”. I guess this is why great advertising campaigns - the ones that work, use both imagery and emotion.

Which reminds me of a "Madmen" episode about a "pitch" the advertising company makes to the Kodak Eastman Company back in the 1960s about how to advertise their "carousel" slide viewer - it's all about emotion and sentiment. And ironically in this case its done using everyday photos which do nothing more than record events in a family's life. In this case it's the words that are overlaid on those images that work the magic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suRDUFpsHus

 

[loquax ludens]

The photographer may record or create, or both, but the camera only records. That said, the camera, the film or sensor and software, and the lens chosen are important creative elements in the expression of the photographer.

I am continually amazed at the sublime images I find on this forum. My own efforts pale in comparison.

One thread I came across today that shows how a camera may record what only a very creative photographer may envision is this one:

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=163328

Would that I could achieve such engaging images.

 

[zuiko85]

When I first picked up a ‘good’ camera, 50 odd years ago, one friend who taught me developing and darkroom work said; ‘remember, photographs happen between the ears.’
Even if hunting for that image, with only seconds to react, usually at least some thought goes into the bump click of the shutter.

 

[narsuitus]

Do You want your camera to “Create”, or “Record” an image?

It depends.

There are times when I wanted to use my camera to record an image. For example, when shooting images for the scientific community, I wanted my camera to clearly and accurately record the subject.

There were other times when I wanted to use my camera to create an image I saw in my mind's eye.

 

[Bob Michaels]

The camera by itself is nothing but an inert tool that can do nothing of its own volition. It takes an operator with volition to create a photograph.
......
The person operating the camera and then rendering the image as formed by it does the creating (or 'making' depending on which word you prefer)

My camera serves the same purpose to me photographically as Microsoft Word does to my writing. A efficient recording tool, incapable of thought much less creativity, no more.

Now if the question becomes if I, a thinking person, strive to create or record, I definitely try to create something that evokes emotion or at least informs the viewer.

 

[Ambro51]

My camera created this using a single meniscus lens at f5. It’s a lousy photo but a good picture.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

My camera created this using a single meniscus lens at f5. It’s a lousy photo but a good picture.

And roll after roll it creates images with still the same effect.

Pinkhassov used iPhone and started with its instag filters. Eventually his creativity (in Russian we are saying "gift in photography") took over and he got iPhone pictures without filters enough for the book.

https://www.magnumphotos.com/theory-and-practice/gueorgui-pinkhassov-sophistication-simplification/

 

[peterm1]

I often laugh at myself for having G.A.S.. I keep desiring expensive lenses and cameras, and then when I make images with them spend all of my time in post processing messing up those pin-sharp, nicely exposed images to create something more "arty".

 

[Beemermark]

I want to record an image that creates what I saw. The image may not be a true representation of the scene but it captures what i saw and creates the final image on film as I imagine it.

 

[nikon_sam]

Sometimes I want it to photograph an image like I'm seeing it becoming and if I get the framing and exposure correctly I can record what's before me...

Sometimes I use one of the creative effects in camera to Create an image using what's before me...
Sony a6000 in "Illustration" Mode...

 

[markjwyatt]

This works for me. Some moments are more compelling than others.

The philosophical issue is candid/spontaneous vs staged.

I prefer the candid/spontaneous, but for some purposes staged works (portraits, some family posed pics).

 

[David Hughes]

My camera created this using a single meniscus lens at f5. It’s a lousy photo but a good picture.

Surely, you created it when you decided to use that camera and that take shot and so on. The camera merely recorded what you'd decided to create...


Regards, David

 

[Ambro51]

I’ll have to go back there and shoot that same picture with the Nikon F and the f2 50. Btw my older daughter had that fuzzy shot done as a mural. It covers one wall in their “gym” room. .....in our quest for perfection, we succeed. The viewer sees the image, the brain understands it as reality and files it appropriately. ...you go the other way, create an image that makes the brain work to put it together. It forces attention.....but oddly can have exactly the opposite effect, giving the viewer a feeling of indistinct calmness in that it is an ephermal scene delivering its message without undue study. This is seen in the photographic styles of Mathew Brady vs. his competitor Jerimiah Gurney, whose technique was absolute pin sharp clarity head to toe on his portraits, which were well lit and technically perfect. Brady, on the other hand, posed and lit his subjects differently. Concentrating on “painterly” lighting, low camera angles and exposures that frequently faded the sitters dark clothing into dark backdrops. He said he didn’t need to show all of someone’s trousers to prove they’re wearing them. So, in a way here, we see Gurney “recorded” in his portraits, while Brady posed and lit subjects to “create” an image which confomed more to impressionistic painting styles. Mathew Brady personally retouched the Print of his grand Imperial size portraits.

 

[helen.HH]

Simply RECORD ... life in motion

and if the photo turns out emotive, evocative, atmospheric, questioning
due to content, framing, a good catch, agitations, processing,...
even better, Lucky me