Fallen into snapshot mode... help!

[oftheherd]

Spend some time studying the great masters of the genre. Look at their pictures and ask yourself what it is that make them so special. Analyse the images in terms of composition, perspective, lighting, depth-of-field, etc. Try to guess what focal length and what aperture were used by the photographer. As a starting point I would suggest you check out the work of Jeanloup Sieff (http://www.jeanloupsieff.com/), or Sebastiao Salgado (http://amazonasimages.com/).

Hope this helps.

Vincent

Imho jeanloupsieff.com is a strange if not lousy web site to navigate. But oh, those photos! Thanks for the url. Great photography!

Your advice is good about looking at others photos. Who wouldn't want to try and take photos like that?

 

[vincentbenoit]

And on another note has anyone seen Contacts? It's a series of short films on 3 dvds where photographers go over their contact sheets frame by frame. I only watched the first dvd but it's got HCB, william klein, raymond depardon, mario giacomelli, koudelka, doisneau, boubat, erwitt, mark riboub, leonard freed, h newton and don mccullin. Fascinating [...]

Oh yes. Highly recommended.

Vincent

 

[einolu]

You just have to ask yourself why you are taking pictures. Its a hard question to answer, and there is no correct answer, but the question is probably the reason for your problem. It might help to put the camera down for a bit (sometimes having a camera in my hands stresses me out) and to just go out and walk around as if you had a camera. Stop at certain scenes, think about whether you would take a picture of them or not, how you would compose, and why. This might lead you to your answer.

Also, there is no better place to get inspiration than the gallery we have on RFF. Go digging through peoples personal galleries, there is lots of great stuff there.

 

[vincentbenoit]

with documentation intentsI agree, Vincent, and I would like to add that IMHO this "snapshot mode" thing is misleadingly introduced and used here. There is no negative meaning connected to "snapshot" in general, tho it is sometimes used with a derisive meaning by non-photogs who use it as a kinda "no-art" category .
In fact alot of HCB's, Erwitt's, Winogrand's , Doisneau''s and Ronis' work WERE snapshots !

Bertram, with all due respect I have to disagree on that. To me a 'snapshot' is a picture taken in a hasty, mechanical fashion, with little or no creative input on the part of the photographer. (Granted, when using an all-manual camera exposure and focus still have to be set by the photographer, but these are technical, not artistic, aspects of the picture-taking process). Now the 'little or no creative input' premise does not necessarily carry a negative connotation; if the intent of the photographer is simply to record 'something' (an event, a scene) on film for documentary purposes, then fine - nothing wrong with that as long as no artistic pretensions are attached to it. However - and correct me if I'm wrong here - this thread was initiated by someone wanting to grow out of this habit of mechanical picture-taking.

If you accept my definition of 'snapshot' then you have to admit that it doesn't apply to most of the widely published work of the photographers you mention (with the possible exception of Winogrand). HCB, Erwitt, Doisneau et al did not just press the shutter for the sake of documentation - there was always an underlying aesthetic pursuit involved in their photography, and this is clearly evidenced in the composition of their pictures. These guys had the ability to visualise a scene and capture it in such a way that all elements of the image seem to be at the right place with respect to the others; this might not be Art with a capital A, but it most definitely goes beyond the mechanical approach of the snapshot.

There is always more trouble than fun with all those categories.
The worst of all tho I've ever heard is "The spirit of HCB" (!!!) but that's another story. :angel: 😛

Actually I believe there is such a thing as "the spirit of HCB"... The man did define a whole new style of photography in his time.

BTW, watched your gallery (carefully)recently, beautiful photos, compliments !!

Thanks. Now that I'm using a Leica I don't have any excuse to take crappy photos (or snapshots for that matter 😉 ).

Cheers

Vincent

 

[Bertram2]

Bertram, with all due respect I have to disagree on that. To me a 'snapshot' is a picture taken in a hasty, mechanical fashion, with little or no creative input on the part of the photographer.

Vincent , this "with documentation intents" part in the frame is not from my text, how did that slip in ? Maybe this led you in the wrong direction ?

Now the 'little or no creative input' premise does not necessarily carry a negative connotation
I don't see a 'little or no creative input' premise necessarily connected to the word "snapshot" ? Maybe you need a bit luck to catch what you want to catch, but
first you must SEE it.

if the intent of the photographer is simply to record 'something' (an event, a scene) on film for documentary purposes, then fine - nothing wrong with that as long as no artistic pretensions are attached to it. However - and correct me if I'm wrong here - this thread was initiated by someone wanting to grow out of this habit of mechanical picture-taking.

I simply don't see that to record something for documentary purposes is the meaning of "snapshot ". And in my understanding the thread was initiated by somebody who has primarily a prob with his results, which seem to have no worth and no meaning for himself. And my answer was this has not to do with "snapshooting" or any other category but with a lack of intentions and ideas.


I (with the possible exception of Winogrand). HCB, Erwitt, Doisneau et al did not just press the shutter for the sake of documentation...

Almighty god, how could I ? As I said, this documentary premise is not my text !

These guys had the ability to visualise a scene and capture it in such a way that all elements of the image seem to be at the right place with respect to the others; this might not be Art with a capital A, but it most definitely goes beyond the mechanical approach of the snapshot.

These guys HAD the abilities indeed and this made their mastership. No reason for me not to call many of their shots "snapshots!, i don't see any mechanical approach beeing necessarily part of the "snapshot". HCB, wasn't he "snapping" at the decisive moment" all the time, as he said ? And I suppose Mr. K. calls his 4/25 Snapshot Skopar not because he sees a little or no creative kinda shooting behind this word ? Seems we have a different understanding indeed of snapshots.

Actually I believe there is such a thing as "the spirit of HCB"... The man did define a whole new style of photography in his time.
He did, yes, but style isn't "spirit" . I f there was a kinda spirit then it was the spirit of the "Photographie Humaine" in the 30s, of which he had been ONE protagonist only.

In general I'd avoid the use of "spirit " in such a context generally , it's one of those elastic blah-blah categories which everybody interpretes as his personal understanding is. VERY different understandings do exist tho obviously, watch the contest gallery and you will see what I mean! 😉
Best,
bertram

 

[vincentbenoit]

In general I'd avoid the use of "spirit " in such a context generally , it's one of those elastic blah-blah categories which everybody interpretes as his personal understanding is. VERY different understandings do exist tho obviously, watch the contest gallery and you will see what I mean! 😉

Yep, looking at the pictures submitted for the contest clearly shows that to many people, shooting like HCB means "snapping at the decisive moment", as you put it yourself. I'm afraid there is more to it.

Vincent

 

[vincentbenoit]

Vincent , this "with documentation intents" part in the frame is not from my text, how did that slip in ? Maybe this led you in the wrong direction ?

My fault, sorry about that. It wasn't intentional.

 

[GeneW]

Another thing you can do is to use a tripod for awhile. It not only slows you down, it helps you think about composition. After a little tripod work, hand holding feels liberating.

Gene

 

[brians]

Great discussion. I really appreciate your suggestions and encouragement. I think the thing about my snapshooting is that it becomes bland in the sense that no emotion is captured behind it. When film seems plentiful, all I want to do is snap away, but it worries me how I try to force the end of a roll of film. Say I have 6 exposures left on a 24 exp. roll.... yeah, I've got a bit of antsyness that gets me. Anyway, one of you suggested taking a completely manual camera, 1 lens, 1 roll of film and giving it a couple hours. I'll try that. Thank you.

 

[Pherdinand]

i'm a snapshooter myself. Alas i get back many frames with a big question mark in my head, what the hell did i do wrong there that it has nuthin to say.
I think a way out of this would be a planned project, and concentrating on obtaining the results
e.g. you see a scene on the street, capture it and then try to find more scenes that correlate in a way. Like i've seen a girl talking to a can driver yesterday, did not capture but thought of it as a possible project to experiment on.

But i'm too lazy and disorganized and, maybe most important, wavelike in my mood to succesfully execute such a project.

 

[Pherdinand]

CAB driver, of course. Taxi driver.
Cans are not driven here.

 

[hinius]

I don't agree with this slow-down mentality at all. All you might end up doing is taking a lot of well-composed, technically competent, but BORING shots. Stuff you see floating around in various travel guides: I call it Lonely Planet syndrome.

The way I see it, the key is you need to develop your eye. Look at as many photos as possible. The Magnum homepage is a good place for starters, so is in-public and flickr. You need to figure out what for you is a good photo. Then you need to train yourself to recognise it when you see it (I call it my internal alarm bell... when my alarm bell goes off I drop everything and run towards it and start snapping).. And then you need to put yourself in a position to get these shots, as often as possible.

Shoot every day. By that I mean, not necessarily taking photos. But LOOKING for photos. Take creative risks, experiment, photograph what you'd normally not bother with. Don't worry about the cost of film (that's where shooting and processing your own film is a bitch). Explore not one, but various themes simultaneously. Figure out how various external stimuli (e.g. light, caffeine, nicotine, music, love, narcotics, hunger) affect your routine. Work out your rhythm... it could be tearing down the sidewalk at a hundred miles an hour or ambling aimlessly down a single street in ten minutes.

Carefully review all your shots. Forget about the safe, conventionally good stuff. Look for the stuff that's a little different. Ask yourself consistently: am I getting better? And if you're not, ask yourself why?

I guess what I'm saying is that you need to shoot as much as you feel comfortable with. Don't hold back. Don't restrict yourself to a single roll if it doesn't feel right for you. Could you imagine if you found yourself in the zone and you were stuck with just one freaking roll of film? As long as you carefully evaluate your results and learn how to avoid falling into the same patterns, the more you shoot the better the standard of your keepers. Just don't stay in a safe, comfortable, creative holding pattern.

And lastly, don't waste your time fondling cameras... it's just too distracting 😉

 

[canonetc]

Great discussion. I really appreciate your suggestions and encouragement. I think the thing about my snapshooting is that it becomes bland in the sense that no emotion is captured behind it. When film seems plentiful, all I want to do is snap away, but it worries me how I try to force the end of a roll of film. Say I have 6 exposures left on a 24 exp. roll.... yeah, I've got a bit of antsyness that gets me. Anyway, one of you suggested taking a completely manual camera, 1 lens, 1 roll of film and giving it a couple hours. I'll try that. Thank you.

Vincent's comments should be carefully studied as they are well thought out (and have me thinking for sure!).

Whenever I start "snapping", it usually results from nervousness. One exercise I do is to take ONE shot of the subject(s). Unless I know I screwed up my exposure or focus, I do not take another (which would be a waste of film). I was motivated by this from Jim Brandenburg's "Chasing the Light". He went to an extreme in order to recapture his love for photography: one shot a day for 30-90 days. Talk about being thoughtful!

Snapshooting is, I think, a natural part of the process of becoming a photographer. By examing the hundreds or thousands of failures, a gradual learning of what's good and why it's good comes about. Once this is learned, then snapshooting (unless as a deliberately artistic act) needs to fall away in order to become a better photographer. Or, start slow, concentrate, and get better results from the beginning.

I thnk some of the National Geo photographers are snapshooters. 1000-3000 shots per assignment means snapshot mania. Are they truly good, or just truly LUCKY? Even if I never achieve fame or fortune, am I a good photographer?

Chris
canonetc