Hints of Hidden Things

[peterm1]

In the theme of "something hidden" I am trying to identify why we photograph what we do. Do we mirror what we see already in our minds? If our world is murky and disturbed do we point our cameras at those scenes? Or do we find a palliative in what we shoot, some thing pleasing and calming? And when the images are really surreal, are those a reflection of what our minds see or a palliative?

OK, I'll get my Baby Brownie and shoot some vacation scenes at the beach and let it go at that.

I can only say what I had in mind when I posted the original post. I knew that there were certain images I had taken (sometimes by chance sometimes by design) that when I looked at them evoked the thought that something is going on either in the subject's thoughts or in their actions that suggest deeper stuff happening within: Emotions only partially revealed or suggested, or interactions suggesting something deeper in the relationship that is only hinted at. That kind of thing. Or maybe as with the photo of the bench seat overlooking an ocean view there was something missing from the scene (the people) that still suggests the presence of people. That kind of thing too.

Other people are different in their interpretation of the theme. I have no problem with that as we are all different.

Even these images below could be of this nature. To me at least the presence of people is clearly suggested even though they are not actually present at the moment. To me at least that makes these images more interesting because the people are hidden from view and absent, present only in the objects they have left behind.

Hong Kong Alleys by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

 

[boojum]

I can only say what I had in mind when I posted the original post. I knew that there were certain images I had taken (sometimes by chance sometimes by design) that when I looked at them evoked the thought that something is going on either in the subject's thoughts or in their actions that suggest deeper stuff happening within: Emotions only partially revealed or suggested, or interactions suggesting something deeper in the relationship that is only hinted at. That kind of thing. Or maybe as with the photo of the bench seat overlooking an ocean view there was something missing from the scene (the people) that still suggests the presence of people. That kind of thing too.

Other people are different in their interpretation of the theme. I have no problem with that as we are all different.

Even these images could be of this nature. To me at least the presence of people is clearly suggested even though they are not actually present at the moment. To me at least that makes these images more interesting because the people are hidden from view and absent.

Hong Kong Alleys by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

You are far brighter than I. I even doubt that there is one simple answer. Maybe a flourish of answers is not even right. But I still wonder what drives us to aim and press the shutter button. For myself it is a visual free association, an ocular stream of consciousness. I see something, I like the color and light, I point the camera at it and press and pray. Just dumb, stumbling snapshots. And buying gear has not helped one little bit. LOL Just another hopeless, floundering fool. But I do it for fun and I am having fun. That's my crazy. That's my justification. ;o)

Those alleyway pics are nice.

 

[peterm1]

You are far brighter than I. I even doubt that there is one simple answer. Maybe a flourish of answers is not even right. But I still wonder what drives us to aim and press the shutter button. For myself it is a visual free association, an ocular stream of consciousness. I see something, I like the color and light, I point the camera at it and press and pray. Just dumb, stumbling snapshots. And buying gear has not helped one little bit. LOL Just another hopeless, floundering fool. But I do it for fun and I am having fun. That's my crazy. That's my justification. ;o)

Those alleyway pics are nice.

" For myself it is a visual free association, an ocular stream of consciousness. I see something, I like the color and light, I point the camera at it and press and pray. "

Yep that's often it for me too. To the color and light which ae crucial for me (as are shadows) I would add the composition often catches my eye too. I momentarily see an arrangement of image parts and like it. Like this one for example, - a nice compositional arrangement of the subjects that spoke to me at the moment. I do not think it's particularly relevant to this topic but it illustrates how a random arrangement of people can catch the eye.

 

[boojum]

" For myself it is a visual free association, an ocular stream of consciousness. I see something, I like the color and light, I point the camera at it and press and pray. "

Yep that's often it for me too. To the color and light which ae crucial for me (as are shadows) I would add the composition often catches my eye too. I momentarily see an arrangement of image parts and like it. Like this one for example, - a nice compositional arrangement of the subjects that spoke to me at the moment. I do not think it's particularly relevant to this topic but it illustrates how a random arrangement of people can catch the eye.

Yes, composition, I overlooked that. But it is part of the three "must haves".

 

[BernardL]

The only one photographer I'm aware of who didn't fail it down to technicalities is Anna Bocharova (sush).
Anya Bocharova (sush). Portfolio. Demons
She is full time photographer with pictures like this been done after work.

Thank you for that link. She belongs with the greatest.

 

[Tuna]

 

[Ko.Fe.]

" For myself it is a visual free association, an ocular stream of consciousness. I see something, I like the color and light, I point the camera at it and press and pray. "

Yep that's often it for me too. To the color and light which ae crucial for me (as are shadows) I would add the composition often catches my eye too. I momentarily see an arrangement of image parts and like it. Like this one for example, - a nice compositional arrangement of the subjects that spoke to me at the moment. I do not think it's particularly relevant to this topic but it illustrates how a random arrangement of people can catch the eye.

It is hard not to catch one particular arrangement.
Lets be honest. Would you catch it if it was someone else figure?

 

[peterm1]

It is hard not to catch one particular arrangement.
Lets be honest. Would you catch it if it was someone else figure?

Let me be honest, probably yes I would. But let me also be honest in this respect - with some subjects, the result achieved would have been somewhat less aesthetic at least with respect to her part in it.
Though it's not just about young lady's evident youth and attractiveness, it's more about how she is standing against the door in a casual but expectant manner (the door of a crowded cafe as it happens, as she waits for her takeaway to be served). This was something obvious to me only because I was there and observed it, that context is probably not so obvious to viewers of this photo. The other elements of the shot are how the other two subjects in the background (three if you count the one in the deep background) are interacting or at least have a place in the image as a whole. This creates not just the photo of one person, but of a streetscape peopled by a range of folk which is what I was mainly interested in for the purposes of the photo though the young woman is clearly the principal subject.

But also to be honest, if it were just her, I most likely would not have taken the shot as its more the overall composition of figures in the street that mainly caught my eye. But admittedly for a photographer it is always helpful to an image to have people in shots who are good looking, or at least neutral in appearance, rather than the opposite. 🙂

 

[peterm1]

View attachment 4853674

Lovely. Well seen.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

 

[boojum]

Let me be honest, probably yes I would. But let me also be honest in this respect - with some subjects, the result achieved would have been somewhat less aesthetic at least with respect to her part in it.
Though it's not just about young lady's evident youth and attractiveness, it's more about how she is standing against the door in a casual but expectant manner (the door of a crowded cafe as it happens, as she waits for her takeaway to be served). This was something obvious to me only because I was there and observed it, that context is probably not so obvious to viewers of this photo. The other elements of the shot are how the other two subjects in the background (three if you count the one in the deep background) are interacting or at least have a place in the image as a whole. This creates not just the photo of one person, but of a streetscape peopled by a range of folk which is what I was mainly interested in for the purposes of the photo though the young woman is clearly the principal subject.

But also to be honest, if it were just her, I most likely would not have taken the shot as its more the overall composition of figures in the street that mainly caught my eye. But admittedly for a photographer it is always helpful to an image to have people in shots who are good looking, or at least neutral in appearance, rather than the opposite. 🙂

I have a friend here in town who is a good water colorist of some merit. He felt the same way and has done some nice work of lovely ladies. I have one he did of an old GF hanging in my home, a nice Conte crayon drawing. But after some reflection Noel said, perhaps the less than glamorous have merit, too. He did a series of women who were not glamorous. Great Conte crtayon and water color works. So unless you are purely a glamour photgrapher there is charm, beauty and interest in almost all of us if not all of us. My two cents. You got what you paid for.

 

[peterm1]

I have a friend here in town who is a good water colorist of some merit. He felt the same way and has done some nice work of lovely ladies. I have one he did of an old GF hanging in my home, a nice Conte crayon drawing. But after some reflection Noel said, perhaps the less than glamorous have merit, too. He did a series of women who were not glamorous. Great Conte crtayon and water color works. So unless you are purely a glamour photgrapher there is charm, beauty and interest in almost all of us if not all of us. My two cents. You got what you paid for.

I am not a glamour photographer by any means, but I do find myself photographing women more than men, in large measure because (here in Oz anyway) the majority of men I see dress and deport / carry themselves terribly. To include them in a shot would frankly diminish the outcome. 😆 For example overly tubby, ill kempt, badly dressed, in shorts and flip flops etc. is for me a photographic turn off. This applies equally to men and women but I tend to see more men of this sort in street. This is not to say people of either sex need to be super models for me to photograph them if they have something else going for them. Occasionally I will see someone who by normal convention is not conventionally attractive but depending upon what they are doing or how they look in that moment there is something about them that makes me want to photograph them.

The elderly chap in the picture below is now no Brad Pitt in his hey-day, but for all of his age and not a few grey hairs and wrinkles he looks great as a subject, he is well dressed and the situation was an interesting one. Had he been a woman of similar age and dress (without the beard presumably 🙂 ) I think I would have found him about equally appealing as a subject. But subjects of this nature that appeal to me are few and far between. Possibly because I live in Australia and few Australians ever bother - the society is just too casual for that. Perhaps the story would be different in, say, France where people have a reputation of keeping up appearances.

Window lit. by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

 

[Retro-Grouch]

I am not a glamour photographer by any means, but I do find myself photographing women more than men, in large measure because (here in Oz anyway) the majority of men I see dress and deport / carry themselves terribly. To include them in a shot would frankly diminish the outcome. 😆 For example overly tubby, ill kempt, badly dressed, in shorts and flip flops etc. is for me a photographic turn off. This applies equally to men and women but I tend to see more men of this sort in street. This is not to say people of either sex need to be super models for me to photograph them if they have something else going for them. Occasionally I will see someone who by normal convention is not conventionally attractive but depending upon what they are doing or how they look in that moment there is something about them that makes me want to photograph them.

The elderly chap in the picture below is now no Brad Pitt in his hey-day, but for all of his age and not a few grey hairs and wrinkles he looks great as a subject, he is well dressed and the situation was an interesting one. Had he been a woman of similar age and dress (without the beard presumably 🙂 ) I think I would have found him about equally appealing as a subject. But subjects of this nature that appeal to me are few and far between. Possibly because I live in Australia and few Australians ever bother - the society is just too casual for that. Perhaps the story would be different in, say, France where people have a reputation of keeping up appearances.

Window lit. by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

The problem you describe is certainly not unique to Oz! Americans are equally slovenly. Every time I fly, I'm astonished to see adults boarding the plane in pajamas and bedroom slippers. Often they're toting a giant stuffed toy to use as a pillow. A nation of sloppy children...
One bright spot in the US can be found in the Southwest, where I live. Traditional cowboy culture is alive and well, and places a premium on the cultivation of a traditional Southwestern style of dressing. It may not always be fresh off the racks, and may even be tattered and worn by hard ranch use, but the clothes these guys wear look good, and they're proud of their style and their way of life!

 

[peterm1]

The problem you describe is certainly not unique to Oz! Americans are equally slovenly. Every time I fly, I'm astonished to see adults boarding the plane in pajamas and bedroom slippers. Often they're toting a giant stuffed toy to use as a pillow. A nation of sloppy children...
One bright spot in the US can be found in the Southwest, where I live. Traditional cowboy culture is alive and well, and places a premium on the cultivation of a traditional Southwestern style of dressing. It may not always be fresh off the racks, and may even be tattered and worn by hard ranch use, but the clothes these guys wear look good, and they're proud of their style and their way of life!

I know something (i.e. a little) of what you mean about USA cowboy culture and western / southwestern style. There is a store in my home city, Adelaide, which imports "vintage" clothing in this style from USA In fact it is named "Old Midwest American Vintage Clothes" and I have bought a few things from there - Carhart Brand Barn Coats for example, which I think to be stylish and handsome, even when it comes with wear marks, patches and genuine vintage oil stains. 🙂 Also, I have a couple of USA khaki canvas hunting coats from the 1950s and 60's - Redhead Brand is one make. Sometimes these still have blood stains (I presume them to be blood anyway). Nothing wrong with such clothing which I too think is immensely distinguished.

A famous British coat I enjoy similarly wearing, are Barbour country jackets - beloved by working farmers, country squires and the gentry equally and often also worn and loved for years till they literally fall apart. I would never think of anyone wearing coats like these (even if they are tattered) to be poorly dressed as they clearly have a story to tell and a sense of style. But to be truthful these are all redolent of an earlier and less insane time when society was not collapsing. Which is perhaps why I like them.

 

[Retro-Grouch]

I know something (i.e. a little) of what you mean about USA cowboy culture and western / southwestern style. There is a store in my home city, Adelaide, which imports "vintage" clothing in this style from USA In fact it is named "Old Midwest American Vintage Clothes" and I have bought a few things from there - Carhart Brand Barn Coats for example, which I think to be stylish and handsome, even when it comes with wear marks, patches and genuine vintage oil stains. 🙂 Also, I have a couple of USA khaki canvas hunting coats from the 1950s and 60's - Redhead Brand is one make. Sometimes these still have blood stains (I presume them to be blood anyway). Nothing wrong with such clothing which I too think is immensely distinguished.

A famous British coat I enjoy similarly wearing, are Barbour country jackets - beloved by working farmers, country squires and the gentry equally and often also worn and loved for years till they literally fall apart. I would never think of anyone wearing coats like these (even if they are tattered) to be poorly dressed as they clearly have a story to tell and a sense of style. But to be truthful these are all redolent of an earlier and less insane time when society was not collapsing. Which is perhaps why I like them.

And of course, we mustn't forget the Filson brand!

 

[peterm1]

And of course, we mustn't forget the Filson brand!

Yes of course. Filson. For a moment I did forget it. 🙂

 

[boojum]

Carhart barn coats are a standard on rural areas. They are a know value. Makes me think I will have to chuck the LL Bean jackets and get a Carhart. There is a store at the foot of my hill which stocks them, work boots, shirts and trousers in logger style. Logging is a local business. I haven't hard a Carhart barn coat now in decades. Living in CA and Mexico there was no need. There is now in the PNW.

 

[peterm1]

Carhart barn coats are a standard on rural areas. They are a know value. Makes me think I will have to chuck the LL Bean jackets and get a Carhart. There is a store at the foot of my hill which stocks them, work boots, shirts and trousers in logger style. Logging is a local business. I haven't hard a Carhart barn coat now in decades. Living in CA and Mexico there was no need. There is now in the PNW.

Well, the damn things are warm! 🙂 I love the idea of a coat lined with a blanket. 😀

 

[boojum]

Well, the damn things are warm! 🙂 I love the idea of a coat lined with a blanket. 😀

Yeah, they are proletarian basic. No Barbour waxed cotton, just cheap canvas and a cheap thin saddle blanket and metal buttons. It works. I love them and wore them when I lived back East. I worked a year as an estate gardener and that was what I wore during the winter, rain, snow and dry. They just work but do not let them soak through. I guess a Carhart is about as American as it gets. They are not $35 or $40 anymore! But now is when to buy them as they are on sale, except at that thief Bezos' shop. He is pricey.

 

[peterm1]

Yeah, they are proletarian basic. No Barbour waxed cotton, just cheap canvas and a cheap thin saddle blanket and metal buttons. It works. I love them and wore them when I lived back East. I worked a year as an estate gardener and that was what I wore during the winter, rain, snow and dry. They just work but do not let them soak through. I guess a Carhart is about as American as it gets. They are not $35 or $40 anymore! But now is when to buy them as they are on sale, except at that thief Bezos' shop. He is pricey.

Yes, in Oz they are an up-market fashion item though I do not see many people wearing them here (partly due to climate though here in Southern Australia our winters can be pretty cold - though no snow). My guess is most are not aware of them.
But what I wanted to say is that a new blanket lined Carhart costs about $500.00 AUD - about $300 US. The lighter unlined ones come in $100 less. All of which is pretty steep though they do last a lifetime. I was lucky...the two I bought, being "vintage", cost about $100 each. The only problem I have is both are somewhat bigger than they should be for me to wear regularly. Apparently Americans are physically bigger than we are. Or at least I am. Go figure. 😛