How do you communicate emotion in photos?

Sejanus.Aelianus said:
This was an interesting thread but I find myself agreeing with Jamie's last post, although perhaps for a different reason.

As soon as someone talks about "great photographers", my immediate reaction is "according to who's opinion"? The older I get, the more I realise that the word "great" in this or any similar context, is a totally subjective opinion masquerading as objectivity. As such, in my opinion, it devalues any further discussion because someone is playing power games instead of addressing the issue.

The early postings threw up a number of views with which I found myself agreeing or disagreeing. However, they made no claims to authority and so added considerably to the discussion. There now seems to be a closing down of the discussion on the basis of claimed authority, which Jamie has quite rightly indicated as spurious and destructive to the conversation (apologies if I am maligning Jamie's intent here).

I believe that, by its very nature, emotion is subjective and therefor the photographer may propose but only the viewer can dispose.
Click to expand...

History and time help decide all great artists. Whether you like or dislike something is an entirely different conversation.
 
Jamie123 said:
Ok, let me make this short because I actually have things to do and I don't have the patience for inane arguments.
You equated style and voice whereas I made a case for distinguishing the two, i.e. referring to the technique and the look as 'style' and 'voice' for something like having a point of view. If you want to insist on putting everything that indicates the authorship of an artist into the 'style' category I'm fine with that. I'm not saying it's wrong, I just think we should be clear about what we're discussing.

But that's really the last post I'll make in response to you. No offense meant but I really disagree with most of your points so far and you seem to think you have some authority on the subject which I just don't recognize. Sorry. There's no point in carrying on the argument as it won't get anywhere. Let's just agree to disagree.
Click to expand...


No offense taken. As far as being an authority I never claimed to be but there is certainly a lot out there to read that would support some of what I'm saying and I have quoted some great artists (history has decided not me) that agree. Some of those artists work I like some maybe some I don't like so much. Whether I like their work or not still doesn't change whether many other people like them or the impact they have made on photography.

Back to how you can communicate emotions color is one element that can help you communicate emotion. There are books on Color Theory and Two Dimensional Design that can help and they are all part of using visual language.
http://char.txa.cornell.edu/language/introlan.htm

http://www.amazon.com/The-Photographers-Eye-John-Szarkowski/dp/087070527X/ref=zg_bs_2027_13
 
History and time help decide all great artists. Whether you like or dislike something is an entirely different conversation.
Click to expand...

I see that as the same trick under a different guise. There is, of course, an entire industry devoted to convincing others that a given set of views is correct and all others, at best, misguided. Its practioners go under various titles such as "critic", "educator" or "priest" but the game is the same: "my opinion is right because it is sanctified by time/tradition/the state".

I am firmly of the opinion that, outside of engineering and science, anyone who is certain of the correctness of their opinion is simply seeking to exert power over others. I freely admit that this is, by definition, true of me but I hope I recognise the danger and, therefor, the limits I must place on myself.

To put it simply, no matter how many appear to share your opinion, observation suggests that more do not. This does not invalidate your opinion, nor does it invalidate the different opinions of others.
 
Sejanus.Aelianus said:
I see that as the same trick under a different guise. There is, of course, an entire industry devoted to convincing others that a given set of views is correct and all others, at best, misguided. Its practioners go under various titles such as "critic", "educator" or "priest" but the game is the same: "my opinion is right because it is sanctified by time/tradition/the state".

I am firmly of the opinion that, outside of engineering and science, anyone who is certain of the correctness of their opinion is simply seeking to exert power over others. I freely admit that this is, by definition, true of me but I hope I recognise the danger and, therefor, the limits I must place on myself.

To put it simply, no matter how many appear to share your opinion, observation suggests that more do not. This does not invalidate your opinion, nor does it invalidate the different opinions of others.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is anyone outside engineering and science that can back up their opinion with something more is just exerting power? For a creative group you sure don't seem to like opposing opinions. I never said I was right because ultimately we all have to do whats right for each one of us. The OP was asking for some advice I gave mine and I gave clear reasons why I think the way I do. I do believe that seeing is an artists vision and ultimately what evolves into the artists style and style is their voice because its the way they decide to communicate. Thats what I believe at this moment in time. As far as creating emotion in images I posted some thoughts on it myself and some thoughts from others and some of them have reached a level of recognition. Theres plenty of opposing views in this thread to mine, in fact I would say the majority are so but that still doesn't mean I am wrong or on the other hand I'm trying to exert power just because I can substantiate some of my thoughts. I pointed the OP to info that may or may not help his journey. I can tell you that color theory and two dimensional design are great places to start.
 
So what you are saying is anyone outside engineering and science that can back up their opinion with something more is just exerting power?
Click to expand...

Forgive me for saying so, but you are simply inventing a straw man to make a non-existent point and providing proof of my assertion in the process.

I cannot see how any reasonable person could take the meaning from what I wrote that you appear to be.

I shall therefor follow Jamie's example and agree to differ with you from now on.
 
Yeah I know ya can't have any of these opposing views around that might actually stimulate conversation and whats next real creativity? We need to discredit any voices of decent as straw man arguments.

Color theory, two dimensional design and the history of photography are not straw man arguments. The first two get right at the heart of this thread and are tools to help someone convey emotion.
 
airfrogusmc said:
Yeah I know ya can't have any of these opposing views around that might actually stimulate conversation and whats next real creativity? We need to discredit any voices of decent as straw man arguments.

Color theory, two dimensional design and the history of photography are not straw man arguments. The first two get right at the heart of this thread and are tools to help someone convey emotion.
Click to expand...

Well anyone who stayed awake through Rood and Munsell deserves to be heard I feel ... I dono much about the history of photography though, is that like those filters one gets in Instagram?
 
Sparrow said:
Well anyone who stayed awake through Rood and Munsell deserves to be heard I feel ... I dono much about the history of photography though, is that like those filters one gets in Instagram?
Click to expand...


heres a couple books ya might wanna check then and some of these address the thought and philosophies of the photographers along with the history. This is a philosophy forum isn't it?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/08...pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1389517282&pf_rd_i=507846

http://www.amazon.com/Photography-E...1355162902&sr=1-10&keywords=images+and+essays

http://www.amazon.com/World-History...&sr=1-3&keywords=history+of+photography+books

http://www.amazon.com/History-Photo...&sr=1-1&keywords=history+of+photography+books

http://www.amazon.com/Photography-I...&sr=1-7&keywords=history+of+photography+books
 
airfrogusmc said:
heres a couple books ya might wanna check then and some of these address the thought and philosophies of the photographers along with the history. This is a philosophy forum isn't it?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/08...pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1389517282&pf_rd_i=507846

http://www.amazon.com/Photography-E...1355162902&sr=1-10&keywords=images+and+essays

http://www.amazon.com/World-History...&sr=1-3&keywords=history+of+photography+books

http://www.amazon.com/History-Photo...&sr=1-1&keywords=history+of+photography+books

http://www.amazon.com/Photography-I...&sr=1-7&keywords=history+of+photography+books
Click to expand...

I'm still stuck on naive set theory sadly ...

... tell me; if the village's photographer takes the portraits of all the villagers who don't take self-portraits, who takes the photographers portrait ... it's about thinking, not reading :)
 
airfrogusmc said:
Yeah I know ya can't have any of these opposing views around that might actually stimulate conversation and whats next real creativity? We need to discredit any voices of decent as straw man arguments.

Color theory, two dimensional design and the history of photography are not straw man arguments. The first two get right at the heart of this thread and are tools to help someone convey emotion.
Click to expand...

Anything that comes next won't need all these quotes and references you mentioned in your earlier posts.
Heres my thoughts. I think great photographs communicate ideas and great artists all use visual language to achieve that. Learning how to use this language frees you from rules.
Click to expand...
This is a bold contradiction. All learning is good, but it won't teach you how to tune your own lyre. And as an aside, there are also great artists that do not use any visual language at all.

Sorry if this sounds a little crude, but I feel you're not responding to the arguments offered by other posters. As you're obviously not a native speaker - nor am I -, perhaps you should reread some of the former posts that try to establish some sort of distincion between the terms used.

All this without acrimony...:cool:

Nescio
 
I would argue that 2000 + years of two dimensional art that many artist may use it and don't know it.

You can use color to convey emotion. For instance in some pieces depending on other supporting element red/orange can convey anger, passion. Complimentary colors can create color vibration making an uneasy feeling. Jagged lines can also create an uneasiness. Strong diagonals can give a feel of movement. Now use several of these visual elements together and it might create a visual communication between artist and viewer. Most great artist not only know this whether its in the subconscious or it conscious knowledge but use it because its usually in the work.
 
Sparrow said:
I'm still stuck on naive set theory sadly ...

... tell me; if the village's photographer takes the portraits of all the villagers who don't take self-portraits, who takes the photographers portrait ... it's about thinking, not reading :)
Click to expand...

I think in this case Plato's Cave is more appropriate. ;)
 
Sejanus.Aelianus said:
Forgive me for saying so, but you are simply inventing a straw man to make a non-existent point and providing proof of my assertion in the process.

I cannot see how any reasonable person could take the meaning from what I wrote that you appear to be.

I shall therefor follow Jamie's example and agree to differ with you from now on.
Click to expand...
You are not the only one. I fear that this potentially interesting topic has been derailed. All analogies break down sooner or later, such as 'voice' and 'style', but their limits have to be explored in a spirit of good faith, not dogmatism, not (often substantially irrelevant) quotes, aka 'case law'. Reading law gave me some experience of the latter.

Cheers,

R.
 
@airfrogusmc

Oh, and just to make things clear, I do like the pics you posted on the Digital Leica M8 / M8.2 / M9 / M-E /Mono / M10 aka "M" thread. So please keep on talking with you camera...

Nescio
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom