minimalist photographer?

[dshfoto]

Anyone consider them a "Minimalist Photographer"? There is considerable discussion about the Minimalist movement. Does anyone consider themselves a minimalist photographer/\? and if so how do you do it?

What is minimalism? If we had to sum it up in a single sentence, we would say, Minimalism is a tool to rid yourself of life’s excess in favor of focusing on what’s important—so you can find happiness, fulfillment, and freedom.

 

[nickthetasmaniac]

Anyone consider them a "Minimalist Photographer"? There is considerable discussion about the Minimalist movement. Does anyone consider themselves a minimalist photographer/\? and if so how do you do it?

What is minimalism? If we had to sum it up in a single sentence, we would say, Minimalism is a tool to rid yourself of life’s excess in favor of focusing on what’s important—so you can find happiness, fulfillment, and freedom.

I'd describe myself as a 'wannabe' minimalist photographer perhaps... Wannabe because I think minimalism in anything - photography, design, engineering, food, whatever - is exceptionally difficult to do well, and I won't try and claim that I do it well...

I think minimalism is about understanding and executing intent in the most direct way possible. Done well and it can be remarkable, but it's risky though. Done poorly I'm reminded of Robert Venturi's comment in response to Mies van der Rohe and the Modernists - 'less is a bore...'

 

[Godfrey]

From Wikipedia ... "Minimalism (disambiguation)" ...

The term minimalism may refer to:

• Minimalism (visual arts)
• Minimalism, in art and design
• Minimalist music, a musical term
• Holy minimalism
• Minimal techno
• Simple living or Minimalist lifestyle
• Judicial minimalism, the United States judicial philosophy
• Minimalism (syntax), a theory of natural language syntax developed by Noam Chomsky in the 1990s
• Minimalism (Biblical archaeology), a school of archaeology of the Levant that gives priority to archaeological findings rather than the Biblical record
• Minimalism (technical communication), a theory of task-oriented and user-centered instruction and documentation
• Minimalism (computing), a philosophy of programming and configuring computers

The larger discussion of "Minimalism" is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimalism
It's a fairly good page on the subject.

Being a minimalist in your photography doesn't mean Minimalism is a tool to rid yourself of life’s excess in favor of focusing on what’s important—so you can find happiness, fulfillment, and freedom. That's more "valuing simplicity" or an ascetic lifestyle with the notion that such a lifestyle furthers pursuit of the goodness that you mention. Being a minimalist in your photography can mean anything from 'preferring to use simple tools' to 'pursuing a Minimalist aesthetic in your images.'

I generally prefer photography which pursues a Minimalist aesthetic. That says nothing about what I engage with in order to produce it or whether I espouse ascetic ideals to seek harmony and joy in my life.

Your question engenders a rather broad conversation which belongs in a Philosophy of Photography topic area.

G

 

[thereabouts]

Not sure that I would fit into any 'formal' depiction of Minimalism (with a capital M), but a lot of my photography focuses on minimal elements of things with a larger perspective.

This is particularity useful when I don't have time to go off and shoot specific projects and allows me to use the cameras that I happen to be carrying about with me on my day-to-day activities. I.E. Even on the same old boring trip to work every day, one can often find a way to create an interesting piece of photographic art.

Are these minimalist? Abstract? Urban?

 

[nongfuspring]

Minimalism as an art movement, something being "aesthetically minimal", and minimalism in life are three very different topics.

I don't know of any photographers that were aligned with the Minimalist movement, but aesthetically minimal photography is very common.

 

[Jdi]

To me it's meant a simple yet competent body, one or 2 lenses, no distractions from gear forums and focusing on getting the most out of what I have. I'm in year 2 of my refocus. 3 bodies got sold, 3 lenses so far and a couple to go. So far it's been a peaceful return to the basics.

@thereabouts: lovely

 

[citizen99]

"Add simplicity" .

 

[grouchos_tash]

Minimal photography makes me think of Louis Baltz. I've noticed looking at my own photography that the majority of my photos are totally absent of people. I guess they are minimal in that respect.

 

[brennanphotoguy]

For me it means not being distracted by the gear. You have a tool that does the job and you're set. I would consider myself pretty minimalist (comparatively speaking). I mostly shoot my M3 with a 50mm Summicron with Tri-X one way. My Rollei comes out from time to time but that's all I have and all I really *need*. I think minimalism is about not having excess or more than you need.

 

[zuiko85]

First thing I thought of with that question was equipment, what does a person use and why. I suppose if your only camera is a cardboard box with a sheet of photo paper taped to one side and a pinhole in a little section of drinks can on the other, then you have reached minimalism, equipment wise anyway.

 

[MCTuomey]

if we're talking about minimizing gear, all i know is to use whatever works or suits me. i like the idea of carrying nothing more than a body with a wide or normal lens, but then behave differently when i want a tight shot and the subject is 10 yards away ...

if i were to minimize gear i'd have to relax my "get the shot i want" ethic in favor of accepting whatever shot is in front of me and making the best of it. Like this -

For me it means not being distracted by the gear .... You have a tool that does the job and you're set. I mostly shoot my M3 with a 50mm Summicron with Tri-X one way. .

if we're talking minimalism relative to subject matter, i'm always impressed with the style (thanks to Gary for the Baltz reference) but my attempts in that direction don't work. my pics just look lifeless, none of the dynamism and tension i see in the work of those who do it well.

not a minimalist here i'd say.

 

[lynnb]

Anyone consider them a "Minimalist Photographer"? There is considerable discussion about the Minimalist movement. Does anyone consider themselves a minimalist photographer/\? and if so how do you do it?

What is minimalism? If we had to sum it up in a single sentence, we would say, Minimalism is a tool to rid yourself of life’s excess in favor of focusing on what’s important—so you can find happiness, fulfillment, and freedom.

From Godfrey's Wiki link: "The term minimalist often colloquially refers to anything that is spare or stripped to its essentials".

From the Guggenheim: "Minimalism. Though never a self-proclaimed movement, Minimalism refers to painting or sculpture made with an extreme economy of means and reduced to the essentials of geometric abstraction".

Minimalism done well can result in very strong images. I'd classify quite a few of my pictures as minimalist - particularly those taken of the ocean and shore, locations which naturally lend themselves towards minimalism - spaces where simple geometric planes and simple (yet often with subtle variation) colour fields can be found in nature.

It's not the only type of seeing that I do, however - so I'd not classify myself as a minimalist photographer; rather someone who sometimes sees subjects where a minimalist interpretation seems natural.

How do you do it? I think a good starting point is to look at the work of minimalist artists - preferably in a gallery, or in the case of sculpture, wherever it is located. Again I'd direct you to Godfrey's link, which contains many references. Or a search of the world's major public Modern Art gallery sites online. Apart from Mondrian and Bauhaus artists and architects (eg. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe) and Japanese architecture and landscaping, I'll add sculptor Richard Serra's beautiful, simple work with curved planes.

Your post mentioned "there is considerable discussion" and "we would say", which sounds a bit vague - considerable discussion by whom? And who is "we"?

regards,

 

[Scapevision]

I'm sometimes a minimalist, sometimes not. I prefer isolation and no clutter in the scene, but sometimes it is in need of some chaos. Same can be said about life.
What is easy for me may not be easy for others, I think it's a matter of seeing. You can learn to see the scene in a certain way. It is also not genre specific, one can do minimalist approach to any type of photography.
I find that tools don't matter at all. What matters is your brain. Look at some exceptional work from others. Minimalism isn't necessarily about keeping the most important in, it's more of what you take out of the scene. Think in geometrical way, think in nordic design, think in unusual composition rules, negative space is key. Design knowledge helps here. I am sure you can find a lot of cheesy photography blogs that can teach you all the bits and pieces you need to succeed.

 

[lynnb]

Here's an example from nature and some from the built environment. This is how I see minimalism in nature and everyday life. Hope this helps - the third pic of the reeds at night is probably more abstract than minimalist

last light #7071 by lynnb's snaps, on Flickr

intersecting planes #0374 by lynnb's snaps, on Flickr

blur abstract #0113 by lynnb's snaps, on Flickr

 

[narsuitus]

No, I do not consider myself a minimalist photographer. However, there are time when I feel the need to get away from the bells and whistles of modern photographic equipment. During those times, I like to grab my old Ansco Speedex folding camera or my old Argus C3 rangefinder and shoot without a light meter, film advance, self-cocking shutter, or an other modern conveniences.

When I want to go even more primitive, I like to shoot single-shot sheet film in my do-it-yourself pinhole cameras.


Pinhole Cameras by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[dshfoto]

I guess when I first thought of the question, I was thinking about how to reduce the amount of photographic equipment I have and still be content with the photos I do take. There probable isn't a formula for that, but I was interested in how others approached the problem -- or, the solution of reducing the amount of gear one winds up possessing.

How long before I don't use a camera should I consider eliminating it? Should I have 2 medium format and 2 35mm cameras and switch out the one that I use the least, to try something else?

But, the discussion of what is in the image is also very interesting. It creates a focus on concentration of what one is shooting.

I appreciate the comments.

Steve H.

 

[Fjäll]

I guess when I first thought of the question, I was thinking about how to reduce the amount of photographic equipment I have and still be content with the photos I do take. There probable isn't a formula for that, but I was interested in how others approached the problem -- or, the solution of reducing the amount of gear one winds up possessing.

How long before I don't use a camera should I consider eliminating it? Should I have 2 medium format and 2 35mm cameras and switch out the one that I use the least, to try something else?

But, the discussion of what is in the image is also very interesting. It creates a focus on concentration of what one is shooting.

I appreciate the comments.

Steve H.

I have what people refer to as way too many cameras. But every one serves a purpose. Most are cameras with non interchangeable primes. When I go out I pick one camera to serve a purpose, to take a certain type of picture. Like the Ricoh GR for close up people shots or the Rolleiflex for the more carefully composed frame.

I could probably cover most of my photography with a 35mm and a 50mm on my Leica but different cameras makes me take different pictures. And I like cameras. That said, I try to separate gear and photography as far as I can.

I avoid accessories such as filters, tripods or lens caps. My photography takes enough space in the daily routines as it is.

Only when I keep things simple my photography gets simple too, not necessarily simple as in composition or style but as in a way of doing it.

 

[finguanzo]

My first 2 or 3 shots of a roll are pretty minimalist...

 

[Calzone]

Steve,

I'm in a similar space. I have more cameras and gear than is practical. Some unfortunately goes unused or does not see frequent use, but since it took a long time to accumulate my "treasures" it is hard to cull down.

I followed the "one camera-one lens thread" and for me that one camera-one lens would have to be my Monochrom and 28 Cron (my most used lens). If I would add another lens it would be my 50 Lux ASPH. I could do a lot of photography with this one camera and two lenses.

Also know I could print big and that I have all the gear to do that owning a 7800 and a 27 Inch Eizo.

Anyways if I were homeless these items would be in my shopping cart.

My gal now understands that she should not remind me repeatedly about culling down my gear. I explained that the repetition comes across as pressure, and I further explain that these treasures once sold cannot be replaced. I further my position that I bought mostly items that I can either get my money back if I cash out, or even make a profit. Know that all my gear has been serviced and is ready to be used for the rest of my life.

I'm seriously considering becoming an "urban gypsy" where we travel living in major cities around the world for a few years at a time that requires the most minimal of possessions. While many people have equity in their homes, I have hard assets that I could sell like my guitar, bass and amp collection that could fill a large bedroom.

Another cumbersome asset is my tube stereo... All these items give me a strong sense of security, I enjoy them, and at this point they are not liabilities that cost me money. When and if they do then I will consider cashing out.

The above example of becoming an urban gypsy is the most sparse situation, but what if life allows me to keep all my treasures. To avoid remorse I am putting off the downsizing for now because there is no reason to, and to avoid possible future remorse. I'm still at a point in my life where anything is still possible.

Also know that if Leica came out with a SLM (SL Monochrom) at PhotoPlusExpo later this year, it might be a game changer for me and might compel me to downsize my medium format film camera collection. The next step would be downsize all my 35mm to only one film camera.

Also downsizing (getting rid of 2/3rds of my belongings) to live in Madhattan really simplified life. I will also say that I never knew anyone with a complicated life that was happy. I already did some serious downsizing.

Cal

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I went to Toronto today. Walked my 10km photo walk. Single camera, single lens. Used 23 frames out 36+ roll.