Must I shoot artsy photos to be a good photographer?

[raid]

I used to read all of the late Galen Rowell's books on exiting nature photography, and then I would travel out to the Southwest of the USA to do photos from dawn to dusk.

This was followed by a multi-year project of street photography. I would drive from Pensacola to New Orleans (200 miles on I-10) and stay in the French Quarter taking photos of people until about 1am and then drive back to Pensacola.

Then I got into married life, and we had two children. Since then, I am quite content with limiting my photography to the outlets that arise as I am with my family.

When I look at what is being posted in the galleries of photo.net or here on the RFF, I wonder whether children photography is being viewed as "good photography" or whether the perception is that using B&W film to take photos of anything else is more "artsy" and "creative".


I am sure that quite a few of the RFF members have been through what I am going through. When photography of new subjects becomes difficult to do, we go and buy some more lenses 🙂 I must admit that collecting cameras and lenses to the degree of affordability is something that I enjoy doing too in addition to photography.

What is your input on this thread?


Raid

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Kids photos are OK so long as you wear a beret and smoke a really smelly cigarette while you're doing it. A mate of mine gets his cigarettes sent to him from Cuba, but I guess that's off-limits to you.

Seriously, you must photograph what you've got. You and me both can't photograph snow. You can photograph kids, but I can't. I can walk out the door at 05.00 when maybe you've got family responsibilities and so on.

When you take your kids to the ocean, and I remember that you do, after the kids shots can you do some waves, surfers, lifeguards, beachfront homes, and tacky shops and diners?

 

[bcs89]

As far as I'm concerned Raid, your "family Photo's" are, at the very least, the equal to any others here.

 

[rover]

Building on what Jon says, you have to make photographs to be a good photographer, regardless of your subjects. Like you Raid a lot of the film I use is dedicated to my son, but I try to shoot more too when I can. Also, all of your photography of your children doesn't have to be straight up things to keep the wife happy. Take some shots for yourself, things that you see and want to capture. These three aren't on the top of my wife's list, but I like them.

 

[FrankS]

There are snapshots of kids and family that are a priceless record of family life, but there is also creative and interpretive photography of family members which strives to be something more than a simple/direct documentation.

 

[rover]

There are snapshots of kids and family that are a priceless record of family life, but there is also creative and interpretive photography of family members which strives to be something more than a simple/direct documentation.

That is what I was trying to say. 😎

 

[mc_vancouver]

When I look at what is being posted in the galleries of photo.net or here on the RFF, I wonder whether children photography is being viewed as "good photography" or whether the perception is that using B&W film to take photos of anything else is more "artsy" and "creative".Raid

Raid, I too question what I am shooting. First, with film being far more expensive than digital, I am selective in what and how much I shoot--not necessarily a bad thing, given that my wife can shoot a thousand images or so on her 1GB SD card, but does that translate into a greater percentage of good shots? I'm not saying. Secondly, I have gone from being an avid photographer in my twenties and thirties to being more of an occasional one now that I've hit 50. Not because I don't like photography,but I think I learned to see from photography, and in learning to see, have learned that sometimes--perhaps a majority of the time--simply seeing something is enough. I don't have to capture it. The camera comes between one and what one is seeing.

I remember a friend, a long time ago, who took photos of people with a telephoto lens exclusively, while I stuck to my 35 and 50mm lens. He didn't want to engage, while I liked my subjects to be aware that I was there. My family don't necessarily make the best subjects, but I'm around them more than anyone else, so naturally I take more photographs of them than any other single subject. I don't know if they're art; I certainly try to get artful compositions, but often its the moment I'm looking for, as well as a record of a time in our lives.

Which is more important to you: to make Art, or to simply shoot to record a time, or to experience and SEE, and (sacrilege!) leave the camera at home?

 

[J. Borger]

How about "artsy" pictures of your children if you are not satisfied with the snapshots?
There is no contradiction perse.
Stieglitz pictures of his daughter Kitty and his wife Georgia O Keefe, Harry Callahans pictures of his wife Eleonor and his little daughter, Sally Mann's pictures of her children ......... the best work of these photographers were family-pictures.

Han

 

[wintoid]

Personally I think you shoot what you shoot. If you're a good photographer, you'll shoot it well. I think it's a mistake to look outside yourself for a definition of "good".

 

[FrankS]

Sometimes a snapshot is exactly what's called for. A simple documentation of a moment in time that is made and then life is lived to its fullest again with just that brief interuption.

Sometimes you have the time to improve on a snapshot and make a stab at creating art. To do this you:

-make a descision on focal length to use to achieve a desired foregound/background relationship
-make a descision on f-stop, eg. to acheive out of focus areas to isolate your subject
-make a descision on shutter speed, eg. to acheive a slight amount of blur to indicate movement
-make a descision on exposure
-consider the background as well as the primary subject
-avoid distracting visual elements within the frame
-explore different framing possibilities
-consider changing your position so as to alter subject/background relationships
-consider how a smaller part of the image could represent the whole
-decide how much envirinment to include within the frame to provide a context
-try to capture a mood, an emotion, an interaction

and I'm sure there's more, but the point is, you don't always want to do this because it takes too much time and your family will end up hating you and your photography. But these are some of the things that are done when you are striving for more than a simple snapshot.

 

[dreilly]

I too focus a lot of my photography on my family. They're the people I'm intimately tied to, they're the people I watch all day like a hawk, looking for something new, a new light to see them in. They're fascinating.

So my gallery has a lot of family pictures in it. Some okay, some I really love. I put one that I really love into the RFF book 2.

But yes, some people dismiss these and suggest I seperate them from my serious photography! Well, it is my serious....oh, bother!

 

[raid]

Frank:

I appreciate what you and others are adding to this thread.
I have to agree with the view that taking family photos doesnot have to limit
Creativity.

Raid


==================

"Sometimes a snapshot is exactly what's called for. A simple documentation of a moment in time that is made and then life is lived to its fullest again with just that brief interuption.

Sometimes you have the time to improve on a snapshot and make a stab at creating
"

 

[ray_g]

Children are excellent subjects since they display their emotions so vividly, and without restraint. I try to capture that, rather than posing them.

Taking pictures of your own kids is easy, but taking pictures of other kids, that's different and possibly one of the hardest subjects you can tackle.

 

[raid]

Ray:I would not enjoy as much taking photos of other peolple's kids.

 

[Jungle Jim]

Raid--

Rule #1: Take pictures of what YOU like.
Rule #2: Have FUN doing what you like.

Life is way too short and children grow way too fast. When your children are grown and off to college, you will want to pull your pictures out and relive those memories with your wife.

If you want to get into "artsy", try using some techniques of successful portrait photographers. One of my favorites is Monte Zucker. Check his website out at Montezucker.com (No relationship to him.) Some people detest Monte but I enjoy reading about his tips and how he uses light and backgrounds to tell a story about his subject.

But most of all, HAVE FUN!!

 

[VinceC]

I tend to think of my children as a chance to embark on a significant multi-decade photo project. Finding new and ineresting ways to photograph them keeps me connected to visual artistry.

Last weekend, at a used bookstore, I found a book of the groundbreaking 1955 "Family of Man" exhibit that included not a few photographs of children. The exhibit's closing image was a now-famous photograph that W. Eugene Smith took of his own children in his backyard while recuperating from a World War II injury that made it difficult for him to take photographs.

Here's a link to it:
The Walk to Paradise Garden

I don't think there's anything wrong with taking pictures of your kids. Good pictures of children are good pictures. Bad pictures of subjects other than children continue to be bad pictures.

 

[raid]

Vince: Thanks fo the link. I love the photos there.

Raid

 

[ghost]

How about "artsy" pictures of your children if you are not satisfied with the snapshots?
There is no contradiction perse.
Stieglitz pictures of his daughter Kitty and his wife Georgia O Keefe, Harry Callahans pictures of his wife Eleonor and his little daughter, Sally Mann's pictures of her children ......... the best work of these photographers were family-pictures.

Han

all excellent suggestions.

did anyone catch mike johnston's portfolio of his son in black & white photography a few months back? great non-"artsy" photos!

 

[amateriat]

I think an "aware" photographer (let's not bring "good" into this for the moment) finds images wherever he or she dwells. Inspiration carries you the rest of the way (usually).


- Barrett

 

[Gid]

If you are a good photographer your art will shine through regardless of the subject matter.