Must I shoot artsy photos to be a good photographer?

[ruben]

"Must I shoot artsy photos to be a good photographer?"

What is "a good photographer" ?...........What are "artsy photos" ?
What is "a good man" ?........ What is "a rich man"?

You already know everything is relative. I think at the end of the day there is only one guy Raid Amin will have to be accountable for. His name is Raid Amin.

My kids are already grown, and only my youngest daughter is at home. The images I made from them when they where small are the emotionally strongest among what I have done. Strongest for me.

Could I go back in time with my present knowledge, and still remain today, I would post a different question to RFF: How can I have better shots of my own kids.

Cheers,
Ruben


BTW: I regret not having a TLR at the right time. More eBay shopping Raid! :bang:

 

[wintoid]

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

I did, yes. They really moved me, along with the commentary.

Also, in respect of the Family of Man, probably my earliest interest in photography was sparked by the follow-up book "The Family Of Children", which was kicking around my house when I was about 7 or so. I own a copy now and still consider it some of the most wonderful photography I've ever seen.

 

[Nachkebia]

I think when you classify photos from arty to something else that is already a nonsence... photography is a visual comunication, it is a form of comunicating, saying something unique, storytelling or documenting does not make any difference, but if you shoot something that I (we) see everyday what is the point of capturing that moment? what are you communicating? just providing some kind of information, my child in the school, so what? it should have a drama (dramaturgy (something that starts developes and ends) I don`t think I am making any sence (even to myself) 🙂 🙂 🙂

 

[Oldprof]

Kids are ok, but cats are really artsy.

 

[FrankS]

Isn't everyone being a little too NICE here? You don't have to go to the extreme of Bill M and say everyone's photography sucks, but at what point do you show enough respect to the person asking a question to give an honest answer rather than a placating/nice/politically correct one?

Raid is one of the nicest people on RFF, and he is sharing intimate family photos, but he is in a sense asking how he could be more artistic with them. If I understand his question, it could be restated: what can I do to make these more worthy of the interest of others beyond my family. If we respect Raid, and I do, should we not provide suggestions for improvement rather than say that this family photos are beautiful as they are? They certainly are in the sense of family snapshots, but Raid himself sees shortcomings in the sense of strong images on their own right rather than jsut for their subject matter otherwise he would not have thought to ask his question in the first place.

Everyone, especially Raid, accept this comment/criticism in the respectful spirit in which it was given!

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Of course you can do great stuff with kids pix. Kids are up for it and will do crazy things for you and make nutty suggestions themselves. Talk to them and ask how they'd like to be portrayed and then do it for them.

But I understand FrankS. My mate Leitao carries his camera 24/7/365, and when I meet him in a cafe he's always ready to show me the latest on the little built-in screen. But at least he edits and he sets it in a more or less OK slideshow mode.

So we sit there and look at architectural photos, he's got a 'thing' about chimneys, and I make encouraging noises. Then we usually hit some grandchildren photos which are truly awful. I used to have to say 'This is personal stuff, would you like to FF to something else'. But nowadays he leaps across the table (and he's an older man) and skips through the kids pix.

Now, if Leitao had your insight Raid he could produce kids pix as good as his architectural stuff.

Talk to the kids and do something edgy.

 

[VictorM.]

I began taking pictures in the mid-sixties. Along with pictures of family and friends, I tried 'artsy' photography. No one should be surprised that I value the pictures of family and friends over the artsy stuff. Also, I regret not taking the pictures I wanted at the time because I thought they were corny cliches. The attached picture, from the summer of 1967, is of my sister and one of her cats. I used a Yashica D (Yashinon lens) and Verichrome Pan film. It's on one of the first rolls I put through that camera.

 

[MP Guy]

do you mean artsy fartsy 🙂

 

[raid]

do you mean artsy fartsy 🙂

Jorge,
I was trying to spare the RFF the bad smell of the "fartsy" portion!

Raid

 

[fitzihardwurshd]

I
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

My perception is that using B&W film to take photos of anything else is more "artsy" and "creative".
Excepted some real cracks like Todd Hanz and Daniel Ridings and some few others whose names I forgot.

Fitzi

 

[tkluck]

"Must I shoot artsy photos to be a good photographer?"

"Must I shoot artsy photos to be a good photographer?"

Jorge,
I was trying to spare the RFF the bad smell of the "fartsy" portion!

Raid

The answer is blowin' in the wind...

A good carpenter will make very nice wooden spoons, but if he wants to sell'em for $50 a spoon he'd better have a long line about the"Soul of the Spoon".
Art is the original bull market...
Just bear with it...

 

[blakley]

So the premise is a little weird.

Raid, your family are people. Photos of people span the whole range from "crap" to "arty". Sally Mann took "arty" photos of her family - you could do the same (if you wanted to, and trained yourself) with your family. Or you could do something else, but it's just plain odd to think that limiting yourself to people - even a few people - limits your creative options; look what photo.net's Tamara Loncar-Agoli does using herself and her family as models (OK, she's prettier than you, but you get my point - Cindy Sherman doesn't even need her family to produce her work!).

I do a lot of experimenting with my daughter as a model and I get results I think are nice; this one from my gallery is an example.

Finally, of course, you're not locked in a dark basement. You probably have flowers in your yard. The streets around your house & workplace are full of possibilites at some scale (my wife consistently takes better pictures than me - partly because, I think, she uses only a 90mm macro lens at 1:1 reproduction ratio, and has learned to see that way).

And, of course, you can take good photos in bars and coffee shops - your family won't begrudge you an hour a day to relax and take the odd shot. Here's one of my recent photos from the bar.

 

[BudGreen]

It's been pointed out above that there's nothing about photos of one's children or family that precludes it from being "artsy", for lack of a better term. There are plenty of examples including Sally Mann and others that created artful photos in which their children were the subjects. There those who will not be interested in looking at photos of children, just as there are some that don’t care for photos of trees, winding staircases, cityscapes, or any other number of recurring themes on this site.

It sounds to me that your underlying question really is how does one photograph one’s family in a way that is interesting to someone outside the family. First of all, I don’t think it’s necessarily a given that this should be a goal, but as someone whose favorite subjects include his six and seven year-old sons, it’s is a question I wrestle with a lot.

The pictures I take of my family mean the most to me. I also take pictures of trees, winding staircases and cityscapes when I find an interesting composition or sometimes just to sharpen my photographic skills. Occasionally theses two things intersect and I wind up with a family picture which depicts a universal theme or makes use of a technique that I feel represents an artistic accomplishment. These are the ones that I post to my gallery.

I don’t claim any special insight or success with this, only that it’s a subject I’ve given some consideration to. Here are a couple from my gallery:

 

[Nachkebia]

Amazing shots BudGreen!

 

[sf]

to be a good photographer, you must take photos that either you or your viewers enjoy viewing. For one reason or another. Technical or subject reasons.

Of course, being a good photographer isn't necessary to being a happy photographer.

Being a happy photographer IS necessary, however. If you dislike photography, you're just a person with a camera.

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Nice photos BudGreen.

 

[pstevenin]

Isn't everyone being a little too NICE here? You don't have to go to the extreme of Bill M and say everyone's photography sucks, but at what point do you show enough respect to the person asking a question to give an honest answer rather than a placating/nice/politically correct one?

Raid is one of the nicest people on RFF, and he is sharing intimate family photos, but he is in a sense asking how he could be more artistic with them. If I understand his question, it could be restated: what can I do to make these more worthy of the interest of others beyond my family. If we respect Raid, and I do, should we not provide suggestions for improvement rather than say that this family photos are beautiful as they are? They certainly are in the sense of family snapshots, but Raid himself sees shortcomings in the sense of strong images on their own right rather than jsut for their subject matter otherwise he would not have thought to ask his question in the first place.

Everyone, especially Raid, accept this comment/criticism in the respectful spirit in which it was given!

I do not know why you are not happy with your family's photo. You're one of the most talented photographer of this forum, and I just envy you.

Concerning the subject, I am hooked by my twins and I obviously have to cope with it. I personally prefer the brutal way. I shoot them every day, with any piece of gear available. Sometimes when I am lucky, I get a decent one. And for that kind of photos I do not think to make them pose will add any 'gutts' to the instant. Even if the photo of the girl with the flower is brilliant, it definetely not the kind of ones I want for my family. In a word, family is life, not art...

 

[ghost]

don't people say life is art? or is it art is life? anywho...

 

[ghost]

has anyone mentioned ralph eugene meatyard in this thread?

 

[fitzihardwurshd]

It sounds to me that your underlying question really is how does one photograph one’s family in a way that is interesting to someone outside the family.

Your question is the right one , Bud, but I do not see it underlying to the original post.
The photos are great, proves you've found the right answer for the right question, tho you used B&W, thus risking to get too artsy. 🙄

Compliment, it's a pleasure to watch them !🙂 Still it always depends on he photog.

Fitzi