Overview of my photography workflow.

[prosophos]

Hi everybody,

I'm writing some articles describing my photography workflow; it's become a little more philosophical than practical, hence the post here.

If anybody is interested in reading the posts, here they are. Constructive criticism is welcomed.

Thanks,

Peter.
www.prosophos.com
-

• My Photography Workflow, Part 1 (Introduction).
• My Photography Workflow, Part 2 (Overview – 5 items I consider when creating images).
• My Photography Workflow, Part 3 (Inspiration).
• My Photography Workflow, Part 4 (Infusion of Self).
• My Photography Workflow, Part 5 (Illumination – pending).
• My Photography Workflow, Part 6 (Inclusion/Exclusion – pending).
• My Photography Workflow, Part 7 (Intelligence/Iteration – pending).

 

[shadowfox]

Looks interesting, I'm saving this for reading later.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Peter: You've taken on an ambitious project in terms of examining and reporting on your internal processes. I was surprised though, when I clicked the links, because I don't think of those internal processes as part of a work-flow. I don't want to be ungenerous or difficult about it, I just understand "workflow" as "doing one thing and then another in sequence" -- I see it as an algorithm or recipe, not a state of mind.

[After a pause]

I am dithering about posting this reaction, because I do think that work should be evaluated for what its author intended it to be and not whether it meets my needs or not. In the end, I am hitting the "Reply" key, not because I think that what your are posting is not valuable, but because you said that constructive criticism was OK with you. My practical reaction is that I can duplicate a workflow that is in the form of a recipe or a set of instructions, but not, I think, one that is a report of your internal processes. My problem is not with your internal processes, I just don't know how reliable _anyone's_ report of his own internal workings is. And without being able to rely on it, I don't think I can duplicate it in a way that would translate into a change in my own work in a useful way.

Having said that, whatever your internal processes are, the proof of the pudding is in the eating and having written the above let me also say that your work suggests someone who has a deep sympathy for those in the world around him: more "Family of Man" and Sabastiao Salgado than Diane Arbus, if you know what I mean. Good luck with your project.

Ben Marks

 

[DougFord]

Just discovered this thread. A quick look has me interested. Thanks for posting.

 

[prosophos]

Peter: You've taken on an ambitious project in terms of examining and reporting on your internal processes. I was surprised though, when I clicked the links, because I don't think of those internal processes as part of a work-flow. I don't want to be ungenerous or difficult about it, I just understand "workflow" as "doing one thing and then another in sequence" -- I see it as an algorithm or recipe, not a state of mind.

[After a pause]

I am dithering about posting this reaction, because I do think that work should be evaluated for what its author intended it to be and not whether it meets my needs or not. In the end, I am hitting the "Reply" key, not because I think that what your are posting is not valuable, but because you said that constructive criticism was OK with you. My practical reaction is that I can duplicate a workflow that is in the form of a recipe or a set of instructions, but not, I think, one that is a report of your internal processes. My problem is not with your internal processes, I just don't know how reliable _anyone's_ report of his own internal workings is. And without being able to rely on it, I don't think I can duplicate it in a way that would translate into a change in my own work in a useful way.

Having said that, whatever your internal processes are, the proof of the pudding is in the eating and having written the above let me also say that your work suggests someone who has a deep sympathy for those in the world around him: more "Family of Man" and Sabastiao Salgado than Diane Arbus, if you know what I mean. Good luck with your project.

Ben Marks

Dear Ben,

I am actually very grateful you posted this, as it is quite helpful to me, and you are in fact being very kind.

I'm struggling with the fact that "workflow" is probably a misnomer on my part as the series have become more philosophical than I envisioned. I do hope to go back and place concrete examples within the framework. It's a work in progress...

Thank you again so much for taking the time, and for your kind words.

Peter.

 

[Clint Troy]

I'm not sure of the real point of it. Is it a lesson you are trying to teach to an audience? Are you trying to find an audience for your blog?

The first thought that comes to my mind is pretentiousness. Maybe if you posted here instead of directing people to your blog my thoughts would change. I say this because i haven't seen the best in the business do this. Not even McCurry, HCB, Salgado, Avedon, Gibson (and so many more) have published books about their introspection. But maybe a "prosophos" has something more to offer...

 

[ianstamatic]

"I believe that good photographic output requires effort. Most of us who are serious about this craft choose to share images with the world that we are proud of, that we have created through some type of process requiring our mental and physical exertion."

To quote from your links.

cods wallop.
Taking good photos is not about effort/reward.

Its all about having a good eye, how you see things, how you relate to your models and knowing just enough to be technically capable.

Then its just taking good photos. Yes repeated practice does make you better.
Some people find it easy, others struggle, thats life.

I found a lot of stating the obvious in complex language, mixed in with odd jems like this quote
"Infusion of Self is deeper, and it can occur even when our subjects are unaware of our presence and even when we’re photographing inert objects."

 

[prosophos]

I'm not sure of the real point of it. Is it a lesson you are trying to teach to an audience? Are you trying to find an audience for your blog?

The first thought that comes to my mind is pretentiousness. Maybe if you posted here instead of directing people to your blog my thoughts would change. I say this because i haven't seen the best in the business do this. Not even McCurry, HCB, Salgado, Avedon, Gibson (and so many more) have published books about their introspection. But maybe a "prosophos" has something more to offer...

My apologies for offending you. Thank you very much for your comments.

 

[prosophos]

"I believe that good photographic output requires effort. Most of us who are serious about this craft choose to share images with the world that we are proud of, that we have created through some type of process requiring our mental and physical exertion."

To quote from your links.

cods wallop.
Taking good photos is not about effort/reward.

Its all about having a good eye, how you see things, how you relate to your models and knowing just enough to be technically capable.

Then its just taking good photos. Yes repeated practice does make you better.
Some people find it easy, others struggle, thats life.

I found a lot of stating the obvious in complex language, mixed in with odd jems like this quote
"Infusion of Self is deeper, and it can occur even when our subjects are unaware of our presence and even when we’re photographing inert objects."

My apologies for the complex language.

 

[Hosermage]

Hi Peter,

I don't know if you're a reader of TOP, but I remembered that Mike Johnston had an article for the term "mindflow", it maybe a good alternative to "workflow". It's generous of you to share your thoughts. Thanks.

 

[ianstamatic]

I agree with Hosermage if the title was more descriptive about it being 'the mental process' or the thought process you go through, as your preparing and taking a shot, would be more accurate title.

 

[rehview]

I always enjoy a written account of process. This content will be interesting to some, educational to others and entertaining to a few naysayers; there's nothing wrong with that!

I take/make pictures on a similar mind/workflow to you and I thoroughly enjoyed reading about it. Well done, I'm waiting for part 5.

There's nothing wrong with detailing the obvious, quite the contrary: I enjoy Neruda's Odes To Common Things and the work of Tillmans, Ferry and others, immensely. There is a skill in approaching the everyday sights/objects/thoughts in a way that captivates an audience an you have that skill.