Photography is equal parts shooting and choosing what to show?

Redseele

Redseele

Established
Local time
7:03 PM
Joined
May 18, 2013
Messages
161
Location
New York City
View My Gallery
Hi all,

I had a conversation today with another film photographer friend about how film is having a popularity revival in the last couple of years. I know there's a lot of famous film photographers out there who are having exhibitions and publishing books, but the majority of us (photographers interested in the medium of film) don't really have much of a chance to showcase our best work. There's Flickr and other similar sites (500px? RFF's own Gallery section?) but in general the problem for people trying to discover new talents in film photography might be the over-abundance of photography.

I decided that I wanted to see what would happen if people could just showcase 1 photo, just choosing the very best of an author's own work, a sort of self-curation. I opened a group on Flickr for this purpose. Please feel free to join and submit what you think is your best work (even if right now it's really bare).

Here's the URL: https://www.flickr.com/groups/bestfilmphotography

I know this sounds like blatant self-promotion, but I'm truly interested in hearing what you guys think about what they say about how photography is equal parts shooting and curating the work that you are going to show to people. Do you think that the excess of exposure (in this age of mechanical reproduction, as Walter Benjamin would call it) might actually be counter-productive to photographers?

Thank you.
 
Redseele said:
...I'm truly interested in hearing what you guys think about what they say about how photography is equal parts shooting and curating the work that you are going to show to people. Do you think that the excess of exposure (in this age of mechanical reproduction, as Walter Benjamin would call it) might actually be counter-productive to photographers?
Click to expand...
On the first point, one could say that photography is an art, or medium if you wish, of selection: selecting what to frame when you shoot and selecting again when editing what you want to show.

On the second point, no, there is nothing counter-productive in the plethora of images today: the ratio of mundane images to "good" ones has always been overwhelmingly large — and keep in mind that the simple personal and family snapshots that I've called "mundane" were, and are, often important to the people who made them. The difference is simply that, because of the internet, we tend to see so much more of these photographs now. Also, I would say the opposite, because making pictures is so much simpler now (cellphones for example) that the average quality level of the mass of pictures has actually improved — just look at teenager Facebook or in instagram pictures. As for art at the highest level, that is as rare and difficult as before, although good and unknown photographs can reach a larger audience — but being recognized is probably just as difficult now.

—Mitch
Bangkok Hysteria [Portfolio]
Download link for PDF file for 30-shot portfolio
 
The ease, and negligible incremental cost of making digital exposures has put more pressure on editing skills IMO. Not sure about the counter-productive bit: digital has benefits, as long as one doesn't shoot indiscriminately.
 
malland said:
On the second point, no, there is nothing counter-productive in the plethora of images today: the ratio of mundane images to "good" ones has always been overwhelmingly large — and keep in mind that the simple personal and family snapshots that I've called "mundane" were, and are, often important to the people who made them.
Click to expand...

Haha. Just think of how plethoric (thus "good") your cherished Vivian Maier's production would have been if she had used a digital tool... 😀
 
Very true and I agree but I would also add one further factor - knowing how to prepare and display your images. I never display images straight form the camera - I always process my images. In fact I often put in more work processing my images than I do in the original making of them.
 
Highway 61 said:
Haha. Just think of how plethoric (thus "good") your cherished Vivian Maier's production would have been if she had used a digital tool... 😀
Click to expand...
You got the wrong guy: I am not one of the admirers of Vivian Maier. I am the one who linked the Jörg Colbert blog article on "The Defense of Merit," in which he says in passing that Vivian Maier's "images don’t even remotely hold up to what so many already well known photographers from the same period were doing."

While on the subject on digital vs film that you've highlighted, the OP states that film photographers don't have enough opportunity to show their best work. It seems to me that they have the same opportunity as digital photographers do. I am not one who thinks that photographs have more quality or value depending on the medium used — it's the image that matters. Incidentally, the portfolio linked below my signature has both film and digital images.

—Mitch
Bangkok Hysteria [Portfolio]
Download link for PDF file for 30-shot portfolio
 
malland said:
You got the wrong guy: I am not one of the admirers of Vivian Maier. I am the one who linked the Jörg Colbert blog article on "The Defense of Merit," in which he says in passing that Vivian Maier's "images don’t even remotely hold up to what so many already well known photographers from the same period were doing."

While on the subject on digital vs film that you've highlighted, the OP states that film photographers don't have enough opportunity to show their best work. It seems to me that they have the same opportunity as digital photographers do. I am not one who thinks that photographs have more quality or value depending on the medium used — it's the image that matters. Incidentally, the portfolio linked below my signature has both film and digital images.

—Mitch
Bangkok Hysteria [Portfolio]
Download link for PDF file for 30-shot portfolio
Click to expand...

... you disagree with the quoted statement then?
 
Choosing what to shoot and choosing what to show are close related. By that analysis, the actual shooting can be regarded as a mere mechanical process -- which points up the worthlessness of trying to separate the steps too rigorously.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Choosing what to shoot and choosing what to show are close related. By that analysis, the actual shooting can be regarded as a mere mechanical process -- which points up the worthlessness of trying to separate the steps too rigorously.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Only if you don't consider the conceptual element to be part of the process
 
Redseele -- Checked out your flickr group -- looks promising. One photo per month. One can also submit to the RFF gallery with their favorites. Social media I believe suffers from overabundance too -- who has the time? As for blatant self-promotion -- I see nothing wrong with that (I know I'm guilty from time to time 🙂 ) -- how else can one share and receive feedback and hopefully improve and sustain a continued interest? As for famous having all the opportunity to show their work -- well that's true in every field. In photography there is the ubiquitous group show -- pay your fee, frame your work, drink a glass of wine, pick up your work, rinse and repeat 🙂 In the end I'm glad to see photography rising in popularity -- it raises all boats.
 
Bad news:
There is no such category as "film photography", just photography.
If your images are good enough, they are. No matter what was the medium of your choice.
IMHO, all the first part of the OP just misses the point.
Replace "film photography" by "Leica photography" and you'll see what I mean 😉
 
It seems to me pressing the shutter button and editing are both fundamental to the creative process.

At the same time, you can't edit if you never press the shutter button.

If you don't edit well, the viewers will edit for you by the amount of attention they pay to individual images or even ignoring potentially interesting images by giving up early.

The fact that complete contact sheets often bring high pieces at auctions is relevant.

I do not view these two processes as being equal.
 
Which is more important: eating, digesting, or going to the WC? None can exist without the others unless there is something very wrong with you, or you are eating unusually unsuitable food: linoleum, perhaps.

Cheers,

R.
 
Yes, I agree with your thread title !

Wait a sec..Add a great big smelly ........It depends!! 😛

Depends on what you wish the final outcome of your photography to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom