Photography without photos

[Hsg]

*This topic is exclusively for those who don't shoot for money.


Imagine that you have been shooting the whole day with your camera and then you realize that there was no memory card in the camera. Or you were shooting film the whole day and you ruin all the negatives during processing.

You took photos without actually taking photos. Clearly that is a very annoying and in fact a nightmare situation for most photographers, but what if that is the reality of photography today?

What happens to all the photos you take?

What happens to all the photos that people keep taking? What value those photos have? Or is photography all about that "taking photos" action and not the photos themselves? In other words, whether you shoot with a memory card or no memory card, the only pleasure you'll ever get from photography is that moment of pressing the shutter. The rest is all a chore, from editing to processing to archiving... Family photos and so on does not apply, obviously.


What I'm saying is insane, but reflect on it. Before you throw away those film cameras, just go out and shoot "blanks!" and if people ask you, lie or be honest that you're shooting blanks, see what happens. Here is one thing, you'll have more fun than you ever did when you were shooting for photos. Try it.

 

[btgc]

In extreme cases there even is no need to actually take photos. Just owning and fondling is the goal 🙂

 

[jschrader]

What I'm saying is insane....

Literally, it is of course insane. Even if you never look at your shots, you would not enjoy shooting if you would know you have no memory card, or film, in the camera.

But I would twist your idea a bit. How important is you shooting (and handling the camera, and buying gear) relative to looking at the results?

I believe these days, many just see their photos on screen and that is it.

How much do you pay for prints (lab, paper, ink, chemistry, framing etc...) vs. shooting (camera, lenses, bags and stuff)?

I think this what one should calculate once in two years or so.......

 

[Hsg]

Fondling is a loaded term with negative connotations. Handling a mechanical camera is a perfectly natural thing to do and if that makes one enjoy the experience of clicking the shutter then why not?

If photography does not make one happy then there is no reason to continue it, but the only part of photography that makes one happy is the moment of pressing the shutter, that is universal.

So, feeling guilty that one does not do anything with the photos, once taken, a common problem today, is a waste of energy.

Just shoot, even if blanks and forget the photos. If you really wanna free your mind then just shoot blanks for the fun of shooting -- Winogrand, was doing exactly that, if you think about it.

 

[Prest_400]

That would be quite bad. But, I tend to have a reason for shooting (usually keeping the moment) and it is a media for recording what was around.

Nowadays I'm outputting a bit, giving away prints and files. Because a lot of my photography are mementos with other people in my college. I realised that these people do very few "recording" by themselves, and I have found this reason a good one for doing some casual and candid shooting.

"It's not about you, it's about them!"

-John Free

This quote I heard on a Video by this photographer about street shooting but it hit me hard as it is what I might end doing. Being a humble historian of a small context between some people.

Although I have experienced something similar by shooting the film very slowly and have it processed, months or a year later.
At the end there is a point that if I don't see the output, I lose a bit the objectives and motivation to shoot. My OM-1 is a great camera, but not having feedback on the medium run just has me drop off in wanting to use it.

Sometimes, let them sit for a while and then take a look at them and have them printed later on. Sometimes time separates the good from the what was thought to be good.

I tend to take care about negs and files, but a few years ago I did lose some files. Sadly some of these contained just about the only photos we had of a family friend who passed away.
Because of this I tend to be quite careful about all of this.

 

[Godfrey]

*This topic is exclusively for those who don't shoot for money.


Imagine that you have been shooting the whole day with your camera and then you realize that there was no memory card in the camera. Or you were shooting film the whole day and you ruin all the negatives during processing.

You took photos without actually taking photos. Clearly that is a very annoying and in fact a nightmare situation for most photographers, but what if that is the reality of photography today?

What happens to all the photos you take?

What happens to all the photos that people keep taking? What value those photos have? Or is photography all about that "taking photos" action and not the photos themselves? In other words, whether you shoot with a memory card or no memory card, the only pleasure you'll ever get from photography is that moment of pressing the shutter. The rest is all a chore, from editing to processing to archiving... Family photos and so on does not apply, obviously.

What I'm saying is insane, but reflect on it. Before you throw away those film cameras, just go out and shoot "blanks!" and if people ask you, lie or be honest that you're shooting blanks, see what happens. Here is one thing, you'll have more fun than you ever did when you were shooting for photos. Try it.

Ridiculous.

I no longer shoot for money, although occasionally I sell prints, books, and folio collections of my photographs.

All my photos roll into an image processing/image management program. I annotate them with IPTC metadata, sort, grade, and curate them, and select some for sharing via electronic means and printing. Film and digital.

The act of making a photograph is one pleasure. The act of viewing, sharing, printing, selling, imagining and writing down the story for a photo or a group of photos is another pleasure. The two together are what I'm in this game for.

On occasion, I sit down and just flip through my photos from as long ago as 50 years. I see my life through them, remember all the wonderful people I've enjoyed time together with, all the things I/we have done, and watch Time itself pass. There are few pleasures greater than that to me.

Collecting equipment to play photographer by clicking an empty camera would be a waste of time and money.

G

 

[rinzlerb]

I've had a great time taking pictures that I've never looked at. I've enjoyed many pictures I can't remember taking. All part of life's rich tapestry....

My favorite swami said "don't be attached to the fruits of your efforts!" Great advice!

That said, I treasure most the pictures that are attached some memorable experience.

It's definitely more important to focus on having the experience, seeing what you want to photograph, and then photographing it.

There was a bit in the so-so movie on Walter Mitty recently with Sean Penn playing a rogue photographer on a quest to photograph a snow leopard, and when he finally sees it, he chooses to simply look and not to take the picture. I think that's what you're getting at. I still recall vividly taking dozens of close-up pictures of a seal carcass. I can smell it now. They were great. I've never looked at them. An extreme example, but sometimes the idea of taking the picture is what's important and helps you experience the world around you, and sometimes actually taking the picture or looking at it afterwards is less important.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

What happens if it isn't for money?
Absolutely nothing.

Fresh example for you.
July 12, we went to one hour canoe trip. In a hurry. I quickly grabbed all I have to and we went. Including new to me Rollei 35 and one roll of film.
I took 20+ pictures, the rewind was rough, but I wasn't sure, it is new to me camera or something else.
Perfect shots from canoe of people in second canoe. Beautiful clouds.
I unloaded film at home and ... realised I was using test roll, with only five frames on it, I didn't read the label before I loaded camera in a hurry.

Next day, yesterday, July 13, I took same camera, plus OM-10. Film was right. It was huge, entire neighborhood street sale. Amazing people for candids and nice locals I know. 36 frames on Rollei 35 and 24 frames on OM-10.
And by 9.15 PM I started to develop it. In a hurry. As result, due to too quick and aggressive agitation I have mattress pattern at all negs.

So...
Now I have reason to go on same canoe trip, visit same event next year and come to people I like and say - it didn't worked out, I would like to take another picture of you.

 

[Hsg]

This is all about what makes one happy. I have realized that I'm only happy when I click the shutter. Maybe buying new stuff but that is balanced with remorse after a few days.

So clicking the shutter is the only part of photography that makes me happy.

Photos don't make me happy because there is always something missing, they're too many, I don't like editing, because its like photographing all over again, I hate processing and I don't care if people see my photos or not.


I'm photographing without photos already, just because those photos are in a HD does not mean they have any value for me, which they don't. I can make up value for them, but I'm simply deceiving myself.

I don't know if you have gone this deep into this hobby and your reasons and what not but I have and my conclusion is, click the shutter and forget the rest.

 

[shortstop]

Clicking only is not the purpose of photography, but is also true that the simple fact of having a camera and thinking a picture trough the viewfinder and deciding the moment to click and finally clicking permits us to see the world at least with more attention, differently, in a word as a photographer. In this sense the provocative assertion "clicking without film or memory card" is not a statement so absurd. But is also true that if we have the photo we often see special things that had gone unnoticed at the time when we were on the spot to make the photo.
The right thing would be to see more the world through the viewfinder (equivalent to clicking without film) and to shoot only when we are sure, very sure is the decisive moment. Watching more, shooting less. This is easier if the roll contains less frames as in 120. More difficult with 135, where we often shoot more because we want arrive at the end of the roll and see the results.

 

[RichC]

Each to their own...

I'm personally often frustrated by my photo equipment!

I often find it a chore lugging the stuff around and setting it up. And then I have to capture the image I'm envisaging in my head, which means exacting technical and aesthetic control - as well as envisaging the picture I have to work out the settings to capture it precisely. After that, there's the fear of not having captured the imagined picture (especially if I'm using film) - perhaps I've cocked it up!

On particularly frustrating days, I sometimes wish I could mentally transfer what I see, post-process it in my head then print it!

To me, the end all and be all of photography is the final perfect print. Preferably on a gallery wall or published in a book, where anyone can see it, not just me.

Lately I've been wandering around Google Street View. I can "take" photographs without messing around with a camera. And, in a way, these are still my photos - the Google cameras take pictures automatically, so it's quite likely that I'm the first person to have seen the view below. let alone "captured" it.

 

[Hsg]

Pick one camera setup that you enjoy the most shooting with, which is most likely a film camera.

Go out and shoot, as if you're shooting for real... Set proper exposure, focus and all. And see what happens.

 

[froyd]

For a certain type of photography I do (experiments with shadows, perspective, lines, etc), having no film would take very little away from my enjoyment of the act of thinking though an exposure challenge, determining the best angle and framing, and clicking the shutter. It's like a mathematician spending time solving theoretical problems, rather than adding up an accounting book or something more practical. However, seeing a print or even a scan, provides useful feedback on the success of my experimentation so I can improve...of course, sometimes I rather live with the illusion that the shot in my mind turned out much better than the print shows!

 

[ian_watts]

Lately I've been wandering around Google Street View. I can "take" photographs without messing around with a camera. And, in a way, these are still my photos - the Google cameras take pictures automatically, so it's quite likely that I'm the first person to have seen the view below. let alone "captured" it.

Yes, Google street view is interesting and I have many screenshots of views that have caught my interest for various reasons.

If you think you have the basis for an art project, forget it – using street view as a "camera" is now pretty old-hat and has been done perfectly well by many others (e.g. Doug Rickard).

 

[RichC]

Yes, Google street view is interesting and I have many screenshots of views that have caught my interest for various reasons.

If you think you have the basis for an art project, forget it – using street view as a "camera" is now pretty old-hat and has been done perfectly well by many others (e.g. Doug Rickard).

Absolutely. I have a signed copy of his book! These photos are just for me, just playing around, not for anything serious... Just for my virtual scrapbook, visual jottings.

 

[chipgreenberg]

if you think of it like hunting (I don't hunt, but do hunt for good images) many hunters enjoy the journey as much as bagging game. Sometimes it just works out that way.

 

[jsrockit]

Here is one thing, you'll have more fun than you ever did when you were shooting for photos. Try it.

I don't use cameras because I only like using a camera... I actaully like the editing, post production, and seeing results. I actually have fun doing all of these things. I can't really understand why you think people wouldn't.

 

[williams473]

I'm haunted by images I didn't take or ones that I lost. For me, it is about the end result - the photograph that can be shown. I've rarely had total catastrophic technical failures, but when I have the moment of realization that there will be no image to work into a photograph literally hurts in my chest. Why this matters isn't something I've figured out yet - I might never...

I've made peace with the fact that I do indeed do this for others. Not that many others have seen my work, but I need an audience. I think about what and how I am communicating when I do photography. I really enjoy exhibiting photographs, which as G. pointed out is certainly different in process than making them, but I need both - yep, need. I would never shoot with no film in the camera. Call me Western but I am most definitely attached to the result. Good topic, thanks!

 

[Hsg]

I think the next logical question is:

Do we really need an audience in order for us to justify taking photos?



why are we so hardwired that you need viewers if you're going to take photos? Can't we just enjoy those parts of this activity and forget the useless parts that have become meaningless due to technology?

Look, there is no other way but to truly digest this fact, that 99% of our photos will never be seen, even if they're seen, so what?

Photography has changed in every way, except how we think about photography.

 

[Thardy]

I was in agreement that the physical act of just using the camera ( pressing the shutter) was fun enough until I remembered the anniversary trip I took with my wife years ago.

We're in Mexico and I'm using a film camera and the darn thing jams. The winder motor is kaput. I'm sick because we will have no photos to chronicle this trip.

Luckily, I have a little low megapixel camera common of the day. I think I still have those photos somewhere.