why?

back alley said:
could you explain more?
Click to expand...

em, you set out to document part of your city and the general going-ons there, I believe. So when I look at your flickr I can judge the outcome against the intent ... does that make sense?

... my knowledge of what you're trying to do (the cognitive bit) informs my assessment of the actual images (the aesthetic bit)

btw ... I've enjoyed the US stuff of late
 
Sparrow said:
em, you set out to document part of your city and the general going-ons there, I believe. So when I look at your flickr I can judge the outcome against the intent ... does that make sense?

... my knowledge of what you're trying to do (the cognitive bit) informs my assessment of the actual images (the aesthetic bit)

btw ... I've enjoyed the US stuff of late
Click to expand...

thanks!


.
 
back alley said:
have you ever looked at your finished image and wondered why you took it in the first place?
Click to expand...

Frequently, actually. Last night, I remember trying hard to puzzle one out, till I worked out what it was for. It was a notebook shot, with a photo of a poster for an event I wanted to remember for later.

But sometimes it's because I've tried something a bit different, or push what I can do with the camera, or test a function I've not explored before. Sometimes they work, and often they don't. It's all learning.

So I might delete the shot (or not save the scan to the hard drive in the first place), but it isn't necessarily a wasted shot.
 
back alley said:
i believe that many think that an image should have a messege, yes.
i am unsure if this is true for me though.
Click to expand...

This whole concept of an image having "a message" is not one I grasp. I really would like to see examples of images that have a message vs. images that have no message.

To research this concept today, I picked up a book of pictures from Life magazine, which by agreement are some of the finest pictures ever taken, and I've reviewed the pictures just to try to wrap my head around this idea. One of the pictures had no more of a message than, "Here is a mother hippopotamus with her baby." Is that sufficient to say the picture had a message? Nothing more profound than that? I've taken lots of pictures like that (with no more of a profound message than, "Here is a bird/car/tree/flower."). At that point it seems to me that the message is so trivial as to not even be worth mentioning or even thinking about.

The pictures from Life that really did communicate a non-trivial message were obviously one in a million, taken at unusual events during unusual times. If those are the only valuable pictures, we might as well leave our cameras in the bag 99.99% of the time. True?

On the other hand, is it even possible to take a picture that doesn't have a message? Who is to say what the message is? Once again, I'd like to see some examples of pictures with someone's exposition of what the message is. That would help me understand this better, I think.
 
sreed2006 said:
This whole concept of an image having "a message" is not one I grasp. I really would like to see examples of images that have a message vs. images that have no message.

To research this concept today, I picked up a book of pictures from Life magazine, which by agreement are some of the finest pictures ever taken, and I've reviewed the pictures just to try to wrap my head around this idea. One of the pictures had no more of a message than, "Here is a mother hippopotamus with her baby." Is that sufficient to say the picture had a message? Nothing more profound than that? I've taken lots of pictures like that (with no more of a profound message than, "Here is a bird/car/tree/flower."). At that point it seems to me that the message is so trivial as to not even be worth mentioning or even thinking about.

The pictures from Life that really did communicate a non-trivial message were obviously one in a million, taken at unusual events during unusual times. If those are the only valuable pictures, we might as well leave our cameras in the bag 99.99% of the time. True?

On the other hand, is it even possible to take a picture that doesn't have a message? Who is to say what the message is? Once again, I'd like to see some examples of pictures with someone's exposition of what the message is. That would help me understand this better, I think.
Click to expand...

you're sounding as confused as i feel...that's great!
 
"Here is a mother hippopotamus with her baby" isn't a message, trivial or otherwise, it's a visual representation. If there is an online reference to some universal symbolic language in photographs, I have yet to find it.
 
Keith said:
If I had an image that I had no comprehension of why I took it .... no one else would ever see it for starters. I have plenty of those!

I do often look at shots I've taken and wonder why I bothered ... but then again at the time I obviously had a reason so there is some merit. If there wasn't photography would be entirely pointless.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Therefore, it might be useful to start editing own work only after a sufficient time has passed, maybe a couple of month, to limit the effect of initial sensation.
 
back alley said:
have you ever looked at your finished image and wondered why you took it in the first place?
isn't it the case that our vision is supposed to help translate our messege to others? if that is true then our prints/images should really be saying something.

i know that i sometimes look at images made by others and ask that question...why?
Click to expand...

In my case, more like I have wondered why it didn't evoke the response I had hoped for.
 
back alley,

Are you doing a series or a project? You could always write an artist statement to help clarify the work. Books, exhibits at galleries, some series, some photographers actually write words on the mats or the images themselves (Duane Michals comes to mind) so many use words to help others understand intent, Diane Arbus use to cover here walls with there work and live with it a while to be able to weed out the weak links.
 
With a camera in hand, there is anticipation of a keeper photo. One tends to rationalize positively why the photo should be taken even when in the back of the mind acknowledging shortcomings that may eventually disqualifiy the photo as a keeper--shoot now, weigh-out later. Back at home, reality sets in. Even the smallest flaws in the photo stand out like a sore thumb, the photo is not a keeper. It is this anticipation that drives me to shoot and justifies my spending on equipment.

A "keeper" is relative. I like photos that tell a story or reminded me of a story. With this perspective, the hippo photo may qualify. I believe even nature and still photos can tell a story. One needs to look beyond the obvious. I agree that many photos posted in the net are meaningless, posted by the poster for their enjoyment in taking photos.
 
airfrogusmc said:
back alley,

Are you doing a series or a project? You could always write an artist statement to help clarify the work. Books, exhibits at galleries, some series, some photographers actually write words on the mats or the images themselves (Duane Michals comes to mind) so many use words to help others understand intent, Diane Arbus use to cover here walls with there work and live with it a while to be able to weed out the weak links.
Click to expand...

i have an ongoing love affair with certain parts of my city and revisit all the time so that is my project.

i have written (or tried to) artist's statements but they usually sound like pretentious drivel to me.

most of my images don't have a clear message...i don't think they do anyway. i think i might be accused of maiking 'pretty pictures' at best.
 
back alley said:
i have an ongoing love affair with certain parts of my city and revisit all the time so that is my project.

i have written (or tried to) artist's statements but they usually sound like pretentious drivel to me.

most of my images don't have a clear message...i don't think they do anyway. i think i might be accused of maiking 'pretty pictures' at best.
Click to expand...

Writing is not my strong suite as everyone can clearly see but it is sometimes important to write something about the work so others can see the intent more clearly if and only if that is important. Sometimes great work invites viewers in to participate and a something clear might not be the best path to take. The work of Aaron Siskind would be one that comes to my mind immediately.

I think to many times we think in terms of single images instead of thinking in terms of a bodies of work with a theme. I tend to think of each individual image like pieces of a puzzle that each are meaningful in their own way but together they form a more complete and large whole picture.

I would recommend you laying the images out together and see if they are working together to make a more complete much larger whole. Try not to put so much emphasis on each image, though I do think they all should be strong, but see how they are working together and if they are saying what you intend them to say as a group.

Heres something that might help. Notice the way that Frank put the book together and how the images flow. If you can pick up the book and spend some time with it. I would also recommend "Yosemite and the Range of Light" by Adams and just see the way the work flows and how they all together make a much more important whole.
Heres a few words on Robert Franks "The Americans"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHtRZBDOgag
 
Lately, as I have entered retirement, I have been less and less enthralled with the images I am getting. For over 35 years, I used SLRs/DSLRs for both work and pleasure. I was fortunate late in life to be able to spend a decade as a small town weekly newspaper photojournalist and my goal was to provide images that grabbed people's attention so they would pick up the paper. When the 2007 recession hit, I was forced back to a previous career to pay the bills as the newspaper loss revenue. Now, after being laid off in 2012 from that career, I have reached an age where no one wants to hire me. Soooooo, I am looking to support some non-profit organizations that I WANT to help to give me focus.
I said all that to say this, for me, I need a focus or connection these days for my images to get past that first edit. Most of what I have shot this year has been of my grandchildren but also recently got to shoot a soldier returning from Afghanistan as he surprised his sister at her high school graduation. I ended up piecing together a number of images to tell a story for the family. It made it all worthwhile. I really want to tell a story no matter what I am shooting. For me, it is no longer about just one image that I grab on the surface but I want to go deeper in order that others can connect.
Probably none of this makes any sense except to me and that is ok. I just want to thank whoever started up rangefinderforum.com as I have really enjoyed being here and learned so much.
 
Nope

I think about photography and composition all the time except when I'm holding the camera and looking through the view finder. Since I dont think about it asking why wouldn't come up with any answers.
 
back alley said:
have you ever looked at your finished image and wondered why you took it in the first place? ...
Click to expand...

I don't. If I don't know why I took the picture, I figure it's not important to know. Besides, if I asked myself why I took a picture, what would my friends and family do?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom