[luftfluss]

I'm a fan of Mike Johnston's blog, and enjoyed his The New Yorker debut.

Your Camera Roll Contains a Masterpiece | The New Yorker

The problem is that photography is subversive. It subverts our intentions, desires, and expectations at every turn, in a thousand ways, and then bestows its gifts whimsically and serendipitously. Some pictures work and some don’t, for reasons that are perpetually surprising. More precisely, a few work and most don’t. The late Erich Hartmann, a past president of Magnum, once showed me his friend Henri Cartier-Bresson’s negatives and contact sheets, stored at the famous photo agency’s New York offices in rows of three-ring binders lined up on shelves. Sheet after sheet contained not a single photograph I recognized. Some worked, most didn’t—not even for H.C.B.

[AggieDad]

The quote is true enough.

And in this wonderful world of digital photography – no cost for another photo – I wonder how many of us could "out-three-ring" Cartier-Bresson.

[Digitalis]

I have been a reader of his for decades now, nice to see him get a gig at the New Yorker.

[Madaboutpix]

Elegant, conversational, contemplative writing that easily manages to transport more truths about photography than a whole stack of photography magazines. The New Yorker chose well. Michael Johnston stands out and has done so for many years. Pieces like the one he did on the DA 35 Limited (can't find the link) or "In Defense of Depth" (linked below) are classics IMHO.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/in-defense-of-depth.html

Thanks for posting.

---

Last edited by Madaboutpix; 04-02-2022 at 07:10 AM. Reason: Link added.

[BigMackCam]

I must say, I'm rather encouraged by his observation...

When I look at other members' photos here - some of which is really impressive stuff - I think I often assume that all (or most) their photographs turn out that well.

Most of mine are fine in terms of fundamental technicalities - i.e. my exposure is usually correct (or close, given the limitations of metering), aperture is appropriate for the desired depth of field, and shutter speed is appropriate for the type of subject and any motion capture or motion blur intended... but often what I intended in terms of subject, lighting, composition and... well... the "story" doesn't result in the image I'd envisioned in my mind and thought I'd captured. Then, some of the shots I didn't think had worked particularly well surprise me when it comes to reviewing and processing them on my PC, and I end up with keepers I really hadn't expected... which is always nice, but I feel like I should have known which shots were keepers and those that weren't, without even needing to review them on my PC later.

Anyway... it sounds like my experience may not be quite so different to others after all...

[c.a.m]

I enjoy The Online Photographer, and pleased to see that Mike Johnston is published in the New Yorker.

Following on from @BigMackCam 's post, I noted this observation in the article:

"Taking five days to decide which frames to keep—it seems almost inconceivable now, in the Internet era, when time lavished on any one thing always feels stolen from something else."

Certainly, as Mike Johnston explains, spending time to cull and curate one's images is an essential process, and worthy of the time spent.

On one of my recent day-long photo outings, I took around 150 pictures. It took me a week of calendar time to arrive at my final set of 20 post-processed images. After each pass, I'd inevitably still be faced with several similar images, to which I returned a day later to cull further. After making some difficult choices or hesitating on the Delete button, I was satisfied with my set of final 'keepers'. Typically, I aim for a 10% retention rate.

- Craig

[robgski]

Good article, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

I am discovering that reviewing images as though I was going to print them gives me a proper attitude towards sorting a days images. I try not to take too many pictures in hopes of getting a great image unless it’s a dynamic situation or a short duration event.
I do cull mercilessly as well.
The only exception is if an image is of friends or family members.

---

Last edited by robgski; 04-03-2022 at 08:15 AM.