Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-23-2009, 07:05 PM   #106
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,327
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
If it's necessary to 'see' an image before capturing it, then many/most of us are not photographers.
I agree wholeheartedly!

QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
We who snap and grab, opportunistically siezing the moment - including sports and wildlife photogs who machine-gun hundreds of frames to capture just the right moment, and many photojournalists, and lomographers, and anyone setting a photo-trap, etc - we're out.
No, you're not out. We all have accidental masterpieces, we all have horrible family snapshots. The key is in how you 'see' the world, and how you turn what you see into photographs. If you never plan a shot, if you can't 'see' what you're trying to do beforehand, at least some of the time, I would not call you a photographer.

QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
Accidental and serendipitous shots are disqualified, as are unintentional multiple images, finger-spasms, much of what's come into the photographic vernacular since the birth of the Brownie. These aren't pure pre-planned performance art. Tsk.
Accidents are just that - accidents. They require absolutely no skill or artistic talent from the producer - by definition.

04-24-2009, 03:21 PM   #107
Ira
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,216
Mods, can you pm about something?

Call me an a-hole, but this thread already has the makings of a great book/guide, and I'd love to put it word for word onto a PDF file for download.
04-24-2009, 08:01 PM   #108
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,263
QuoteOriginally posted by OregonJim Quote
If you never plan a shot, if you can't 'see' what you're trying to do beforehand, at least some of the time, I would not call you a photographer.
Ok, so you're a calligrapher, and all other writing isn't really writing. Noted.

EDIT: Sorry if that seems harsh, but I'm currently re-reading archives of JPG magazine, including many interviews and conversations with people working in photo and design fields. Almost all stress the importance of being ready for unplanned, accidental shots. (All except those who specifically look for certain abstract patterns in human and natural artifacts, whose work tends towards the... dull...) Should I disregard their counsel?

Studio photographers, producing portraits and product shots and staged scenes, naturally want and plan for total control over their work. The rest of us shoot what's out there. Or am I only a 'photographer' when I'm shooting a pic in a light tent, of something I hope to sell on eBay? To me, that's the most trivial of photography, like calligraphy of advertising slogans. Such visualized, planned photos are boring, produced only because I must. Much landscape photography is also carefully planned. Much landscape photography is boring. Coincidence?

I open any book of photojournalism and see some of the most indelible images of the last century and a half. Some were planned, even staged, and doctored. Many are spontaneous, accidental, and doctored. They're all photography, writing with light to record the human condition. Scenes of violence and love and picayune behavior, of excitement and tedium, all stuff that happened in front of someone with a camera. They're all photography.

Last edited by RioRico; 04-24-2009 at 08:46 PM.
04-24-2009, 08:20 PM   #109
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,327
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
Ok, so you're a calligrapher, and all other writing isn't really writing. Noted.
Flawed analogy. It should read:

Ok, so you're a calligrapher, and all other writing isn't really calligraphy.

Edit: That's not to say all other writing is not important, or not beautiful. It's just not calligraphy.

04-25-2009, 09:30 AM   #110
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,263
QuoteOriginally posted by OregonJim Quote
Edit: That's not to say all other writing is not important, or not beautiful. It's just not calligraphy.
I think my analogy is appropriate. Writing is the genre, calligraphy is the specialty. Photography is the genre, and ONE CERTAIN APPROACH to photography is the specialty. That ONE CERTAIN APPROACH might be called MetaStudioWork (or KameraWerk, in homage to Stieglitz), which includes viewing the world as an unwalled studio. It's a fine approach, just not the only approach to photography, writing-with-light.

(Oops. Stieglitz's CAMERA WORK images were often heavily doctored. Bother. Maybe the purist approach should be called RawKameraWerk.)

But to consider ONE CERTAIN APPROACH as the only 'real' photography easily leads to a holy war, as in: self-identified Xians who don't follow my specific dogma aren't really Xians, are are thus inferior/damned/whatever. Et cetera. That's why I reject narrow labels, because they establish me-vs-the-unwashed dichotomies and other toxic relations, and a Dominant Heresy, and inquisitions, et al.

Again, people making their livings in photography and design just don't bother with such distinctions - they have to generate images, by whatever means necessary. When I worked as a photographer in the US Army, I wasn't told what NOT to do to make pictures. I had to produce the most usable images, which often meant considerable lab work. Dilettantism was not acceptable.

Now let's get back to snapping our shutters, eh?
04-25-2009, 10:42 AM   #111
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,327
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
That's why I reject narrow labels, because they establish me-vs-the-unwashed dichotomies and other toxic relations, and a Dominant Heresy, and inquisitions, et al.
But your treatises are full of those narrow labels that you claim to reject. I think that the only place we disagree is in the use of the term 'photographer'. You seem to be using it as an umbrella term that encompasses anyone who, as you say, writes with light. I define it in the more traditional sense, to preserve the distinction between skilled craftsman and all the other myriad forms of producing images. Otherwise, there is no distinction.

QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
Now let's get back to snapping our shutters, eh?
Agreed.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, lot, photography, reality
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New in here and in photography Aktivus Welcomes and Introductions 1 09-12-2010 01:19 PM
What Is Your Philosophy? Rupert General Talk 56 02-08-2010 01:35 PM
3D photography MattGunn Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 07-29-2009 09:54 PM
adopting the strobist philosophy Gooshin Photographic Technique 29 06-07-2009 07:53 AM
Let's get better at our photography together!!! paulsoucy Post Your Photos! 40 08-19-2008 10:50 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:52 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top