|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/18/2003 09:28:25 PM · #1 |
I would like to go back, for a moment, to Brooks Jensen’s recent LensWork article entitled “Things I’ve Learned About Photography.” (Issue #50). I keep coming back to this article. It seems like each item listed in this article could have a short essay written about it.
“Most people see good pictures and photograph bad ones. Real photography begins when we let go of what we have been told is a good photograph and start photographing what we see.” - Brooks Jensen
What could this possibly mean?
Maybe when we approach a photo opportunity, we start thinking about photographic rules. Maybe we approach a photo with thoughts about what would make it appealing to other viewers. Are we shooting for ourselves or for someone else?
This quote reminds me of some of the images by Henri Cartier-Bresson that I posted earlier. He, in his “decisive moment” photographs, seems to have ignored a lot of general rules of photography, yet his images have withstood the test of time. I see a lot of similar images from other photographers throughout history that seem to hold the same level of impact. These images capture something about the moment that overrides anything else.
Photographs can contain great emotion and impact, regardless of any particular rules of photography.
|
|
|
|
12/19/2003 08:27:08 AM · #2 |
I'm not sure what exactly Jensen meant when he said it, but I know that it really applied to how I went about my entry for the vehicles challenge. I had a picture in my head, no background, but subject, general framing and tonality were all there. I was truly surprised when I was finished uploading the image to the challenge that it was SO CLOSE to the image in my head.
I believe that on a personal level, I'm right at the verge of being able to block out what anyone else thinks about my work when I'm trying to create it. There's still a little nagging in the background, but more and more my own voice is starting to drown out that sound. As a result, I'm beginning to see a bit of myself in my images, and less of everyone else... Does that make sense?
|
|
|
|
12/19/2003 08:53:15 AM · #3 |
I thought that it´s about one kind of photograph.
Jensen is talking about Real-Live photographs. Capturing the scene, the moment, the action or simply the view around you. These are cases of a tipical wedding, events, sports or action photographer. When you see te moment you apreciate it. He is talking about registration of this apreciation without worry about tech issues. Capture it as you can and as you view.
It´s completely diferent of a Project Photographer, like TooCool describes. When you compose one project in mind you can think in terms of identity, personality, preferences and style. My shot to vehicles was done as a projet too. It wasn´t perfect, due to a limited time to shot and a very bad wheather condition. But my results was exaclty what I want, in terms of concept although the picture itself had some lacks.
I agree with Jensen in that view of get the moment. When the fact itself is so stunning that no techs or refines will add nothing, as reverse will subdue it. |
|
|
|
12/19/2003 11:51:52 AM · #4 |
It seems to me that the “decisive moment” photograph can be great for what it is – a well-placed (maybe well-researched), prepared, gutsy shot by someone who knows how to use their equipment and the lighting available to them at that moment. As has been said in other forums, if HCB was participating in DPC challenges, he would get critiques about rules of thirds, lighting, perspective, message, etc. The point is rather moot, though, as his artistry wasn’t about the rules in the sense of classical art. As he has labeled it himself, it was about the “decisive moment.”
So, we, as aspiring HCB’s, or Ansel Adams’s, or DPC ribbon-winners, must make a choice, or at least explore our strengths and weaknesses. What do we enjoy doing? What do others enjoy about our photos? Do we care about the others? Do we have the guts to take personal “decisive moments” photos, or is that too far out of our own comfort zone? Once we start to answer these questions, we are ready to grow in our chosen path. We then will have fresh questions to answer as our photography matures.
In the meantime, it would be wise for us to learn and use the “rules” of visual art, whenever the opportunity presents itself. And with digital photography, I would submit that you can do both with a majority of your photo opportunities – break the rules and use the rules – and see which you like (unless you’re involved in a “decisive moment”). As a member of DPC and a local camera club, I get feedback (not as much as I want) and a chance to apply those critiques to future shots.
Bottom line, I personally enjoy rule-following outdoor shots, “decisive moment” shots, studio shots, impromptu shots, and abstract shots, in that order. I don’t think it’s correct to always follow the rules, nor to never follow the rules, when taking photos. If you’re assembling your opus, you might want to make a statement with the shots you pick – “I respect classical artistry in my photos” or “I can break the rules and still get great shots” – but it’s got to be a decision you are comfortable with. Otherwise, have fun with your hobby/craft, learn about the art of it, and take your peers’ critiques into consideration if you plan to sell photos or just make them happy.
|
|
|
|
12/19/2003 12:02:29 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
“Most people see good pictures and photograph bad ones. Real photography begins when we let go of what we have been told is a good photograph and start photographing what we see.” - Brooks Jensen
What could this possibly mean? |
I think what he means is that you should shoot it the way YOU see it. If you see a wedding as a bad thing - shoot it cold, blue and crisp.
If on the other hand your like 99.9% of the universe and see weddings as happy, loving, joyus occasions, then shoot it that way - warm colours, smiley faces, soft delecate shots.
DPC is shoot for the viewers, everyone knows that and I kind of like it in "some" ways.
I see things stark, dark, moody and heavy but with a hint of inner beatuy which I feel we can find in anything. I tend to see nice things in what others pass off as ugly and my personal shots sort of relect this as I often prefer dark colors - B&W and a good deal of contrast. Detail doesn't matter for me, it's the shape and the depth of the subject which I am always attracted to. Now if I shot like this every week for DPC I would get many critiques, so I don't often do it. Not that I don't like shooting pretty pictures of cats/flowers etc, I do, but it's not the way I always see things.
Eg:
  
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 06/08/2025 10:11:31 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/08/2025 10:11:31 PM EDT.
|
