Subject Before Technique
Thanks to all of you for your encouragement regarding my picking up a camera. The verdict is unanimous. I should go for it!
It sounds so simple doesn’t it? Pick up a camera and just start shooting. But I’m not the type of person to do that willy-nilly. I read extensively about photography of course, and the more I read, the more complicated it seems to be. Not the nuts and bolts of taking a shot of course. Any person with any moderate degree of intelligence can learn basic composition, exposure and how to work a camera. But there’s a heck of a difference between learning how to do that, and actually being a real photographer.
To a complete novice like me, it seems that the first thing you need, before you even contemplate picking up a camera, is to have some idea of what you want to photograph. You can’t go round just photographing random places, objects or people and call yourself an artist. O.K. so many people do, but I’m talking about real photographers. You know, the ones that create photographs that actually mean something.
So my initial opinion is that I have to choose my subject matter first. And according to most learned photographic philosophy books I’ve read, it has to be something that I am both highly interested in and feel passionately about. Bland records of anything and everything don’t produce meaningful images. As photographer David Hurn said, "The photographer must have intense curiosity, not just a passing visual interest, in the theme of the pictures."
Technique, the how of producing a photograph, must come second to the subject matter. Your fascination, enthusiasm and passion for the subject of your choice are what makes a good photograph. O.K. technique is important too, but I propose it is not as important as the way you feel about what you are photographing. If you photograph a random image, which does not at least capture your basic curiosity, then there’s no way you are ever going to produce a meaningful image that will move either you or your viewers. The most vital component of the image is missing. Why is more important than how.
I’d rather look at a poorly composed snapshot taken by a mother of her kids, than a sterile expressionless “arty” Vogue fashion shot any day. The first reflects an intense emotional connection, a visual response to the world, the second is empty.
But that’s just me. And I might be way off track here, so please correct me if you think I’m talking complete nonsense.
Sadly for you lot, I don’t feel remotely curious or passionate about photographing naked women. However I do have an obsession with cats. I’d love to be able to take a decent portrait of my pussies. Not a snapshot. No, I mean a truly meaningful, good kitty portrait. One which pleases me at least, even if it leaves you reaching for the puke bag. (Brooks Jensen thinks cat photos are universally trite. To that I say: Art is subjective. Clearly you are not a cat lover. And BTW your cat probably hates you.)
Thus, due to my passion for all things feline, combined with a reasonable level of intelligence, extensive study of the craft of photography, and then after twenty years hard slog, I can therefore logically conclude with reasonable certainty that if I am still alive in 2028, I will probably be a moderately competent cat photographer.
Yay! Genu-Ine photographic ambition! As Bill Bradley once said, “Ambition is the path of success. Persistence is the vehicle you arrive in.”
Images are of Clayre McKinnen.
From this discussion we therefore conclude that Rich’s photographic curiosity is aroused by pretty women, preferably nekkid pretty women. Nothing wrong with that. In fact we both share a passion for pussies. The only difference is that mine is furry. (Not mine personally, you understand, the subject pussy, I mean. Although in the interests of political correctness I should state categorically for the record that both bald and furry pussies of both genres are equally welcome, as are partially waxed felines and kitties with landing strips. Don’t wanna offend the photographic subjects, now do we?)
It sounds so simple doesn’t it? Pick up a camera and just start shooting. But I’m not the type of person to do that willy-nilly. I read extensively about photography of course, and the more I read, the more complicated it seems to be. Not the nuts and bolts of taking a shot of course. Any person with any moderate degree of intelligence can learn basic composition, exposure and how to work a camera. But there’s a heck of a difference between learning how to do that, and actually being a real photographer.
To a complete novice like me, it seems that the first thing you need, before you even contemplate picking up a camera, is to have some idea of what you want to photograph. You can’t go round just photographing random places, objects or people and call yourself an artist. O.K. so many people do, but I’m talking about real photographers. You know, the ones that create photographs that actually mean something.
So my initial opinion is that I have to choose my subject matter first. And according to most learned photographic philosophy books I’ve read, it has to be something that I am both highly interested in and feel passionately about. Bland records of anything and everything don’t produce meaningful images. As photographer David Hurn said, "The photographer must have intense curiosity, not just a passing visual interest, in the theme of the pictures."
Technique, the how of producing a photograph, must come second to the subject matter. Your fascination, enthusiasm and passion for the subject of your choice are what makes a good photograph. O.K. technique is important too, but I propose it is not as important as the way you feel about what you are photographing. If you photograph a random image, which does not at least capture your basic curiosity, then there’s no way you are ever going to produce a meaningful image that will move either you or your viewers. The most vital component of the image is missing. Why is more important than how.
I’d rather look at a poorly composed snapshot taken by a mother of her kids, than a sterile expressionless “arty” Vogue fashion shot any day. The first reflects an intense emotional connection, a visual response to the world, the second is empty.
But that’s just me. And I might be way off track here, so please correct me if you think I’m talking complete nonsense.
Sadly for you lot, I don’t feel remotely curious or passionate about photographing naked women. However I do have an obsession with cats. I’d love to be able to take a decent portrait of my pussies. Not a snapshot. No, I mean a truly meaningful, good kitty portrait. One which pleases me at least, even if it leaves you reaching for the puke bag. (Brooks Jensen thinks cat photos are universally trite. To that I say: Art is subjective. Clearly you are not a cat lover. And BTW your cat probably hates you.)
Thus, due to my passion for all things feline, combined with a reasonable level of intelligence, extensive study of the craft of photography, and then after twenty years hard slog, I can therefore logically conclude with reasonable certainty that if I am still alive in 2028, I will probably be a moderately competent cat photographer.
Yay! Genu-Ine photographic ambition! As Bill Bradley once said, “Ambition is the path of success. Persistence is the vehicle you arrive in.”
Images are of Clayre McKinnen.
From this discussion we therefore conclude that Rich’s photographic curiosity is aroused by pretty women, preferably nekkid pretty women. Nothing wrong with that. In fact we both share a passion for pussies. The only difference is that mine is furry. (Not mine personally, you understand, the subject pussy, I mean. Although in the interests of political correctness I should state categorically for the record that both bald and furry pussies of both genres are equally welcome, as are partially waxed felines and kitties with landing strips. Don’t wanna offend the photographic subjects, now do we?)
Labels: cats, Clayre McKinnen, Philosophy
posted by Lin at 6:43 AM
6 Comments:
Go for it Lin - I just would like to be a fly on the wall for your cat portrait sessions:
"Move your paw 6 inches to your right.....no the other paw.....please get your head out of your pussy, pussy..."
i don't agree that an "intense personal connection" with your subject necessarily yields results that scream "intense personal connection."
A good photograph does not reflect reality. A good photograph interprets reality in ways that evoke something meaningful and/or purposeful in the viewers' eyes and minds.
The craft stuff you are learning are the tools that photographers use to interpret reality in, hopefullly, meaningful or purposeful ways.
Sure, an "intense personal connection" is a tremendous asset, but good photography is most often realized through manipulations of reality wrought by the tools the photographer has at his or her disposal.
(Whew! That all was a mouthful!)
Nothing I appreciate more than a good kitty shot. Hope to see yours in the future.
There was a part of our conversations at Art Chicago that we touched on the art/technical side of photography. Joe Crachiola said [by the way see his profile on the Detroit Jam blog] that you really can't create art photographically unless you know the science and processes behind clicking the shutter. You can get lucky and get some good images, but you can't be consistent. You can't have a vision of future work because you don't know how to get there. You have no path to follow to accomplish your goals.
I think one of the things that holds me back from being more the a photographer of little consequence is the technical aspect of photography. I can see the images I'd like to create. I see them everyday, but I don't know how to make them a reality, the learning curve seems so daunting.
D.L. Wood
Edward Weston loved to take photographs of his cats as well as peppers.
Don't over-analyze. Just take pictures of what looks interesting.
Fine art doesn't have to be the goal in every picture.
It's your "art". Not someone else's idea of what your art should be, or how it should be created, or what you should feel when creating it.
The WHY is truly the more important than the how. I agree with that point but sometimes you actually do have to go out and start randomly shooting. I knew I like to document the lives of my family. I also knew I liked nudes, but didn't think I could readily get a woman to take her clothes off for me. So instead, I drove around town and just started shootin' everything. When I developed my film, I noticed that with a camera, you can focus on on conceputal elements that actually make a good photo. I didn't realize I liked shooting trains, til I got a train in my viewfinder, but there were other aspects as well. Go out and start shooting. Shoot anything. Zoom in on an old door knob or the pattern in cobblestones. Get in real close to your "kitty" of choice and see what you come up with. You might be surprised. I know I can't wait to see it.
Um...furry...pussy...isn't that why you're Fluffytek?
You never cease to amaze me, and I love it.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home