Why do we post pictures here or elsewhere on the WWW? How should we respond?

We're a diverse lot! Some of us post for camaraderie, others to learn and others to share the thrill of having achieved a wonderful result or to freely exchange experience and new ideas. Some posts are clearly the results of painstaking competent work and others seem to plead for help. There are also posts simply to drive folk to their own website to sell some kind of service or gurumanship. As long as folk are open and fair, everyone is welcome to post for all these reasons.

One area in need of attention is the fact that accomplished photographers tend to post and just gather praise while neglecting to help others who request and or merit extra attention. We have worse than that too!

Recently, I've seen some snarly comments about feedback, as if it's "interference" or attempting to teach others how to "master" photography. Well let's clear this up immediately. Following the ideas of Nicolas Claris, at the very birth of OPD, we're not at all interested in teaching photography to anyone! Instead, we each declare why we are posting an image and what kind of input we want! Everyone then knows what path each of us in travelling on.

The purpose here is to help each other on our respective idiosyncratic private journeys. We must avoid gurumanship and elitism.


To do this we respect everyone from beginners to experienced folk who earn a fabulous living from photography or who's work is collected. We have to be generous in sharing ideas and know when praise or critique is appropriate and when it's not. Certainly we must not poke fun at those who's style is different than ours or those who take the trouble to critique work that requests practical feedback and not just praise. To understand when to do what, requires recognizing the work and wishes of those who post and of their creative work. Generous feedback helps to let us know why we end up in blocked paths, even when we have a clear goal. Knowing the relationship to what we do to what we get is part of the dissection of works that do not yet meet the needs of the photographer. Bart Van Der Wolf has a wonderful quote:


Without feedback, we don't always realize the need to reevaluate what we keep doing that blocks our progress on our chosen path. The object of feedback should be no more than to provide options for the photographer to consider to help materialize their own hopes and dreams for a picture in progress. Giving such feedback has risks! The idea may not be helpful or it may be plane wrong for the goals of the photographer. That's where the community and the self-worth of the photographer is important. We must be able to protect our own and others originality, while letting them know what the significance might be of factors damaging the materialization of the photographer's intent.

Some show photographs that are "museum and collector ready". Obviously no one would consider saying that finished work merits cloning, cropping or any other changes. "It is what it is!" and we enjoy it or pass by! So this obviously applies to such accomplished photographers as Michael A. Smith and Paula Chamlee. Their work is already breathing independently, is in numerous galleries and collections and no one makes the mistake of asking them to "blur this" or "sharpen that". It's obvious and everyone just gets it!

When Dawid Loubser or Jim collum, for example and certain others, (you know who you are, LOL), share their work, we once again recognize instantly that the work is, likely as not, totally finished and our comments are to learn more of the creative project and get hints for our own work, in addition to saying how the pictures affected us. Unless otherwise indicated, we recognize naturally that these pictures don't need cropping, straightening the horizon or any other edits, however brilliantly conceived!

Others, often, often, equally competent, see advantage in getting feedback while still considering the choices for completing the work. We are not all as capable in all the various processes available. This goes from from taking the picture, framing and finally being able to make a picture we thought so powerful in the field, as a really impressive delivered product.

Look at the lists of prefixes and see if these cover your own needs to specify the kind of feedback you would be happiest with.

So how do we and should we approach the very different needs of folk who post pictures? Let us know your ideas so feedback is appropriate to the wishes of each person's work and attitude.

Asher

This and others posts of recent times have triggered a line of thought similar to yours here, Asher.
You are fully aware of my stance on this matter. I have been vocal enough in the past. Now I present another option that is probably at the forefront when I post on a forum, which are few and far between.
It is to generate a conversation. About what? Whatever comes as long as it doesn't tell me to crop my picture or change my DoF. My interested are deeply immersed in the function of photography. I am interested in art and journalism and all the other genres as well as assisting people to reach their goals but primarily I see the function of photography as a communication devise, an integral part of all the other methods we use to get our message across. This requires two things of me: to 'listen' and to respond. The listening bit is the hardest part. Sometimes the message isn't all that clear and I miss the point or I'm too heavily involved in my own thoughts to be paying attention, but I am working on that.i don't see myself as a criticiser of the 'grammar' of photography. Like a badly constructed sentence or a poorly pronounced word, I have to rise above the bigotry and find the message. In this way I can enjoy and participate in the communication intended.
I understand this happens at all sorts of levels and competences. Skills, cultures, lack of experiences, and many other factors make the taste an interesting one but it is the most exciting part of photography for me.
What I do find is that I am far more interested in the conversation when it moves away from photography and more towards the lives, thoughts and experiences of the photographer and how the photograph relates to that. If a conversation runs from a photo of a hospital into world economy and the price of oil in the Middle East I am totally in there. If I post a photo of a school entry and it leads to people presenting their opinions on their education system then I am more than willing to contribute. If someone posts a photo of a flower and the conversation leads to discussions on cropping, focus, light quality, how much they spent on a lens or how many pixels they have, then I'm out of there.
Do we need any control over the conversations here? I don't think so. It's the variation in responses that make life interesting here. I look at all the photos but only choose to participate when I have something to say. As you know, I invariably never talk of camera stuff. I hope that's OK with you.
For those who find the conversation moving in a direction they don't like and spit the dummy I can only suggest you don't post pictures.

Tom dinning said:

What I do find is that I am far more interested in the conversation when it moves away from photography and more towards the lives, thoughts and experiences of the photographer and how the photograph relates to that.

Click to expand...

Yes, our diversity allows us to surprise each other and share points of view totally outside our local mundane experiences. It's risky, as folk can tread on each others open wounds, but is very educational.

Tom dinning said:

If a conversation runs from a photo of a hospital into world economy and the price of oil in the Middle East I am totally in there. If I post a photo of a school entry and it leads to people presenting their opinions on their education system then I am more than willing to contribute.

Click to expand...

All fine and dandy, Tom! It is great fun to have a stimulating exchange, especially if folk land surprises for us. But what if someone really wants your view instead on a crop or need for correction as in the recent "Barn series". They don't need your views on which camera to buy, but they do search for some feedback on picture structure. One can take an attitude that "If the muses don't actually speak to you, me slapping you around won't help you either!" or you can succinctly share pointers, as to where the options are and what effect they might have on the way the image is experienced.

We're not here to teach, but sometimes it's a great kindness to help solve a conundrum people face in trying to photograph some, "truth" and then worrying about the purity of what they have captured.

Some hold back commenting so as not to be "wrong" and seem foolish, others think it's below them to bother. I think it's a generous act and it's a two way street. I learn from everyone.

Asher

..and BTW, Tom, no one would risk having their head flattened with a mallet by even letting it be discovered that they even imagined screwing with your pictures,! So I think you're work is pretty secure here!

Asher

Somewhere among all of that is agreement, Asher. I'm just not sure on what. We can start with the mallet.
Christine hates it when is silent. " your quiet" she would enquire. " I have nothing to say" I reply. " Everything OK?" She questions with some concern. "Perfect" I reassure her.
Such is the case here and elsewhere.
As for those who require an answer, I must first hear the question. Providing opinion on matters pertaining to image structure is for the experts, of which I am not one. I'm guessing, as I suspect most are. And I also wonder what it is that the photographer is heading towards. The greatest satisfaction most of my students gain is from the realization that being better is an internal thing. When they stop worrying about what others might think and work from within they realize their own worth and the worth of their own images. I have been criticized often on this method of teaching because it gives nothing for the student to work from. My arguement is that it gives them everything to work from. Sure, teach them the tools and processes but leave the composition alone. My students may not be better photographers because of it but they sure are happier with their photos.
At the end of the day, I would prefer to see the masses happy with their lot than just a few who have succeeded in pleasing the critics.

Hi Asher,

I have a sneaking suspicion that what I wrote in my own thread (Industrial Desolation) the other day may have given you the trigger to start this thread, which was partly sarcastic and it may have fooled people into thinking that I was serious. Therefore, I would like to clarify where I stand on this.

But before I do so, may I repeat what Ken Tanaka has said to me a couple of years ago? Like I did so then, you are meandering too much in your posts above. Make it short and clear, say directly what you want to say. You are being so politically correct to address the sensitivities of our full audience that your story (or question) gets lost in there. You, like the rest of us, have the right to your opinion without having to explain yourself at length first.

One recurring theme you come back to is to repeat and reassure that OPF is not a school for teaching photography. I know that Nicolas was/is against it and so was I. This past year, I have changed my look on that. If we learn anything at all by having conversations with each other in OPF, albeit on photography or on the development oil prices, OPF is then functioning indirectly as an educational institution. An institution which brings together from different walks of life and helps them all to become more informed and knowledgeable about things, which mainly pertain to photography.

I have always been for providing feedback and/or C&C the pictures submitted. Heck, I have even written a 101 to help inexperienced folks to get started with it. One aspect which has always been important to me is to pay attention to the photograph itself first and foremost: look at it, try to understand it, see it. Only then, if it is still applicable or desirable, react on the technical aspects. This does not mean that I am against technical advice, it means that I find other aspects more important. If the goal of the original poster is to get advice on technical aspects or the cropping, etc., by all means we should give it to them. That's what Tom means when he writes that he should hear the question first.

So why do I post here? Like Tom, to generate conversation and to share what I have seen and captured with you. I confess, in the past there was also the ego bit behind it. One of the things I have realized this post year is how unnecessary that is. I no longer mind if my photos are less than perfect according to my impossibly high standards of the past. I no longer feel the need to raise the bar again and again. I simply enjoy taking photographs and I also enjoy sharing them with others. That's enough reason for me. And I by removing the ego bit, I have also removed the defensive attitude. I don't care if people dislike them or ignore them or even if they suggest a crop, lol.

To make a long story short, I don't think that we should complicate matters even more than they already are. Let everybody react in a manner which suits them. If they want to provide C&C, fine. If not, also fine. If all they have to say is to crop here or change the perspective there, that is also fine. We are free to read what we want to read and draw our own conclusions.

Tom dinning said:

....The greatest satisfaction most of my students gain is from the realization that being better is an internal thing. When they stop worrying about what others might think and work from within they realize their own worth and the worth of their own images. I have been criticized often on this method of teaching because it gives nothing for the student to work from. My arguement is that it gives them everything to work from...

Click to expand...

I agree fully Tom. I can confirm the feeling of satisfaction as I have experienced it first hand thanks to your teachings this past year.

I am afraid that I don't have quite the same opinion on these matters.

I post pictures to get feedback. When people tell me something, anything really, it helps me to understand what they saw in that picture. For example, if someone tells me he would prefer a crop here or there, I don't take it as a criticism but as an indication of what elements are important for that member.

This approach has been criticized, maybe rightly so because I was undoubtedly a bit too terse in my postings, but the result is that I am not motivated to post opinions on pictures any more. But I don't want that, because I know that the attitude is not honest: if I get feedback on my pictures, I am supposed to give back or the forum cannot work.

I am less interested in discussing what is depicted. For me, the picture needs to show something really particularly interesting to be worth writing about. A recent example was the thread "occupy wall street", but the discussion would not have been much different without pictures, actually.

In the thread "industrial desolation", Cem Usakligil wrote: "why can't we take a picture as presented as a given and comment on what we see without having to chop it into pieces or adding the presumably missing adjacent parts to the picture? Just tell the photographer what you see and how it moves you (if at all) and let the photographer decide whether he/she has then achieved his/her goals or not. We should learn looking at pictures and forget about our own prejudices and habits.".

I'd like to point out that I try very hard to look at pictures without prejudice and that, as a consequence, I have changed my opinion many times seeing a picture and realizing it was done in a way I would never have chosen myself. I don't look at picture with a preconception on how pictures should look.

But I have a problem with Cem Usakligil's suggestion. Taking the recent thread B&W&G as an example, we have this post: "I see an interesting composition here. The details are partly hidden due to the low-key processing and I must look further to decide on what it is I am looking at. There seems to be oriental architectural elelements repeated in a large space, which makes me think that this is a public place. Perhaps it is the lobby of a hotel or something like that. There are comfortable looking sitting areas with cushions. There is a diffuse, probably natural light coming from left and the table lamp seems to be switched on as well. All together, this gives me a relaxed feeling. This might be a place where one can sit down and empty his/her mind. Just observe what is going on around you and use your imagination.". It would be an enormous amount of work for me to post something similar, because I don't actually see pictures in that manner. If I am required to post what I see in a picture, I would find it much easier to post it as a drawing, because what is important for me are lines and shapes and they are much easier to draw than to describe. But an Internet forum is a text medium, so I can't do that.

Taking the thread "photography and music" as another example, we have a completely different approach to critique. Here, Asher simply remarked that "he missed a cow". To me, that remark is far more useful than a description of the picture, because it gives me information on many levels:
-it teaches me that the viewer has understood the landscape and related to it on an emotional level: it is a pictures which makes him think about farming and his knowledge of the countryside, so the picture works on that level. Nobody would miss a cow in the pictures of the other threads.
-it teaches me that the composition misses an element and indeed my feeling is that the shapes are not balanced, the red barn is either to small or too big and the eye wanders around helplessly.
-it gives me a solution to the compositional problem. Next time I will go out and take similar pictures, and realize that the composition does not work, in addition to trying to move the frame around or move the viewpoint, I will see if another element cannot be added. It needs not be a cow, but any element one would miss in the pictures setting.

There might well be a class war developing here. In one corner we have those who take pictures for their own pleasure and are happy with that and there are those that need to have the image endlessly scrutinized and analyzed before an audience of peers.
There may be other contenders but they are just variations on a theme, dressed in slightly different armor.
Cem has recently made the transition and is a better person for it. He is able to deal with other aspects of his life equally well. Letting go of the more troublesome parts of ones life is a good thing, don't you think. Why, I might even let someone edit my pictures one day just for the hell of it. I've tried being nice but that doesn't suit me at all.
It seems those on the other side are chasing something elusive and possibly non-existent. Perfection. Fix this, correct that, shift the other thing, make it 'better'. Better than what?
I have a feeling Asher was joking when he mentioned the cow. It's hard to tell with Asher. He's such a serious man some days. Nice but too ****ing serious (in public at least). And going back to take the shot again with the intent of improving it! What's that about? Different shot, different day, different mood, different everything. I think it was Jane Bown who said the first and last shot was always the best. She took one roll and ten minutes to get it right. And never to return.
Moral of the story? Don't scrutinize too much. Shoot and be happy. Be a better person and you'll be a better photographer. As for your photographs? That's something entirely different.
It's like when I look at Cem's photos. I see a life I haven't lived and the contents interest me. He presents them in a palatable way but that's secondary. Through his photos I have come to know him and some of what he is. We share stories that relate to the contents and I learn more about him. This is of more value to me than any improvement in composition I might rudely suggest.
This hold true for many people here. Asher and his ladder, Fahim and his wanderings. The stories are reflected in the photos and the conversations and i get to know just a little bit more about the people and their lives. How nice is that?

Why do I post pictures?

I can, I do.
I can't, I won't.

Tom, I am not looking for perfection. I am trying to tell stories that cannot be expressed in words.

This is one of the first pictures I posted here, when I introduced myself:


What does it tell you about me and my life?

Jerome Marot said:

... What does it tell you about me and my life?

Click to expand...

You've asked the question to Tom but I will give you my answer anyway. We have had interactions with each other for some years now and how you react to various posts along with the pictures you have shared gives me the impression that I have gotten to know you a bit Jerome. Unless, of course, you are a serious psychopath who poses as someone who he isn't.
I reckon that the situation holds the other way around. This one picture does not say much, but given time, one gets there.

fahim mohammed said:

Why do I post pictures?

I can, I do.
I can't, I won't.

Click to expand...

That's OK with me.

When I post I like to receive critique.
This makes me improve my photography and grow.
I am a very pragmatic guy not very towards speculation...

I like to post here from time to time. These days I post rarely because I am involved in photographic projects.

This forum is rather different from others where I have been. This one looks more to the aesthetics and subjective aspects.

Jerome Marot said:

I am afraid that I don't have quite the same opinion on these matters.

I post pictures to get feedback. When people tell me something, anything really, it helps me to understand what they saw in that picture. For example, if someone tells me he would prefer a crop here or there, I don't take it as a criticism but as an indication of what elements are important for that member.

This approach has been criticized, maybe rightly so because I was undoubtedly a bit too terse in my postings, but the result is that I am not motivated to post opinions on pictures any more. But I don't want that, because I know that the attitude is not honest: if I get feedback on my pictures, I am supposed to give back or the forum cannot work.

I am less interested in discussing what is depicted. For me, the picture needs to show something really particularly interesting to be worth writing about. A recent example was the thread "occupy wall street", but the discussion would not have been much different without pictures, actually.

In the thread "industrial desolation", Cem Usakligil wrote: "why can't we take a picture as presented as a given and comment on what we see without having to chop it into pieces or adding the presumably missing adjacent parts to the picture? Just tell the photographer what you see and how it moves you (if at all) and let the photographer decide whether he/she has then achieved his/her goals or not. We should learn looking at pictures and forget about our own prejudices and habits.".

I'd like to point out that I try very hard to look at pictures without prejudice and that, as a consequence, I have changed my opinion many times seeing a picture and realizing it was done in a way I would never have chosen myself. I don't look at picture with a preconception on how pictures should look.

But I have a problem with Cem Usakligil's suggestion. Taking the recent thread B&W&G as an example, we have this post: "I see an interesting composition here. The details are partly hidden due to the low-key processing and I must look further to decide on what it is I am looking at. There seems to be oriental architectural elelements repeated in a large space, which makes me think that this is a public place. Perhaps it is the lobby of a hotel or something like that. There are comfortable looking sitting areas with cushions. There is a diffuse, probably natural light coming from left and the table lamp seems to be switched on as well. All together, this gives me a relaxed feeling. This might be a place where one can sit down and empty his/her mind. Just observe what is going on around you and use your imagination.". It would be an enormous amount of work for me to post something similar, because I don't actually see pictures in that manner. If I am required to post what I see in a picture, I would find it much easier to post it as a drawing, because what is important for me are lines and shapes and they are much easier to draw than to describe. But an Internet forum is a text medium, so I can't do that.

Taking the thread "photography and music" as another example, we have a completely different approach to critique. Here, Asher simply remarked that "he missed a cow". To me, that remark is far more useful than a description of the picture, because it gives me information on many levels:
-it teaches me that the viewer has understood the landscape and related to it on an emotional level: it is a pictures which makes him think about farming and his knowledge of the countryside, so the picture works on that level. Nobody would miss a cow in the pictures of the other threads.
-it teaches me that the composition misses an element and indeed my feeling is that the shapes are not balanced, the red barn is either to small or too big and the eye wanders around helplessly.
-it gives me a solution to the compositional problem. Next time I will go out and take similar pictures, and realize that the composition does not work, in addition to trying to move the frame around or move the viewpoint, I will see if another element cannot be added. It needs not be a cow, but any element one would miss in the pictures setting.

Click to expand...

I am fine with our differences of opinion Jerome. Even by reading what you wrote above, I am learning things which I haven't considered before. When you say that you post pictures to get feedback, in order to understand what they saw in that picture, that is exactly what I have been saying as well. As you know, I have been a champion of reciprocity here, for the forum to work. There has been a time when my feathers would have been ruffled if someone suggested a crop, but nowadays even that is something I can deal with. So we are not that much in disagreement at all.

What is rather surprising to read is that your lesser interest in discussing what is depicted in a picture. If I understand correctly, for you the picture itself is the subject and to a lesser degree the contents of it. Does this mean that you see and evaluate pictures as individual pieces of art? Does a picture mainly speak to you via compositional elements? Or via ephemeral ideas it generates in your head? Am I just speaking nonsense? Which is perfectly possible. Anyway, I find it fascinating.

Asher's comment about missing a cow in that picture is the same way as my description of Fahim's picture, the end results are the same. In this case, I just took the touristic route to get there.

Tom dinning said:

Cem has recently made the transition and is a better person for it. He is able to deal with other aspects of his life equally well. Letting go of the more troublesome parts of ones life is a good thing, don't you think. Why, I might even let someone edit my pictures one day just for the hell of it. I've tried being nice but that doesn't suit me at all.

Click to expand...

Tom,

First the succinct form, bullshit! The key is not having fun by being "released" from technique! The two of you have simply emerged from your pupae and have your well-earned technical wings! The release comes from an incubation period where resources are directed to definite ends.

"Letting go of it"? This is fine for your special students. Provide a "PC-everyone-wins-a-trophy" system and like giving oneself to a prophet, everyone has bliss. That works there, and bless you for that. In the rest of the life? Actually you're one of the most critical bastards under the sun! Everything is the opposite from what you pretend, LOL!

Truth is you can't know Cem by his pictures. Cem is not a better person "because he let go of things" and followed your mantra. Although this mutual admiration is darling, the truth is different. You have some 2,000 hours of compositional work over the years and double that in exporting ideas to imagery! With all this self-training under your belt, you are liberated. Much of the necessary hard work is now reflex. You didn't really lower your expectations, you just have aged well and integrated your methods into a fun approach! Bravo. I like your work and the meanness is the mustard to make it right.

Cem, you've mastered techniques of your way of seeing, finding your position and then capturing a range of illumination, all with brainpower. There's nothing laissez-faire about your pictures. You don't deliver the hot dogs according to happenstance positions of the barbi, some underdone and some cooked to charcoal. So you now can relax more. Your don't have to worry about "how to achieve that" next time. This what all mature photographers do according to their goal, be it crime scene documentation or boudoir photography. All work to a set of strict standards and only then there's no pressure or worry!

"Let it be"? Telling that to a novice, is nonsense if they are to do more than make mementos. There are demands for every kind of photography. "Let it be" is wonderful for a philosophy, but won't please a bride or her mother or the art editor of an architectural magazine.

Asher

Cem_Usakligil said:

Does a picture mainly speak to you via compositional elements? Or via ephemeral ideas it generates in your head? Am I just speaking nonsense? Which is perfectly possible. Anyway, I find it fascinating.

Click to expand...

Cem,

This was not directed to me, but let me have a stab at it. I'll reassure you immediately: you are not speaking nonsense here! We respond according to what we believe are the needs, wishes and frames of reference of the poster as much as our our own esthetics.

When I look at Fahim's travel pictures, I sense his admiration for the priest in his robes, woman drawing water or for the worker carrying a load. The composition is secondary. Your refined highly structured pictures talk to me from social commentary on what we have done with the world and how we pass through it. Yes, they could go in a gallery, but the content gets me first.

Rachel showed a picture of a rose, like succulent erotic lips, and it was an exceptional achievement. Sometimes her landscapes are hardly able to stop me walking by as the compositions are not finished. That's where technical feedback is so justified!

Dawid's B&W images are masterful in technique and composition. The content is secondary. He's not making a social commentary, just giving us beauty.

But could you know them from the pictures? Not at all. From my own personal knowledge of people here, the pictures themselves are poor as windows to the person, insufficient light gets in and weird filters distort the view.

Asher

Good Lord! The school has migrated here!!

Listen, I am too old to be in a classroom. Too set in my ways, and dare I say with enough experience, that I sure as hell need no two bit prophets and their flock to teach me about pressing the shutter.

And I am too old to be ooooing and aaaahing just because someone posted a blank wall and everyone else
is spending multiple accolades and/or hours trying to find the zen behind the blank wall.

This is not a classroom. There are no teachers here, at least not ones that I consider to be capable of teaching anything to me. Except get their own self egos inflated by waving their cvs and teaching experiences.

Want to join a school, go to kindergarten. As I said before, this place is for grown ups. Those who can stand and piss in the wind and not have it sprayed back onto themselves.

That is maturity and experience. Learnt the hard way. Like everything else, even photography.

Cem_Usakligil said:

What is rather surprising to read is that your lesser interest in discussing what is depicted in a picture. If I understand correctly, for you the picture itself is the subject and to a lesser degree the contents of it. Does this mean that you see and evaluate pictures as individual pieces of art? Does a picture mainly speak to you via compositional elements? Or via ephemeral ideas it generates in your head? Am I just speaking nonsense? Which is perfectly possible. Anyway, I find it fascinating.

Click to expand...

I'll say it again: I am trying to tell stories that cannot be expressed in words.

If I were interested in telling stories which can be expressed in words, I would simply use words. I am a reasonably good writer. Maybe not so in English, but my French is better. But if I use a picture to tell a story or -should I rather say?- convey a feeling, it is because that story cannot be expressed in words.

Take your pictures of industrial desolation as an example. Could you write a story about that? Probably, but it would be rather boring. After all, it is just a chemical plant or a bridge. Or maybe you could make it interesting, but it would be a completely different story, one of development, environment and technique, maybe. But the pictures tell a different story, they create different feelings, they speak of sadness, clouds, wintertime, structure, geometry, dullness and many other things for which there are no words. It is a good story, this is why all people who saw them here were impressed.

By discussing a picture, you are reducing it to words. Conversely, this is only possible for pictures telling stories which can be expressed in words and in that case, using words would probably be the better choice. Taking pictures is an incredibly clumsy way to express oneself.

If you really want to say something about a picture, maybe write about your feelings. On "Industrial desolation" I felt cold and gray as in winter, but I also was in awe about the power of the clouds, the intricacy of the pipes design, the elegance of the tree silhouettes. I felt that this 2.9 sign was important and I don't know why. I like the shape of the cooling tower. But I am also bothered that the left tip of the ship is hidden behind the bridge structure, and I would spare no effort to photoshop it back if I could. But, more simply, I can just say that I am impressed and invite you to submit the series to the planned exhibition. That sums up my feelings nicely.

I made my task easy by choosing your pictures as an example, because they are great pictures. Commenting on good pictures is simple, I can just describe my feelings since my feelings are great. Where I have a problem, especially in this forum, is when the pictures are not so good, which can happen to anyone. We are trying to be polite and gentle. But want can we do when the feeling is the one of a missed occasion or, worse, when we have no feeling? When there is no story? A picture can be like a badly written text: a dull story, too simply told with added bad grammar and spelling mistakes. It can still be a story which has meaning to the teller, a bit like the average facebook timeline where people indeed tell about their life and what matters to them. I may even still learn something from that facebook timeline, but does it make it to a story? Should I comment on it? Probably facebook invented the "like" button because they realized themselves that most timelines are not worth a comment. Valuable for the posters, maybe for their friends, but not a story able to raise feelings.

This thread is interesting and informative. More so than looking at photographs? Answer honestly: what does the answer(s) say about you? What does it say about photography?

Michael_Stones said:

This thread is interesting and informative. More so than looking at photographs? Answer honestly: what does the answer(s) say about you? What does it say about photography?

Click to expand...

Michael, answering honestly...about me, the response remains the same as above a few posts.

What does it say about photography or my photography? About my photography...some keepers, some meh, others destined for trash.
About other people's photographs...bar a few, people trying too hard to be ' artists ' with a ' deep and hidden ' meaning in their images. Only a few with intelligence can supposedly fathom these gems, given time.

With me, time is in short supply. It is point and shoot. Straight and to the point. For simple people, by a simple person. Either the viewer gets it or I have failed to point the cam effectively.

What about you?.

After my last post, I realized something that I had missed to type.

Why do I post photographs here? Because it is a photography forum!!!

And this thread does not have sufficient photographs in it. Photography is a communication medium. Visual, as opposed to verbal. One's message has to be simple, clear, unambiguous, easily understood by the recipients. And it has to be geared to those that shall receive it.

My daughter was in Florida recently for a conference of Oncologists. She had a presentation too. I could not understand a word of it..the words or the images. But the presentation, supposedly, was very well received by her peers. They spoke the same language.

Unless one is aiming for the avant grade , mind bending type of western culturally influenced images that might only be appreciated by someone exposed to those cultural influences the best images are those that transcend cultural boundaries. That which appeal to us as a human species ( majority of us anyway ). The communication medium should communicate. Make it easy for the receiver to understand.

Not expect a recipient to belong to MENSA or an alien culture. That this holds for a forum that is international ( or at least purports to be ) is a sine qua non for its existence. Else I too can start posting mind bending culturally dependent images, that would make most not versed in my culture seem retarded.

I am not a teacher ( heaven forbid ), but let me repeat..the pictures I post are by a simple mind which hopefully shall find resonance with the broadest spectrum of viewers. I expect all viewers of my photos to be more intelligent than me. The pictures I post are the simplest...the basic point and shoot kind..that which all of you can do way better than me. As an example, my grand kids...


p.s I originally intended to type..why do I post photos here? Because it is a photo forum...DAH!
But thought I might insult someone or the other.

Remember Eli Wallach in the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly....if you want to shoot, shoot..don't talk.

---------

There is a difference between giving advice on camera or lens choice and how many megapixels are needed - - - and offering opinions on the qualities that make up a visually acceptable photograph, like composition (which many times results from effective cropping) and choices of colour, tonality and contrast.

In general, the former is related to technical and the latter is related to the creative. Not always, but they are not the same. Example : people who buy cameras talk the tech - people who photograph are more concerned with the results.

------

There are some whose preference is to analyze and talk ad nauseum (whether that be about the photo or the photographers motives or life experiences) - - - and some who simply enjoy the visual pleasure of photography and express simple views about what they are experiencing.

In general, the former is related to technical and the latter is related to the creative. Not always, but they are not the same. Example : even fully qualified photographers learn how to talk nonsense in order to sell teaching course or put on elite gallery exhibits - people who just love to get out an shoot enjoy the visual part of seeing an interesting photograph and whether they sell their work or not, love experiencing others taking notice and their reactions to it.

-----------

All respectful views can survive side by side - but the former can have a tendency to overpower a conversation and make others (than the 2 or 3 involved in the conversation) lose interest. My opinion about opinions, is that the web offers no validation or assurances of the qualifications of anyone involved in a conversation.

No one here has any idea who I am. All anyone can base an honest opinion of me on, are the photographs that I post. I like it that way. So, my personal preference is - let the photograph speak if this is a photography forum. The talk is fine. I just ignore a lot of it.

Hey - I'm talking too much and analyzing too much. Back to shooting! hehe.

------

BTW - prior to the web, I had a main street studio where I could display my work and enjoy people viewing it - - - once closing the studio and moving online, forums gave me a much needed avenue for displaying my work for others to view. The art, craft and professional of photography has changed in the last 5 or 6 years - maybe becoming irrelevant - - - and so I think I may just be a dinosaur in using such resources for such simplistic desires.



- --- --------- - -

When I do a shoot, whoever might be the client, I wish others can see/look/watch at it.
A writer wants his text to be read, a film maker wants his movie to be seen, a painter, a sculptor, a photographer etc…
Otherwise, we can keep our vision in our own mind and keep it for ourselves only.
The good point is that no one is obliged to watch, read, see etc…

Jerome Marot said:

I'll say it again: I am trying to tell stories that cannot be expressed in words.

If I were interested in telling stories which can be expressed in words, I would simply use words. I am a reasonably good writer. Maybe not so in English, but my French is better. But if I use a picture to tell a story or -should I rather say?- convey a feeling, it is because that story cannot be expressed in words.

Click to expand...

An intriguing comment by Jerome that I've been pondering ever since first reading it. I threw out questions a few posts ago about whether discussion about photography is more interesting that viewing photos and what are the overall implications for photography. Fahim responded and asked how I'd answer those questions. I'll answer, of course, but with the proviso that those answers apply to my thinking right now, which is certainly different from in the past and may well change again.

I found this thread fascinating because it relates to stories about how people approach photography, their different ideas, motives, etc. So my honest answer to the first question is that stories interest me more than photographs, however heretical that might seem.

Implications regarding the second question is that photographs can amplify, supplement or detract from written/spoken words in story telling. For example, words describe feelings coarsely except when put together very well. Think of Dylan Thomas: "Do not go gently into that dark night / Rage, rage at the dying of the light...." Few people can express in words the emotions and cognitions about his father's death he phrased so eloquently. I know of no photo that matches that emotive power. Although photos and can prompt or clarify a story, to my mind a story requires a plot and narrative that static images provide with less subtlety than language. So to me, photography is the bridesmaid but not the bride but only if the bride is very beautiful indeed.

Michael_Stones said:

An intriguing comment by Jerome that I've been pondering ever since first reading it. I threw out questions a few posts ago about whether discussion about photography is more interesting that viewing photos and what are the overall implications for photography. Fahim responded and asked how I'd answer those questions. I'll answer, of course, but with the proviso that those answers apply to my thinking right now, which is certainly different from in the past and may well change again.

I found this thread fascinating because it relates to stories about how people approach photography, their different ideas, motives, etc. So my honest answer to the first question is that stories interest me more than photographs, however heretical that might seem.

Implications regarding the second question is that photographs can amplify, supplement or detract from written/spoken words in story telling. For example, words describe feelings coarsely except when put together very well. Think of Dylan Thomas: "Do not go gently into that dark night / Rage, rage at the dying of the light...." Few people can express in words the emotions and cognitions about his father's death he phrased so eloquently. I know of no photo that matches that emotive power. Although photos and can prompt or clarify a story, to my mind a story requires a plot and narrative that static images provide with less subtlety than language. So to me, photography is the bridesmaid but not the bride but only if the bride is very beautiful indeed.

Click to expand...

So, this was the meaning of your question! I wonder what you actually meant and could not answer it.

Probably I should not have used the word "story" here, because it implied for you the idea of story telling with a narrative plot, a beginning and an end. Indeed, photography is not adapted to the idea of a narrative plot. But I can give you an example: take Cem Usakligil pictures of industrial desolation. Would you be able to write a text that would convey the same content? I don't think so: there is more to the pictures that a written description of the setting would convey. One could also write a text about industrial desolation, chemical plants, etc... but it still would not be the same thing. That is what makes the medium interesting for me.

I am less interested about images used to illustrate an existing story, as in the case for pictures published as an illustration to a newspaper article, to a book or to an account of a travel. I understand that other people prefer this kind of pictures, but we can't all have the same taste.

I really can't answer the question as to why I post pictures on the web. I just don't know.



I usually try to respond from the heart.

Cem_Usakligil said:

Hi Asher,

I have a sneaking suspicion that what I wrote in my own thread (Industrial Desolation) the other day may have given you the trigger to start this thread,

Click to expand...

Cem,

It was obvious, but I didn't want to further divert your thread. After all, I like the industrial scenes and want to enjoy that thread for your photography, rather than philosophy.

Cem_Usakligil said:

you are meandering too much in your posts above. Make it short and clear, say directly what you want to say. You are being so politically correct to address the sensitivities of our full audience that your story (or question) gets lost in there. You, like the rest of us, have the right to your opinion without having to explain yourself at length first.

Click to expand...

I wanted to expose the range of ideas people have on posting and responding. P.C.? As the "navigator" here, I want to discover opinions but not be rude where it's not needed. So, yes, it's a thin line I tread as there are a hidden mines when different strong folk get together and be, "honest" without deference and consideration. You are much freer than I to blow off steam.

Cem_Usakligil said:

One recurring theme you come back to is to repeat and reassure that OPF is not a school for teaching photography. I know that Nicolas was/is against it and so was I. This past year, I have changed my look on that. If we learn anything at all by having conversations with each other in OPF, albeit on photography or on the development oil prices, OPF is then functioning indirectly as an educational institution. An institution which brings together from different walks of life and helps them all to become more informed and knowledgeable about things, which mainly pertain to photography.

Click to expand...

Thanks for adding the qualifier, "indirectly" which I bolded. It's that distinction which is special here. We do not sell classes to being masters of anything. no one is setup to being a guru, yet we do functional as an educational body, but as you point out, indirectly. The main focus has to be to celebrate each other's journey to their aspirations for the one picture or their attempts to achieve some photographic kind of work. We don't offer course in how to be like any of us. That's the difference. We don't make money on the myriads of vulnerable folk who have dreams of achieving some particular competency. however, we do allow and even encourage worthy course work/genuine services by members, if they contribute.

Cem_Usakligil said:

I have always been for providing feedback and/or C&C the pictures submitted. Heck, I have even written a 101 to help inexperienced folks to get started with it. One aspect which has always been important to me is to pay attention to the photograph itself first and foremost: look at it, try to understand it, see it. Only then, if it is still applicable or desirable, react on the technical aspects. This does not mean that I am against technical advice, it means that I find other aspects more important. If the goal of the original poster is to get advice on technical aspects or the cropping, etc., by all means we should give it to them. That's what Tom means when he writes that he should hear the question first.

Click to expand...

So we agree and that is totally as I expected!

Asher

Feedback, Connection, Learning

I'm hoping to find response here to the possibility of becoming an artist with my photos. I'm not interested in feedback re how to make what I do a commercial photograph, etc.; what "grabs the eye" as in advertising, or wedding kitsch (although I do it on occasion for money). I'm hoping to find people who are interested in pushing the envelope.

I like photos that cause you to do a double take, or have a delayed reaction, or which gently, subtly move the eye from place to place.

doug anderson said:

I'm hoping to find response here to the possibility of becoming an artist with my photos. I'm not interested in feedback re how to make what I do a commercial photograph, etc.; what "grabs the eye" as in advertising, or wedding kitsch (although I do it on occasion for money). I'm hoping to find people who are interested in pushing the envelope.

I like photos that cause you to do a double take, or have a delayed reaction, or which gently, subtly move the eye from place to place.

Click to expand...

Doug,

That's a major declaration and in this group a great step. Your work can then be referenced against such goals. Make sure you introduce the subject, so we know it's not just for fun and mementos. Also keep your eye or your vision. Advice should help not muddy that.

Asher