The other morning, before dawn, our dogs started barking furiously at the bedroom window. I got up, and saw a shadowy figure in our drive. I got a pair of binoculars and had a second look - it was a doe, standing rigidly, and alert. Then, a second, smaller shadow, and another. Coyotes!
The drama played out over a couple of minutes. The doe stamped and feinted an attack. The coyotes dropped back and circled. Finally, the doe turned and bounded down our drive, with the coyotes loping behind.
I hoped she would lose them, and expected that she would.
I didn't have a camera to document the scene. The images will remain with me a long time though. It was an emotionally charged drama that played out before me, a drama that is as old as Nature herself.
I don't regret not having a camera. The experience did underscore one thing for me: images remain as powerful symbols of our emotional experiences. For me, successful photographs are those that recall not just the scene, but somehow capture the emotion associated with experiencing the scene. Whether in a print, or in my memories, images are powerful signposts in my life.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Reflections on the summer art show season
The last show of the season.
How many times have I packed and unpacked this year?
I do recall meeting a lot of very nice people, artists and guests. I also recall some unpleasantness along the way .....
I have been genuinely touched by all the people that stopped by my booth, considered my photographs, and took the time to tell me how much they liked my work. For a creative person, that is what it is all about. If you are somehow struck by an image that I have created, then I have succeeded. I have opened a channel of communication beyond words, in a realm of visual symbols that encode some emotional content. Wow .......
The positive response is also a source of inspiration. When I succeed, then I am driven to try again. I don't believe that anyone creative can work in isolation: their "product", be it words, images or music, is part of an elaborate dance between creator and viewer.
The shows are hard work, and long hours. Few people make a living from these shows. What I sell helps to keep me out there creating images. If I tallied up the hours spent photographing, processing, printing, framing and attending shows, and what I earn from the process, I suspect I would make more slinging hamburgers, but that is completely beside the point. I am out there, creating images, and interacting with an appreciative audience. I do this because I love it.
Surprisingly, I have been criticized at shows. Comments about it being "just" photography, "I could do that with my (fill in the name of a digicam)", "I went on a trip and have hundreds of photos like that ","my kid took a photography course, he could do that ..." and on and on. All within earshot, or right to me. I have to admit to being stung by such comments, but upon reflection, I have concluded that all of these individuals only saw the most obvious - an image of a rock, or tree, or a scene from Superior. They did not, or could not, look a bit deeper to see why I had chosen that particular image. The same image that others would express deep admiration for.
I have always concluded that there are visually oriented people, and there are those who are not. Among photographers, the same split exists. There are plenty of fellows, usually keen to talk about equipment or camera clubs, who seem to pay no attention to the images on display..... it seems to be all about the technology, the gadget, and not about the medium or creativity.
The most memorable experiences from these shows are talks about images. What elements make it work, what about the image evokes a response, what emotional responses are brought out. I am deeply flattered by people' s interest in my images. I also learn a lot about the visual communication from these discussions. Of course, when someone is moved to take one of my images into their home, I consider that the ultimate compliment!!
So, if you have a perspective on the creative or communicative properties of photographs, I'm keen to hear from you. If you want to discuss the merits of the latest digicam, I just remembered that I have to count my loose change and take it to the bank .......
How many times have I packed and unpacked this year?
I do recall meeting a lot of very nice people, artists and guests. I also recall some unpleasantness along the way .....
I have been genuinely touched by all the people that stopped by my booth, considered my photographs, and took the time to tell me how much they liked my work. For a creative person, that is what it is all about. If you are somehow struck by an image that I have created, then I have succeeded. I have opened a channel of communication beyond words, in a realm of visual symbols that encode some emotional content. Wow .......
The positive response is also a source of inspiration. When I succeed, then I am driven to try again. I don't believe that anyone creative can work in isolation: their "product", be it words, images or music, is part of an elaborate dance between creator and viewer.
The shows are hard work, and long hours. Few people make a living from these shows. What I sell helps to keep me out there creating images. If I tallied up the hours spent photographing, processing, printing, framing and attending shows, and what I earn from the process, I suspect I would make more slinging hamburgers, but that is completely beside the point. I am out there, creating images, and interacting with an appreciative audience. I do this because I love it.
Surprisingly, I have been criticized at shows. Comments about it being "just" photography, "I could do that with my (fill in the name of a digicam)", "I went on a trip and have hundreds of photos like that ","my kid took a photography course, he could do that ..." and on and on. All within earshot, or right to me. I have to admit to being stung by such comments, but upon reflection, I have concluded that all of these individuals only saw the most obvious - an image of a rock, or tree, or a scene from Superior. They did not, or could not, look a bit deeper to see why I had chosen that particular image. The same image that others would express deep admiration for.
I have always concluded that there are visually oriented people, and there are those who are not. Among photographers, the same split exists. There are plenty of fellows, usually keen to talk about equipment or camera clubs, who seem to pay no attention to the images on display..... it seems to be all about the technology, the gadget, and not about the medium or creativity.
The most memorable experiences from these shows are talks about images. What elements make it work, what about the image evokes a response, what emotional responses are brought out. I am deeply flattered by people' s interest in my images. I also learn a lot about the visual communication from these discussions. Of course, when someone is moved to take one of my images into their home, I consider that the ultimate compliment!!
So, if you have a perspective on the creative or communicative properties of photographs, I'm keen to hear from you. If you want to discuss the merits of the latest digicam, I just remembered that I have to count my loose change and take it to the bank .......
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Opening shot ....
Well, a new venture, starting off with the best of intentions.
Photography is an art form that has its many controversies and perspectives. Plenty of grist for the mill, to use an old cliche.
Right now, a lot is changing for photographers: digital has certainly made a big impact, but paradoxically, it is also a golden age for those of us who want to work with traditional equipment and materials. Film persists, and likely will, in some form, for a long time to come. I consider film and digital to almost be different media, for reasons that I will discuss in future posts.
While I exclusively use film for my "fine art" images, I do shoot digital, and print from scans as well as in the darkroom. The important thing, in the end, is the image. Either it is an image of artistic and technical merit, or it is not. I personally don't much care how the photons were captured. I will NOT engage in the puerile film vs. digital debate. Ever.
I do care about ethics, though. All of my images, regardless of process, are faithful representations of the scene as found. I do not accept compositing of images (i.e. superimposing a great shot of a tree over a separate great sky shot) as photography - it is a form of collage, and needs to be declared as such. It is reprehensible to not be open about such matters, and undermines the faith in photographers at large: a significant element of the appeal of an image is the fact that it does capture a special moment, albeit through the photographer's vision. Sadly, I see such shenanigans by "photographers", undeclared, in a cheesy attempt to wow folks into buying their images.
Is a photograph merely a record? No, it is a deliberate selection of a tiny slice of time and space. A successful photograph depends on the visual communication with the viewer. It stands on its own, and needs no verbiage. The more text, the less successful the image.
I've touched on a range of topics, and I'll revisit each in more detail as time goes by. I hope that you find these posts interesting and thought provoking, whether or not you are a photographer.
Stay tuned ........
Photography is an art form that has its many controversies and perspectives. Plenty of grist for the mill, to use an old cliche.
Right now, a lot is changing for photographers: digital has certainly made a big impact, but paradoxically, it is also a golden age for those of us who want to work with traditional equipment and materials. Film persists, and likely will, in some form, for a long time to come. I consider film and digital to almost be different media, for reasons that I will discuss in future posts.
While I exclusively use film for my "fine art" images, I do shoot digital, and print from scans as well as in the darkroom. The important thing, in the end, is the image. Either it is an image of artistic and technical merit, or it is not. I personally don't much care how the photons were captured. I will NOT engage in the puerile film vs. digital debate. Ever.
I do care about ethics, though. All of my images, regardless of process, are faithful representations of the scene as found. I do not accept compositing of images (i.e. superimposing a great shot of a tree over a separate great sky shot) as photography - it is a form of collage, and needs to be declared as such. It is reprehensible to not be open about such matters, and undermines the faith in photographers at large: a significant element of the appeal of an image is the fact that it does capture a special moment, albeit through the photographer's vision. Sadly, I see such shenanigans by "photographers", undeclared, in a cheesy attempt to wow folks into buying their images.
Is a photograph merely a record? No, it is a deliberate selection of a tiny slice of time and space. A successful photograph depends on the visual communication with the viewer. It stands on its own, and needs no verbiage. The more text, the less successful the image.
I've touched on a range of topics, and I'll revisit each in more detail as time goes by. I hope that you find these posts interesting and thought provoking, whether or not you are a photographer.
Stay tuned ........
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)