civilized ku # 16 ~ contemplation?
Friday, March 30, 2007 at 08:56AM 
Spring time light • click to embiggenOver on photomusings Paul Butzi has been ruminating over the course of several posts on 'contemplation' and 'contemplative cameras'. At the root of it, the premise seems to be that some cameras create/help foster a more 'contemplative' picturing experience. Paul states, "If our goal is to have our photographic process be contemplative, and some cameras are more supportive of this than others, then it makes sense to invest some time and energy in understanding what features (or synergistic combinations of features) tend to add to the contemplative experience and what features tend to diminish it."
This notion is antithetical to my approach to picturing which is much more along the lines of Nike's exortation to 'just do it'. I find it much more advantageous when picturing to be in a 'receptive' rather than a 'contemplative' state of mind.
I know others feel the same. Consider this email which arrived yesterday with the subject of "?????".
Aaron wrote, 'so am I missing the point or is it just subconscious?
people comment a lot on my photos about things that make sense after I read what they say, but were not true intentions??? is it just something their mind see's or am I really creating it that way, just subconsciously???
example: the 3rd panoramic I uploaded to your site yesterday... someone complimented me on the great composition and juxtaposition of the "strong" boulder on the left and the "weak" fallen birch that takes the right 2/3rds...
I just went into the woods...walked around and saw many good spots, but the one I chose to shoot just "felt" right. I really don't think about composition AT ALL! Is that wrong??? I just like the way things "feel"...like deep down inside...it feels right...whether it be the photograph(ing) or the post-processing?!!'
The thing that gets me is Aaron's question, 'Is that wrong?"
Now Aaron's a photo-neophyte. He has been serious about picturing for only about 6-8 months. His photo 'education' consists of; several conversations with beer (with me), two 5-hour-car-ride photo "seminars' (with me), and most important, thousands of 'just-do-it' exposures. It's worth mentioning that he also spent a couple years during his home schooling apprenticing with me doing graphic design which gave him a huge headstart computer skill-wise.
Aaron can thank his lucky stars that he's learning in the digital domain. Except for the expense of purchasing a good dslr, he was already set up with a high-end digital darkroom and high-level skill set therein. Consequently, he could shoot his a** off and play with post-shoot processing to his heart's content, something he has pursued with a passion (maybe an obsession). Suffice it to say, he has crammed about 5 years worth of my early photographic 'fooling around' into a few short months.
Good for him. And, in answer to the question, No it's not wrong.
That said, my take on the 'contemplative' thing is this - do your 'contemplating' without a camera anywhere in sight. Be 'contemplative' while viewing your own pictures and those of others. Be 'contemplative' while reading about the aesthetics of the medium of photography. Be 'contemplative' while making decisions about what to picture (in a body-of-work/project sense) and how to do it (in a technique/techincals sense).
Then, camera in hand/on a tripod/perched on the top of your head/whatever, go forth and 'just do it' until it 'feels right'.
Frankly, IMO, if you can't 'just do it' and figure out for yourself (with a little help from your friends) when it 'feels right', maybe jigsaw puzzles might just be a better way to past the time. Then, at least when you finish one, you'll know that you 'got it right'.
Reader Comments (4)
As a knowledgeable person to the dynamics of Aaron to "Gravitas",
I smile formed and a question popped into my head, " Are these abilities to create good photos, that is to say balanced, well composed, meaningful, blah-blah-blah, in the DNA? Were Aaron's "feelings" inherited? Or does it come being there and absorbing,
subconsciously, these abilities?
I think it takes time to learn to read your own work. My take on it, speaking only for myself, was that it did start out subconsciously. There were things that I was drawn to very strongly but I didn't know why and I didn't even have a mental framework with which to inspect what was going on. And a lot of my thinking about it was very vague and expressed in terms of just "having a feeling". But then after doing more and more work and being forced to confront it over and over again, I feel that I'm really starting to focus my own intentions. And a lot of my "revelations", as it were, are very clearly there in the earlier work it's just that it took time to be able to recognize them.
True word, Ana! Some photographers seem to resist thinking about their work or trying to understand what they're doing. In my view, they're not only missing a lot that could be learned, but they're slowing their growth and diminishing their ability to make better photographs.
Having a hard time figuring the significance of the number and the "ku" in your titles.
Care to provide some illumination?