civilized ku # 759 ~ on seeing

Parking lot ~ Old Montreal / Montreal, CA • click to embiggenSince last I wrote about seeing, a number of comments have been made, re: writing about the subject...

I too am baffled by the direction of Mark's thoughts on this topic...I think it's clear that it is one thing to be a good photographer and another thing to be a good writer about photography. (Sven W) .... I doubt there's much that is instructive to be said in general about how to make good photographs (James M) .... I find that discussions of this nature just keep going round and round in circles, without really being very useful...and pretty soon gets to be boring (Anil Rao)

...the gist of which could be construed as I should put a cork in it and move on. However, those comments were amended (sort of) by Anil Rao's additional suggestion that ...

I think it is important for this dicussion that you share with us some of your thoughts behind the making of your pictures. I am sure that a lot of us would really appreciate this insight in your photography.

What I find interesting about these comments is that most are pining for commentary on "the making of (my) your pictures". IMO, the reason for the desire for this more "concrete" information, as opposed to the rather ethereal commentary I have been presenting - commentary about "feeling" and digging deep inside one's self / psyche in order to "invent" your own personal manner of seeing and making pictures of what you see, is the result of a kind of fear.

Fear of having to make the long and arduous effort of coming to grip with and understanding one's inner self and how that applies to what one is trying to accomplish in his/her picture making endeavors. Fear of failure. Fear of letting go of old habits. Fear of addressing the unknown.

After all, if art - the good, the mediocre, and the bad - is the measure of the man/woman, there is an inherent risk/fear of letting it all hang out, aka: the fear of rejection. Rejection, not only of the art you make, but rejection of one's image of one's self.

All of that (ethereal malarkey) said, there was one comment from James M with which I totally agree ...

... one of the best ways of learning how to "see" better is to immerse yourself in good pictures. I just keep looking, and hope that something will sink in.

However, the key word in that notion is, "immerse" - one needs to immerse one's self in good pictures but the immersion must include understanding why one likes and/or dislikes good pictures. That is to say, to come to an understanding within one's self about why one likes or dislikes the pictures one views.

If, when viewing pictures, all one does is "hope that something sinks in", you're going to be hoping for quite a long time, maybe forever. What's needed is a more active approach to Making something sink in.

I have often suggested to picture makers who want to move beyond the pretty picture and for whom photography is more than entertainment (as stated in the sidebar, About This Website) that they write their own critique about those pictures to which they are attracted or, conversely, from which they are repelled. And I do mean to actually write - put some thought into it and put one's thoughts and reactions down on paper. That activity is a very important part of self education.

Now, all of that said, I am not completely adverse to discussing the making of my pictures. However, if I am to do so, I would like to avoid those discussions that are gear / technique driven. Which is not say that those issues are not part of the making of my pictures but I would be more inclined to discuss the why rather than the how of my picture making.

In the meantime, I will continue with my writings on the subject of seeing and, as I was about to commence, on how to make pictures of what one sees - at least, inasmuch as I see it.

Comments

[beau]

This highlights the difficulty of teaching/learning photography. Putting it in words is a great suggestion!

It helps my students out a lot when they get past their reluctance to voicing things externally. When they see written down what they are thinking and trying to achieve it really helps give them direction.

One thing that can help the discussion is having the images you DIDN"T take (to discuss the decisions that led to the images you did take).

I rarely have the foresight to take some of those along with what I am photographing...

[Anil Rao]

Hi Mark,

As I had said earlier, I am not interested in how you make your photographs. I am, however, very interested in knowing why you make them in the manner you do. Its not so much an issues of fear as you seem to put it. Where I think it will help me most is gaining an understanding of your way of seeing things.

For better or worse I find that I see my world quite differently from you. Therefore an understanding of why you are doing what you are doing is useful when I am immersing myself in your work.

[Sven W]

Hi Mark, hopefully our comments have made you pause and change tack a little; not so much as to "put a cork in it" but to consider some other ways of communicating your ideas.

Speaking for myself, there's no "fear" factor involved but there is a definite aversion to "ethereal malarkey".

Sure, we're talking about conscious and subscious processes here but there has to be a way to explain things. I realise you've been making pictures for many years and it's become second nature ... the amount of finesse in your images is evidence of this.

Your suggestion of writing down what we like and dislike about an image is just the sort of practical pearl-of-wisdom I'm interested to hear. The idea has never crossed my mind but I can immediately understand the benefit!

Perhaps this could be a starting point for you - either some of your images or some of the "classics". (Perhaps some of your images may go on to be recognised in this category.)

[James M]

I like the idea of writing things down--though I can already see that it's going to be challenging. I think I'll start with trying to work out what I think about books or series of photos rather than individual photos. (Much of the photography that excites me has groups of photos as the primary unit.)

PS. I didn't mean to imply that you should put a sock in it. And I'm pleased to see that you wouldn't have listened to me anyway!