civilized ku # 1162 ~ dancing solo
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 10:46AM 
Parking lot cones ~ Saratoga, NY • click to embiggenThere are times when I know a given action on my part will create a rather negative reaction (also on my part) but I go ahead and do it regardless. It would seem that I just can't resist annoying myself. Although, in most cases, I am less annoyed with myself for allowing myself to be annoyed than I am by the annoyance I experience as a result of being annoyed by the annoying activities of others, if you know what I mean.
If you don't know what I mean, let me give you an example ...
As the result of seeing a link (on a photo blog) to an article - Understanding Criticism by Alain Briot - on The Luminous Landscape, I followed the link knowing full well there would most likely be something for me to be annoyed with.
caveat/full disclosure: I am neither a fan of The Luminous Landscape - way too gear/technicals oriented for my taste - nor the pictures of Alain Briot - way too pretty picture / clichéd for my eye and sensibilities. That said, it should be understood that I do not dislike the persons known as Michael Reichmann or Alain Briot in any way inasmuch as I have never met either individual. In the specific case of Alain Briot and the context of this entry, my comments, ironically enough, should be taken only as a critique of the ideas/notions found in Briot's article Understanding Criticism, not as a criticism of Briot's personhood. He and I have differing opinions on the subject. Should Briot come upon this entry, I hope he understands. end caveat/full disclosure
In installment # 2 of Understanding Criticism - item # 4, under the heading of Do not be your own critic, Briot states (the bold emphasis is mine in order to highlight some points I wish to address):
Do not be the critic of your own work. Your personal judgment for your work is based on considerations that are different from those of your audience. Personal emotions and memories are attached to the work that we created. Plus, creating artwork involves a significant amount of time, money, and effort. Therefore, we are understandably bias when it comes to our own work: we tend to think highly of it because of how hard we worked on it.
On the other hand we may also feel that no matter how much effort we put into our work the outcome falls short of our expectations. In that case we may not think much of our work, not because of what the work actually looks like, but because we are looking at the difference between what our original goal was and what we ended up with. Here too, we are bias[sic], but this time in a negative way.
Don’t do it. Instead, let people decide if they like your work or not. If you sell your work, let them ‘vote with their money.’ It works great and the answer is accurate and measurable. By keeping an open mind when it comes to the evaluation of your work, and by listening to your audience, you will learn valuable things that you may have missed if you only listened to your own opinion. People not involved in the creation of the work do not know what we know and did not experience what we went through. However, eventually, none of that matters. What matters is how our work comes across, and whether or not it successfully communicates to our audience the vision we want to share.
First and foremost, the idea that a picture maker should not be the critic of his/her own work is, IMO, a somewhat wacky notion. Given the idea of "personal vision" which springs from a picture maker's innermost intellect and emotions, who, other than the picture maker him/herself, is better suited to be a critic of their own work?
Furthermore, I thoroughly fail to understand how discovering, understanding, and trying to implement (in pictures) your own personal vision can be construed as a "bias" in any sense that might negate that knowledge / driving force as a basis - in fact, IMO, the absolute best basis - for self-critique.
Simply stated, it is my belief that you should be your own most demanding critic. You, and only you, know what you wish to express with your picture making endeavors. What anyone else may get or not get from viewing your pictures is entirely irrelevant to developing your own personal vision unless, of course, all you really want from the expression of your personal vision is praise, awards, accolades, and financial gain.
While there is no avoiding the fact, others (an audience) will decide whether "to like your work or not", using that decision to guide the development and expression of your personal vision - Briot suggests you keep "an open mind when it comes to the evaluation of your work, and by listening to your audience, you will learn valuable things that you may have missed if you only listened to your own opinion" - is a fool's errand**. After all, it's called a personal vision, not a group vision, right? So, what can an audience tell you about your own personal vision, that is to say, an inner voice begging and screaming to be let out of its inner box?
Of course, not everyone has a begging and screaming inner voice. For most, the notion of expressing oneself (as opposed to one's self) is very wrapped up with the notion of desiring / seeking praise, awards, accolades, and financial gain. That is why I believe Brooks Jensen was right on the mark when he wrote:
... eventually every photographer who sticks with it long enough arrives at a technical plateau where production of a technically good photograph is relatively easy. It is here that real photography starts and most photographers quit.
"Real photography", in Jensen's opinion,
... begins when we let go of what we have been told [ed. - by an audience or "gurus"] is a good photograph and start photographing what we see.
IMO, standing on your own two feet, three if you're using a tripod (or is it five), when it comes to personal vision, picture making wise, requires a certain amount of insular introspection and personal strength. That is, the ability to not only to shut off the "audience" and learn to listen to your own self, but to also have the fortitude to stand by that self and go your own way (responsibly, of course).
All of that said, I hope I haven't annoyed you.
*for the purposes of expressing one's self, making less than technically "perfect" prints might be part of the vision.
**the only exception being for those whose financial livelihood is dependent upon the sales of their pictures or assignments from clients to make more of the same. In those cases, pleasing the audience/client is everything.
Reader Comments (3)
I admire your personal strength.
Once in a while I capture an image that surprises me (in a positive way) and makes me wonder, whether I was the photographer, because the image feels unique. The rest of the time, I tire of praise for my "calendar-like photos."
Couldn't agree more with what you have said.
Mark, I haven't read Alain's article but I suspect this is a key sentence:
"If you sell your work, let them ‘vote with their money.’ It works great and the answer is accurate and measurable"
Alain Briot strikes me as a creator of marketable photographic images; your perspective is that of a photographic artist (or even more strongly, an artist who uses photography).
Sure, Alain possibly refers to himself as an "artist" (I haven't checked) but again this is probably more about marketing than an attempt at correct labelling.
Just sayin'.