civilized ku # 2111 ~ "nice"

Enjoy bowling ~ Romano's / Saranac Lake, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenOn yesterday's entry Sven W (no link provided) wrote this comment:

... when you talk about the "perception of my pictures as beautiful objects" are you also including the appreciation of the craftsmanship in the image?

And when I say "craftsmanship" I'm not simply referring to purely technical matters (like sharpness etc) but also the aesthetic considerations through-out the process of creating the image ...

When viewing my pictures - in a gallery, on my walls, in a photobook, or just a loose print in my studio - the first reaction of most is to comment upon the print as an object. Those comments invariably include the words, "clear", "sharp", "nice color" and the like. Those comments are then usually followed by the exclamation of, "I would never have thought to take a picture of that ... you have a good eye" (or words to that effect), with the implied / inferred idea that I had brought their attention, in a favorable manner, to something they ignore / pass by with giving it a thought.

The latter comment - "I would never ... a good eye" - is about as close as it gets, re: "aesthetic considerations through-out the process of creating the image", aka: the camera use part of creating the image. And, as mentioned in yesterday's entry, those comments are most often heard issuing from the mouths of non-picture makers (in the serious / advanced amateur sense of the phrase). The utterance most heard from picture makers is usually short and sweet - "nice", or, even once in a while, "rubbish".

In either case, non vs serious / advanced, I believe that my attention to making "beautifully processed" pictures/prints is an integral part of my picture making signature. And that is why I totally disagree with a TOP entry, Shooting JPEG Instead of Raw, in which the author suggests shooting JPEG because "... major camera manufacturers invest substantial sums toward refining their image processing technologies. It's what they're most proud of as the hearts of their cameras and a key part of their proprietary competitive weaponry."

A Featured Comment on that entry by "h.linton" summed up my feelings best ...

"I get your logic though, but, in the digital world that I inhabit, it's the post-processing 'signature' that I create myself that I'm most interested in—not what some camera manufacturer might come up with."

My pictures have my signature stamped all over them. A significant part of that signature is, but by no means limited to, my print quality. I place a lot of emphasis on that quality because, after all, it's what the viewer sees first.