Oh, I agree with you that artists are “seers” – and I LOVE that pun!
I think Greiner’s point was exactly what you stated about thinking, responding, revealing. Stil, what the person experiencing the photograph (or any other art form) feels doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with what the artist intended – akin to the concept of the fallacy of intent in literary theory. The work will always be the artist’s response to the world. But the viewer will be responding to the work and that experience won’t necessarily be – can’t be – the same as the creator’s, which isn’t to say that they won’t get what the artist intends. And the response of viewers will differ because they bring different thoughts, histories, and emotions to their experience (not to get all Kantian on you ) and end up at different destinations.
Also, great art can sometimes ask more questions than it provides answers.
Just wanted to echo Saikat’s comment about Kokoro – these sets are indeed feasts for the soul – especially for me, who isn’t Japanese but was definitely Japanese in a previous life!
Ok, I’ll agree with a bit of that. I just see it as limiting people who make art using a camera. I guess I have to admit that it still bugs me that photographers feel the need to say “fine” or “art”, when a painter or sculpture, even tattoo artists don’t need to use adjectives. I was in a gallery years back (one with primarily photography) and a guy stopped in and asked, “do you have any art in here?” After saying all we have is art, I asked him to leave! BTW, I too shot weddings 40 plus years ago, and yes once in a while I still get asked. I laugh, I smile and politely say “no way”. Even at the rate some of them get, “I’d rather eat glass” as a friend says.
Jones, are you sure that emotion and thought are different things? People often make this division, because thought is supposed to be verbal whereas emotion is not. To some degree, that is the great virtue of photography; the visual can blend emotion and thought. Not always, but when it does so they combine to make a powerful image.
Perhaps another way to look at this is the sequence. Which comes first, thought or emotion? I’ve found the answer is — both. Sometimes my photography projects start with a thought that leads to an emotion, sometime vice versa. I’ve found that for me it is less important to worry about the logistics than it is useful to plumb the depths. Where does a thought lead, and why? Is this emotion genuine or an habitual response.
Over the years, one other thing I’ve learned along the way is that with either emotion or thought it is best to distill a photography project to its essence. Try to say too much and it just gets bogged down in its own weight. Saying a small thing with clarity and power is better than a long thing that rambles. Functionally, I believe photography is closer to a haiku than it is to a graphic novel. Our Seeing in SIXES and the recent Trilogies projects were all about that and I think are great illustrations of the blending of emotion, idea, and thought. You can see these in LensWork in the form of our new Image Suites which we’ve been publishing for a couple of years now.
Bruce, horses for courses. My approach is to choose my equipment based on the results I want to create. If I wanted to make giant prints, I’d use a larges sensor with the most pixels I could afford — or almost afford. I use m4/3 because it fits my needs for book publication, folios and chapbooks, and the PDFs I do in Kokoro. In fact, I have more pixels than I need for these destinations. Prints to 16x20 are not a problem and I don’t often make prints that large.
As to lens reach, the Panasonic 100-400mm can get you the eq of an 800mm lens on full frame. If you need more than that, my goodness! I use the Panasonic Leica 50-200mm and have never had the need for anything longer (full frame eq of 100-400mm). Important to note, however, that my work rarely involves photographing wildlife. There are specialty areas in photography where specific equipment is needed, of that there is no doubt and compromise and workarounds are not a good solution.
As to noise. I’ve never yet met a camera or system that didn’t require me to occasionally employ some workaround. Every camera. On the rare occasions when I need to worry about noise at high ISO, I typically find I can use the Mean Stack Noise Reduction technique and it works beautifully. I don’t hesitate to shoot at ISO 12,800 with confidence that my final m4/3 image will be essentially noiseless. Obviously not with all subjects, but with enough that I’m almost never snookered.
Hi Brooks, Kevin Raber here. Way too long since we have caught up. We must talk sometime. Are you still traveling in the trailer? Or, have you retired to a more permeant location for the winter.
Question: How have you seen photography change since the pandemic?
Maybe not by name, but I can by characteristic. I prefer photographers who show me why I should look at their landscapes. If all they do is make a copy of the world (particularly if it’s a “pretty picture”), I’m less interested. The fundamental act of photography is presenting an image that is supposed to be meaningful and connect with the viewer. If the photograph essentially presents me with something I would have seen had I been standing next to the photographer at the moment of exposure, I am often left asking the question Why? Why am I supposed to pay attention to this? Why do you find this significant? I often put it this way: of all the trees you drove by or walked by, why did you stop to photograph this one? What makes this tree special? The photographers I admire the most are those who can show me (in their photograph) why that tree caught their eye over all others. Not “a tree”, but this tree. Ditto for any other subject in the landscape.
I’m curious as to why you restrict your question to contemporary photographers?
Because the past great photographers are generally accepted and their work has been written about and analyzed. The new ones are in the process of being evaluated and what they’re adding to photography. I was interested who in your opinion these people are and what they’re adding that’s new. Who are the vanguards of landscape photography?
Kevin, nice to hear from you. Yes, still traveling in the trailer — two years now. This summer I’m working my way to the east coast and then up to Nova Scotia. Right now, I’m in Brookings, Oregon for the winter. It never freezes here!
As to the pandemic, it has been an ideal time for people to work their Lightroom (et al) catalog to mine their archives for projects. I’ve said for years that if I could never make another capture, never make another trip out there somewhere, I’d still be productive as a photographer just by working the projects hidden in my archives. Small project (3-20 images, let’s say) are there, but might be separated by decades, equipment, media (film vs digital), unscanned negatives, ideas that haven’t occurred to you yet, new processing techniques that my rescue older images — on and on. Just because we couldn’t go out doesn’t mean we can’t be productive. Photographers have been frustrated because they couldn’t travel, but photography is a lot more than clicking the shutter.
It seems you want names. At the risk of leaving someone out, here goes: Huntington Witherill, Brigitte Carnochan, Chuck Kimmerle, Mitch Dobrowner, Paul Kenny, Cole Thompson (you owe me!), Guy Tal, Al DaValle, Bruce Barnbaum, the late Jack Curran ( ), Clyde Butcher, Hans Strand, Josef Hoflehner, Paul Gallagher, and Michael Kenna. I know I’ve left out some important photographers, but these are the ones who come off the top of my head.
Hi Brooks, I’m a long time fan of Lenswork and a proud subscriber since 2007. For years I have been listening to your podcast (previously weekly now almost daily after you started “Here is the Thought” - I call them my daily dose of photography wisdom ). My photography development has been undoubtfully influenced by what you do. I’m sure many people today will ask you philosophical questions, but I just want to ask you a very practical question - how did you get things done so efficiently and effortlessly? I’m assuming just Lenswork publishing itself is already very demanding; then with tons of update in Lenswork Online, doing podcasts with such short intervals in between, and still able to find time to do your own photography work… I’m sure there are many other behind the scene work as well. You seem to be able to handle all these very gracefully. Particularly I’m most amazed by how (seemingly) effortless that you record these LW and HT podcasts. Words seem to just flow. Your productivity is simply amazing to me. Can you share some of your secrets ? Thanks in advance!
Hi Brooks! I’m sure you’ve probably been asked this question many times, but do you ever see yourself making individual signed prints of your work available for purchase? I’m familiar with the chapbooks and folios, but sometimes they’re out of stock. Every time I see your Cosmic Jackrabbit, or some of your wonderful Fort Worden abstracts, I regret not having one for the wall!
Huibo,
You’ve made an old man blush. Thanks for all those kind thoughts and words.
How do I get it all done? Three answers. I do photography (and publishing) all day, every day. It is my life. From my first cup of coffee in my jammies in the morning, until I shut things down in the evening. that’s at least 12 hours a day, pretty much 7 days a week. And I love every minute of it. Second, I make extensive us of templates, macros, advanced software techniques, and shortcuts. In short, technology. And third, and most important, are those behind the scenes who make me look better than I am. Maureen (boy, do I miss her!) and Crystal contribute far more than any of you know. Production is a function of love what you do, do what you do, and get help doing what you do. I think that applies to creating our own artwork, too.
As to the podcasts, I learned years ago that I struggle to write. Speaking comes much more naturally to me. Everything I write starts as a dictation which is then transcribed for editing. Knowing what comes easy to you and what is difficult allows us to play to our strengths.
) and end up at different destinations.
), Clyde Butcher, Hans Strand, Josef Hoflehner, Paul Gallagher, and Michael Kenna. I know I’ve left out some important photographers, but these are the ones who come off the top of my head.
Thanks in advance!