Looking beyond

<p>Or seeing beyond.</p>

<p>Looking beyond and seeing beyond, while possibly contextually different, are considered here as similar. I say that to avoid focusing on their differences (looking versus seeing).</p>

<p>Looking (or seeing) beyond that which is masking what might be the essential;</p>

<p>Looking beyond the material or commercial things that hide what may be beneath or masked;</p>

<p>Looking beyond material things that might indicate where we are, but not what or why we are;</p>

<p>Looking beyond the obvious to perceive the real, the hidden or the mysterious;</p>

<p>Looking beyond one’s background of experiences or education (for exploration, discovery, interpreting unknowns);</p>

<p>Looking beyond one’s specific culture or mode of living;</p>

<p>Looking beyond that which photography has already shown us or has communicated to us.</p>

<p>Looking beyond?</p>

<p>Does that motivate your photography or life? Is it important to you, why or how? Does it matter to you? Are you more comfortable without the desire to look beyond?</p>

<p>I realize this might be also a question of philosophy but it is perhaps better a question of personal approaches to or uses of photography in a more general and less formal discussion. However, if you harbor a particular philosophy that relates to this OP, or an anti-material perception of what is around you that is fine as well. I am interested in your feelings about looking beyond or seeing beyond,what it means to you as a photographer and perhaps some graphical examples of it.</p>

<p>Mea culpa: I am on the move with not always a wifi connect, but I will try to read the responses as often as I can.</p>

<p>Arthur, my answers are pretty much the same in talking about photos I look at, photos I make, and my view of the world.</p>

<p>I embrace the physical or the material and don't put much stock in "essences." When I feel I go beyond the material, I use the term "transcendent" or "intangible," not "essence." People, places, things, and events are much larger than what a photo is or what my own or a camera's view of something is. A photo can capture something significant about its subject.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Looking (or seeing) beyond that which is masking what might be the essential;</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In my own photos and my own approach to life, the masks we wear tell a lot, especially when we carefully look at them, play with them, and confront them. Masks are significant.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Looking beyond the material or commercial things that hide what may be beneath or masked;</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't see the material as necessarily hiding anything. As a matter of fact, really studying and contemplating the reality of the physical world can lead us to all sorts of insights. I think that's something special photography at its best can do.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Looking beyond material things that might indicate where we are, but not what or why we are;</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My view of the material is that in can indicate what and why as well.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Looking beyond the obvious to perceive the real, the hidden or the mysterious;</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What's obvious is just as real as what's not so obvious. Often photographers, by noticing and framing things, actually show us something obvious that we simply missed. That can be very important and eye-opening. Often my "Aha" moments are the recognition of how obvious something was that I'd been missing all along.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Looking beyond one’s specific culture or mode of living;</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Some photos look beyond one's own culture. Other photos look carefully at one's own culture and way of living. One can attain to either or both. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Looking beyond that which photography has already shown us or has communicated to us.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Photography has already shown us so many incredible things. If one is to go beyond it, one can start by internalizing it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Are you more comfortable without the desire to look beyond?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't see it as a matter of comfort. <br>

<br>

The OP sets up a lot of dichotomies, hidden vs. obvious, material vs. essential. I see them more as symbiotic than oppositional.<br>

<br>

The strong play of light and shadow in the photo below made Ian's face seem almost like a mask to me, so I kept that in mind in my post processing. I feel as if I learned something about Ian and something about all of us by considering the face as mask. <br>

<br>

Who knows? Maybe's Ian's essence (or mine), in part, is to want to hide himself. Maybe that's part of being a human. In that sense, hiding is revelation.<br>

<br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/7642273-md.jpg" alt="" width="679" height="465" /></p>

<p>I have been taking photographs for a long time, both of people and of scenes. For me it seems to be an act of capturing (the visual) moment, which so often gets passed by unnoticed, or barely noticed in the activities of life. So, its more like a slowing down, noticing, and appreciating the moment. Instead of “going beyond,” its “catching up” at least for me. I think that many other photographers do have a more philosophical intent to their work than I do. </p>

<p>I agree with Steve. Trying to find and capture what's interesting in the present is hard enough.</p>

There are many ways that photography can be used and is understood/seen as. Some are very particular, and (for instance) define a strict role and character to photography (such as capturing a fleeting, and "decisive", moment, extending it beyond however short a moment is, making it last forever). Strict, or restricted, in that photography as a medium is seen as, and its 'meaning' understood as primarily or exclusively a thing that does exactly, and only that. Or in the assumption or assertion that photography has a unique connection with the 'real'.<br>Other approaches are more instrumental, and (again a for instance) focus on the conceptual aspect of what we are doing first, see and use photography as 'just' one other way to leave marks on paper, create something to look at.<br>Trying to find something to capture and trying to think of things that can be created using a camera are both possible, and valid, ways of looking at the medium. And, though quite different, are not mutually exclusive but can complement each other (with either one 'in the lead').<br>I'd say that there is plenty scope for 'looking beyond'. We all choose a way to use photography the way we want to, and the fact that there is a choice, that we could also consider other ways in which photography could be used makes that scope for looking beyond rather evident. In fact, the interesting bit about people's photography is to notice that they do indeed approach, understand and use it in a way that is not our's. It gives cause for a reflection on our own understanding of what we are doing. Thrown in the fact that photography is a medium, a communicator, and it also gives cause to reflect on our understanding of whatever is communicated.<br>Without a beyond, we would all be caught in a false, because restricted, sense of what photography is and by extension possibly also of how the world is (but that latter bit could be seen as supposing that we only know the world through photos, which evidently isn't so. But you get the point). There could only be doubt about there being an opportunity to look beyond if we could claim that we already and always consider and indeed use all aspects and options photography offers. We may indeed be considerate and deliberate enough to consider all all aspects and options. But we always select a way to use photography, i.e. set limits beyond which that beyond is found.