Photographic "projection"

<p>Is our tireless and desperate search for photos to view, actually a search for the photos we would like to make ourselves?</p>

<p>In other words, do we need to constantly "<em>project</em>" our photographic self into the photos we search for?</p>

<p>And does it happen that the more "<em>developed</em>" our photographic self is, the more challenging the confrontation is with what we are presented?</p>

<p>I would say so. Whenever I attend arts/crafts festivals, street fairs, or galleries I am never looking to buy - rather, looking for inspiration for my own adventures and photo opportunities. I don't want to buy an image that somebody else captured. I want to go there, see it, and capture it myself, perhaps in my own style.</p>

<p>For me it is only sometimes. When I look at landscapes they often cause me to analyze why I like the photo and perhaps apply those lessons to my own landscape images. I love looking at extreme macro images and while I have tried it I don't love doing it but I still love looking at others work. I also love looking at images of beautiful women but I have no interest in doing model or fashion photography.</p>

 

<p><strong>Luca A.R. - "</strong>Is our tireless and desperate search for photos to view, actually a search for the photos we would like to make ourselves?"</p>

<p>Perhaps for others. Not for me.</p>

<p>"In other words, do we need to constantly "<em>project</em>" our photographic self into the photos we search for?"</p>

<p>Not in my case.</p>

<p>"And does it happen that the more "<em>developed</em>" our photographic self is, the more challenging the confrontation is with what we are presented?"</p>

<p>No.</p>

 

<p>Luca, I try to look for and to see what the other photographer is doing. I've been trying to discipline myself not to view others' work as if I had done it or from the standpoint of how I would want it to look. I'd prefer to allow <em>them</em> to speak. Since the photos I tend to be drawn to are personal ones, ones that seem somehow unique to the photographer, I wouldn't expect to make or even be able to make the good ones. Nor would I expect others to make what I would.</p>

<p>Because there are so many great photos and photographers I'm still not exposed to (and some I'm only exposed to superficially), I'm not in a tireless or desperate search for photos to view. Any time I want to look at others' work, I have much to choose from.</p>

<p>I do learn from others. For me, that's more a matter of empathizing rather than co-opting. At the same time, I do keep in mind Picasso's quote about borrowing and stealing. It's not a matter of projecting myself into others' photos. It's a matter of drawing them near. As Picasso said, I can make something I'm influenced by my own.</p>

<p>Yes and no. Viewing photos from others sure can inspire me a great deal, and also inspire to do other things. Not to copy what has been done, but to extract lessons from it. So in that sense, yes, I do view other photos also to project me into it.<br>

But the part no is equally there. Many photos I seriously like, are photos I could and would never make. Because they're outside my skills. For example, I like quite a lot of photos from Fred's galleries here, but at the same time, I know they're not photos I am likely to make. I admire them for that they are, not for what I could 'take from them'.</p>

<p>It is to me, though, also two different kinds of watching at photos. In the first case, I'd study details more, trying to extract technical details on how things were done. I do not find this becoming more challenging, in fact it's getting easier and more interesting as I develop myself.<br>

In the second case, I am much more blank and just going with the flow of my own impressions.</p>

<p>Luca: I'm not sure how to respond, except to say that a person's not projecting himself/herself into any conscious activity doesn't appear to be possible. Moreover, I'd like to know a bit more about what you mean by the phrase "photographic self."</p>

<blockquote>

<p>. . . a person's not projecting himself/herself into any conscious activity doesn't appear to be possible.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Michael, aren't there degrees? Don't you project yourself into some photos, films, stories more than others? Don't you think some people project themselves into photos they view more than other people? Don't we take more and less subjective and objective stands toward things, closer or more distanced views, meaning that we personalize things more and less? This is what I took Luca to be asking.</p>

<p>Luca, for me there is clearly no "desperate search" happening. I'm a great "searcher" for all types of artistic visual expressions, photography being one of many. They inspire me and help to embed myself in life and develop an ever more profound understanding of the physical and metaphysical reality. "Projecting my photographic self" into images of others is therefor not an issue.<br>

However, following the long tradition of "copying masters" I do sometimes, with much modesty, challenge myself in following the track of photographers such as Cartier-Bresson. Learning from such challenges is part of improving, but closer to a "technical" issue, more than an issue related to my personal "photographical project". </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Fred, maybe my post was unclear. Luca asked whether "we need to constantly "<em>project</em>" our photographic self into the photos we search for." My point was that this is not a matter of need; we project ourselves into our photographic activities simply as a matter of fact.</p>

<p>One more point........ Of course there are degrees. We are human beings, not automatons.</p>

<p>Michael, I understand your point about need, and agree. I took Luca to be asking how much we project ourselves into others' photos and what role that plays in our experience of them. I sort of took "need" loosely. In any case, since I know your work and have read many of your own insightful comments, both in the Philosophy forum and in critiques of photographs, I'd love to hear your thoughts. What role does projection play for you in looking at others' photographs. Do you view them from a standpoint of what you would do (differently) or with more acceptance of what is put before you? Or is that a distinction you don't even make? (Which is a plausible position as well.)</p>

<p>"<em>Projection</em>"<br>

Using a personal pattern, in this case of photography, and applying it to what we view. In a sense this means "filtering" what we see according to this pattern.</p>

<p>There are many different modalities of application of a pattern: a genre, a subject, a technique, and environment.</p>

<p>Until a certain time - I think when Eggleston started to exhibit his colour photos printed with the dye-transfer process - "serious photography" was identified with black and white.</p>

<p>It seems to me there was a "<em>black-and-white pattern</em>" which was internalised by photographic viewers and <em>projected on </em>the photos they saw.<br>

That was the reason why colour photos initially were not considered "serious".</p>

<p>"<em>tireless and desperate</em>"</p>

<p>Sometimes I like hyperbolic expressions. But based on some observations.</p>

<p>:-)</p>

<p>I don't consciously project myself the way you described. Certainly not at an art fair! You can be sure anything at an art fair is very common or it would not be there. I wait for an image to find me. When it does I'm convinced I conjured it up. Or, I go looking for it and, sure enough, there it is waiting. Prints sometimes may become crafting bench marks. either for their straight-forward simplicity of execution or their unfamiliar technique. Next time a picture finds my photographic self I'm better prepared to catch it. </p>

<p>Might be helpful to be aware that people with fairly basic psychological literacy understand "projection" in specific, generally agreed upon ways..some linking it especially to narcissistic defense. So..when the term is used inventively, some will put it into that context.</p>

<p>The writer in this link sees projection as part of empathetic/moral-development, which brings with it the possibility that failure to get past projection means the person is stuck on Jung's "shadow" side: <a href="http://www.insideoutjournal.com/empathy/the-emotional-terrorist-part-i">http://www.insideoutjournal.com/empathy/the-emotional-terrorist-part-i</a></p>

<p>For me it's more important to understand how someone else responds to my photos than it is to project upon them what my photos (or anyone's) "are about".. the reason I'm reluctant to interpret an image into words. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Luca posited:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Is our tireless and desperate search for photos to view, actually a search for the photos we would like to make ourselves?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes!</p>

<p>I do often visit photo gallery openings to get inspired for my own work. I also get to visit quite a few pro studios, and often get the opportunity to talk to a lot of top-line photographers in the course of my day job. I talk with both the photographers and assistants whenever possible. Most are very generous with sharing their knowledge, their preferred tools, and their specific techniques. Although I'm more likely to buy art created in a medium in which I don't practice (e.g., abstract acrylic paintings), I almost bought a Helmut Newton print at PhotoLA a few years ago (I didn't because it wasn't one of my particular favorites of his). I do buy photo books, both for their beauty, and for their inspiration. The photography in the books I buy, I do in fact, often wish to emulate, and is certainly one of the reasons for my purchases. My mom has two beautiful photographic prints on canvas, which I very much envy as a photographer. I don't intellectualize too much about the viewer's experience when looking at my work. I'm just hoping to produce some new work which either isn't horribly overdone, or too stereotypical (I haven't yet shot any of these). I just hope to create a few "Wow!" images in my near-term portfolio attempts. If I can manage a handful of "Wows," then I would be pretty happy with that.</p>

<p>Luca continued . . .</p>

<blockquote>

<p>In other words, do we need to constantly "<em>project</em>" our photographic self into the photos we search for?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>While I'm not 100% sure that I'm <em>precisely</em> clear on the exact meaning of Luca's question, I know that I certainly project myself into my work (who doesn't?). It's a very self-conscious process. Right now, I'm striving specifically to become both technically expert, and to achieve the goal of developing commercial-quality skills as photographer (as artfully as I can manage to do so). So, "Yes," I project myself into both the work I seek (which become rubrics of both style and technique), and into the images I wish to create. At this point, it's all very calculated. Not only am I scouting locations, I'm pre-shooting locations, and returning to my office to pre-visualize these shots (to be taken at a later date with a model). I'm determining technical requirements, equipment requirements, etc., specific to each location. I'm doing a lot of "testing." The eventual goal, as I mentioned, is a new portfolio. And since the portfolio's goal is to get some commercial accounts, yes, at this point, it's all about me, me, me.</p>

<p>Luca concluded with . . .</p>

<blockquote>

<p>And does it happen that the more "<em>developed</em>" our photographic self is, the more challenging the confrontation is with what we are presented?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Wow! You really lost me on that one. Not because it's poorly stated, but simply because it's so open-ended. Or maybe I really don't understand it. I guess I would need a clearer definition of what a "developed photographic self" is. Also, what is the "confrontation?" Just as I don't quite enjoy movies or TV as much as perhaps a layperson, because I know so much about how they're made (or perhaps, it's because of this, that I actually enjoy them <em>more</em>, but in a different manner), it's hard for me to look at others' work without "comparing," "grading," or "analyzing" (technically). It may be that it's far easier for me to enjoy artistic endeavors in media of which I know nothing about their technique.</p>

<p><strong>James Farabaugh</strong>: my post was more about the conceptual relationship we develop with the photos we see and how our "self" comes into play. I agree with your approach "<em>I want to go there, see it, and capture it myself, perhaps in my own style.</em>"</p>

<p><strong>Walt Flanagan</strong>: I see your point. And how does your interest ("<em>I have no interest in doing model or fashion photography</em>") influence the relationship (visual, emotional) with what you see?</p>

<p><strong>Luis G.</strong>: :-)</p>

<p>"<em>Perhaps for others. Not for me</em>". Does it mean that you work in perfect photographic isolation from other authors? That you exclude any kind of influence?</p>

<p><em>"not in my case"</em>. Does it mean that your photographic experience in no way guides the way you look at photos? Or the photos you look for?</p>

<p>"<em>no</em>". Does it mean that your evolving photographic knowledge and skills have no influence whatsoever in the way you look at other photos?</p>

<p>:-)</p>

<p><strong>Fred</strong>:</p>

<p>"<em>Since the photos I tend to be drawn to are personal ones, ones that seem somehow unique to the photographer, I wouldn't expect to make or even be able to make the good ones</em>."</p>

<p>I'm familiar with your photographic approach and I think that this is exactly it: your personal "<em>photographic pattern</em>" is intertwined with the personal relationship with the subject. Most of your portraits, as you have said in other occasions, are made after establishing a personal relationship.</p>

<p>Similarly, you say that you are drawn to "personal photos".</p>

<p>"<em>It's not a matter of projecting myself into others' photos. It's a matter of drawing them near.</em>"</p>

<p>I think that's exactly what I mean. I understand "<em>projecting</em>" as creating a relationship between what I am and what I see. You seem to confirm this.</p>

<p><strong>Michael</strong>,<br>

Thank you for your question.<br>

"<em>photographic self</em>": since photography is a way of expressing oneself visually, it might incorporate the way we feel, our cultural background, our interests, what emotionally attracts us.<br>

All this informs the relationship with the images. The images we make, the images we imagine (and which we might make), the images we view, the images we are attracted to and those we are not interested in.</p>

<p><strong>Wouter</strong>,<br>

I like the way you differentiate your response a lot: the photos you are interested to make, and which you examine from a "<em>making point of view</em>" and the photos which just attract you visually, where you seem to take a more passive, receptive attitude.</p>

<p><strong> </strong>Isolation? What? No, Luca. I am simply not engaged in what you described as a "tireless and desperate search for photos to view". I also view a lot more than just photos.</p>

<p>The works I look at I do not look at because I want to emulate them. In fact, I tend to look at the work of others and rule out making work exactly like that. It forces me to work harder.</p>

<p>In the beginning, no...more like about a 3rd of the way, I experienced things more along the lines you are talking about.</p>

<p>It's not like watching an F1 race and fantasizing I am Michael Schumaker or wanting drive like him.</p>

<p>This doesn't mean I am in any way walled off or insulated from others and am passionately moved by their work. I am very choosy about whose work I look at for various reasons, and other contingencies regularly take me to experiencing work I would have never looked at on my own. I also explore and mine snapshots to the point that I once worked at a 1-hr lab to do this. Yes, snapshots. It's a balance that works for me, but I do not advocate it. Naturally, I learn from and am influenced by others' work, and by knowing/meeting the artists, of course.</p>

<p>I am whomever I am at any given moment, and that is not crystallized but shifting and shimmering, like everything that lives. Are my "confrontations" with the works of others more "challenging" as time goes on? I do not feel they are. They were plenty challenging at the beginning, too.</p>

<p>Everything in my life that preceded looking at a photograph adds up to the way I look at a particular photograph, but that is very different from a "...need to constantly "project"..." myself into the photos I am viewing. Most often I let them run through me.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Luca,<br>

while your description of my response is quite accurate, one tiny point to add maybe:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>the photos which just attract you visually, where you seem to take a more passive, receptive attitude</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's a bit more complicated than that. I study those photos all the same, but usually to find that I am me, and in my current state very incompetent in several fields of photography. So, there is part analysis and self-reflection in it; after running into my own limits, the next step of appreciation is different. I appreciate the photos I would not make myself often <strong>more</strong>, because I would not be able to pull off the same thing.</p>