What do you find worth documenting?

[Uhooru]

Nice question,and I can't answer it now, but I don't see mutually exclusive barriers between "street" photography and documentary.

For me, I tend to think of documentary as a sequence of images that will be a coherent subject and that at least a portion of will be in a "reportage" style, ie tell a story, or point of view, etc. This will leave room for other interest, or "art" shots that are more related to photography and see'er and process, and less on strict subject, but stand because they are supported by the other photos. Of course there's no limit on what a documentary subject is or how it should be presented. In documentary class, it was what works or doesn't and hopefully why that is. As for documentary subjects. For me its rather mundane. I've been playing Irish music for over 20 years, its a great love and I've been photographing it for a couple of years since I started taking pictures and you can see my mixed results under my <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=221773">tunes</a> folder. You won't be overlwhelmed, its a rambling just throw up things I was interested with little editing. Also a school project on riding a local <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=436608">bus</a> which I've referred to before and is basically the work prints which were honed down to a final presentation, a little tighter. I just don't know enough about how I'm seeing yet to really be able to discuss it, though, I do know now that I do have a certain "eye".

[terry_rory]

OK, this weekend I will root out the negs for the Bakery & Blacksmiths and put up a folder next week. In the meantime I have started a folder on my local barber. Here is what I have at present....<a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=475330">Barber folder</a>

[claudia__]

i like to document anything that is amusingly odd...out of place...temporary...doomed by time<p>

 

<center><img src="http://sfbaysailingpix.com/fitnesstoned.jpg" width="480" height="487"><center><i>Holga Pic</i></center></p>

[john_elder1]

When doing Street photography, I get my best shots when I have no Agenda. I try to be alert, receptive, and shoot anything that interests me. Over the 23 years I have been doing this, I have found that certain subject matter attracts me;certain subjects are a "trigger". My street work is almost always 35mm. Consistent with this approach is looking for events, gay rights, protests, parades,citylife, etc where I can go to shoot. I have a slightly different approach with mediun format. I have several"subjects" that I shoot. I shoot the construction and destruction or decay of Architecture. Recently I got access to a used car lot which I had been trying to get permission to shoot for 3and1/2 years. There were close to a 1000 cars many of them from the 40s and 50s. They were beuatiful wrecks. Finally I got permission to shoot last november, 1 month before a Sherrif sale cleaned the place put. I shot there 5 days over the course of 4 weeks. Almost all of the used car shots are abstracts as are most of my Architecturs shots. In the fall of 2000 in Mujeres, Mexico I spent 2 days tresspassing on government property shooting a hotel complex which had been decaying for close to 20 years: El Presidente Norte. This place was almost completed when for political reasons unknown the Government stopped construction. What a shoot! The Seaview on Statin Island will be similar subject matter for me next summer with my medium format cameras:Rollei TLR and Brooks Veriwide 100. Perhaps what is strange is that when I do the work on My medium format "Subjects" it is much more abstract than my random street work.

[Uhooru]

Actually, I think the process of assigning yourself a specific documentary project is a real good one for anyone to take on because it teaches skills on how to approach and group images and how to "see". You don't need to think "topic" all the time, but for learning sake,choose a topic. Go shoot it. When you're photographing it start off by trying to divorce the subject from your idea of it. Think of all the things that comprise it and how to phtograph that. Don't worry about the final product, just shoot. The idea here is to look at the thing, any-thing, as a newly discovered thing and to take as many pictures as you can. Move away for overview, move part way in, move all the way in, different angles, different lighting. After developing or whatever process u use, review your proof sheets or digital proofs, first even turn them upside down or sideways and just pick out all the ones that have any visual interest and mark them. Then go back and review the first cut for content. If it has interest, put a 2nd mark on it. Do quick work prints of all the ones with 2 marks. Start playing with the work prints, stick em on a wall, move them around. Now looking at them, get a sense of what's missing or how the ones you have would look better. Things start to happen when you put the images toghether. Than go out and get those other shots..and so on refining down. At some point finish the project, make final prints and mount them, it really gives you a sense of completeion to mount them. I know this is a stilted formulaic approach. But its really amazing what you can learn from doing it even if you don't adopt this as a way of working. Give yourself a month or 2 months. Make the first couple of ones, something you can accomplish in a month or two. You'll be surprised.

[Alex_Es]

The other day I was in Himeiji, the home to one of Japan's most beautifully preserved castles. A block or so from the castle is a photo studio called "Himeiji Jo Photography" (or something like that). The photographer has dedicated himself to photographing the castle. He's published and won awards. What he does is both documentary and artistic. Lucky guy. The object of his life's work is always under his nose and won't go away.

 

I've spent four years documenting the quasi-counter culture life on a bridge in Osaka. Well, the Osaka government just tore the bridge to pieces and put up a bridge where it is almost impossible to hang out. Impossible as in the old days. So everything I've photographed is now history. I wrote about this in Leica forum: see "Good-by Ebisu Bridge: The End of a Leica Project" (where I answered your question, Donald). This has forced me to reconsider how I want present my Ebisu Bridge photographs.

 

I've aestheticized a number of those shots that I've posted here and in the Leica forum by cropping and softening the background. This seemed fine when the bridge existed. It does not seem fine now. I will go back to the original prints and negatives and review them and re-Photoshop them. No more soft backgrounds. Cropping will be conservative.

 

This documentary project more or less attached itself to me. I began simply recording weird fashions. In October 2000 I saw a woman in a cowboy hat, Greta Garbo veil, white leather mini-skirt, purple mesh stockings and white platforum cowboy boots with spurs in Kobe. I asked my wife if the woman was going to a Haloween Party. No, she said, this was current fashion. It seemed a worthy subject. Soon I found myself, somehow in Ebisu Bridge and discovered I was photographing more than fashion. It was a mini-Haight-Ashbury but without vision. It was a place to be weird and different. Toward 2004 it came to be dominated by "dating club" touts who harrassed young women as they walked by. They became a major subject of my photography. In May, 2004, I sensed that I was myself becoming a fixture on the bridge and that my well-being could be in danger. I did not return to the bridge until this past Feb. and it had changed completely.

 

The bridge did open me up to everything I photographed in Japan in some way. The eccentric is a key to the normal. The normal is Japan's belle epoc that has stretched from the end of World War II to the present. It has been a period of peace and considerable prosperity. When Japan turning into a warfare state again, this epoc may soon come to an end.

 

Below is an example of a photograph that I might have aesticized through cropping. It is presented here only slightly trimmed at the edges.<div></div>

[abufletcher]

Trevor, only you can decide whether you want to post your bakery shots but

it's absolutely vital that we not exclude such "subject driven" photography from

this forum. Obviously we all strive for some measure of "art" in our photos as

well but it's a matter of balance. A photo can be compelling because of its

aethetic qualities alone or a photo can be compelling because it shows us

some corner of the world we hadn't previously been aware of. The very best

of this genre do both.

 

As an example of a recent self-assignment, for years I had been walking

passed the local tatami repair shop and always told myself that "someday" I'd

make a portfolio of images of the process. Well one evening after a session of

wandering the streets, I saw the guy at work and asked if I could take some

pictures. He agreed. That's somehow a key element. Anyway, I spent about

an hour there documenting the various stages of him resurfacing an old

tatami mat. I'm sad to say that very few of these initial images have any real

aesthetic value but the session did end with a great cup of hot green tea on a

cold night and an invitation to come back whenever I'd like.

[abufletcher]

Alex, the trouble I have with the photo you post here is that it doesn't, on its

own, communicate any of the background info you provided. This is just a

guy and a gal standing around. You may know better -- but the photo doesn't

show it. For example, do you have photos that actually show harrassment? If

you do, I can imagine that shots like that could very well cause these touts to

become agressive. Ultimately, if you need words the photo has failed.

 

There is also the issue of to what degree a documentary photographer needs

to interact with his/her subjects. My own feeling on this is that ultimately you

have to have at least the tacit acceptance of the main subjects. This is not

quite the same as formal permission to take photos. It's more like an

unspoken acceptance that you are there and are going to go on being there

and that you have a camera and will be using it. The photographer has got to

be come more than just a disconnected observer, s/he needs to become a

silent partner in the interaction.

 

And that's what's REALLY REALLY hard!

[abufletcher]

BTW, here's an example of the silent participant concept. This was taken at a

small local shine ceremony on a rainy day. I was the only non-Japanese

there and the old one with a camera. The people around me were all praying.

I was bout 3 feet about from the priest. I never asked for permission to be

there, I was just there from the very beginning of the event and when

everyone else started to file into this small area I did too. There is absolutely

no way that they weren't constantly aware that this red haired, red-

commplexed foreigner was there and taking photos but no one cared.<div></div>

[abufletcher]

Here's another from the same ceremony.<div></div>

[robert_clark]

I like your irony Trevor. Give me monks, bakers and trawlermen, but make them gritty with some ennui thrown in, and, of course, only in blurry, high contrast B&W.

[abufletcher]

I wonder whether my "just the facts" attitudes towards "cultural documentary

photography" (there's nothing sappier than "travel photography") aren't

responsible from my feeling that I HAVE to photography in color most of the

time.

 

That having been said I'm pretty well convinced that the tatami shop photos

need to be in B/W.

[robert_clark]

Jeff, you seem to have forgotten Lewis Hine, who photographed, extensively, for the National Child Labour Committee between 1907 and 1918, precipitating changes in US child labour laws, and, somewhat earlier, Jacob Riis, who photographed the New York slums between 1887 and 1890, when his book, 'How the Other Half Lives' came out.

[Uhooru]

Donald, my own belief that "just the facts" approach does not a documentary make. For instance, in my day job I sometimes take photos that will be used in court. Those photos are definately, just the facts. Don't want artistry, don't want anything that takes away the "fact" your are trying to ascribe. A measurement, a mark, a dent, etc. Documentary is much more than just presenting the fact of a thing. Its how u choose to shoot it, how you see it, what meaning it might have for you and what you want to present of it individually and then in groups of images. If you look at the documentarians like Walker Evans and Dorthea Lange etc.,they were hired by the Farm Administration for the editorial purpose of documenting how the support given by the Farm Ad. was neccessary, was working and was needed. To do this they in their individual ways show suffering and dignity of individuals, the ravages etc. But these photos weren't just mere facts, they were compelling storys, powerful documents on a mission. I think that's the difference. I think most good documentary's are intended to convince, whether its editorialized from the get go, or whether its convincing oneself based on what you learn on the way. Honesty is also a facet they must have.

[Uhooru]

Words and images can be very powerful. Just think as the words being another element in the piece. As far as documentary, Eugene Smith was very effective in word and image pieces, and I don't think anyone would say his images weren't incredible.

[Uhooru]

Peter, even the speaker of those words you wrote published "documentaries". Such as his Airport book etc. I'd call that documentary. Not so much using the topic to tell a "story" but as common theme for his explorations. That's blurring the lines of classic documentary I would think, but still in there? (not sure really of last remark)

[takaaki]

Rather than the 'what' or 'how' to document (or whether something is considered 'documentary' photography), I question the 'why'... Why are you compelled to document something? Koudelka shot empty streets during the 1968 Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia and titled it: "The Urge to See"... and not The Urge to Document.... <br><br><i>Photography is not about the thing photographed. It is about how that thing looks photographed.<br><br>I have a burning desire to see what things look like photographed by me. -Garry Winogrand</i>

[abufletcher]

Barry, in some way, though, the "just the facts," "artless" style of forensic

photographs IS the very statement that is being made. In the same way that

journalists go to extreme lengths to manufacture the pretense of neutrality in

news interviews (a subject I'm familiar with from my research), so too forensic

photographers strive to produce "apparently artless" photos that become all

the more compelling as evidence because of this style. Many hard news

photosgraphers, and we'd definitely call them documentarians, take the same

"no art," "no composiiton" attitude. They want you to be looking at the subject

not the photograph of the subject.

 

Pesonally, I like to keep as much of "me" out of my photographs of other

cultures as possible. I want them to be aesthetically pleasing in order to

cause people to linger a bit on the subject matter.

[robert_clark]

I think good images should be able to stand as good images on their own. There is no doubt though as far as informing the viewer goes the place and date of the pic are very helpful for context.

 

However, when words give us more of the context of the image, without trying to do the work that the image should be doing on its own, then they can add something. McCullin's Albino Biafran boy is a powerful picture of vulnerability and suffering and needs no explanation to work, but reading McCullin's own commentary to the whole situation: where the boy was still an outcast, even among the other starving kids, adds another level of poignancy that we cannot get from the image alone.

 

Words often sound crass when they try to push us into a particular interpretation, rather than supplying context.

[Spearhead]

There is a fundamental contradiction in the concept of documentary photography at the root of the discussion between Donald and Barry. The issue is that a "document" is considered a dispassionate object, but because a person, who presumably has some point of view, captures the image, it's very difficult to be free of meaning and perspective. There isn't a good way out of this.<p>

 

On the other hand, I would disagree that a "hard news photographer" is a documentarian - often they are paid to photograph something in a specific way (meeting the stylistic and/or ideological needs of a news organization) and present no real documentary of their own.<p>

 

For anyone really interested in this, I highly recommend the standard text by William Stott, <i>Documentary Expression and Thirties America.</i> It goes a long way towards seeing the nature of documentary photography and investigating the internal contradictions. It also has quite a bit of history.

[abufletcher]

Sorry, let's try that again...<div></div>

[abufletcher]

Hmm...now the post this was in reference to seems to have disappeared. The

point:

 

Sometimes to photograph the reflection in a lake you have to wade into the

lake which destroys that which you sought to photograph. The solution:

Wade in, then wait calmly for the reflection to be restored.

[takaaki]

<i>That having been said I'm pretty well convinced that the tatami shop photos need to be in B/W.</i><br><br>I think that there is something here... May I ask why you feel that way? Love the sunglasses...

[abufletcher]

Takaaki, partly it's a technical issue. The shop, at least later in the day, is lit

primarily by overhead florescents. In addition, the colors of the entire shop

have become mutted by 100 years of tatami (straw) dust and even the guys

jacket seems to match the materials he works with all day long (a sort of faded

green). All in all the color photos just didn't work. Even the D70's ability to

handle white balance can't save the day.

 

Another more philosophical reason to choose B/W in this case would be to

connect these photos to a past. This guy tells me he is a fourth generation

tatami maker and that the shop has been there for over 100 years. Somehow

color only weakens the images -- I can't believe I'm saying this!!!<div></div>

[takaaki]

No no.. Donald, I am sorry for throwing these questions at you, and I am very grateful for your answer. I am very curious about what other people see...

 

So, are you in Takamatsu area? The udon capital of Japan?