The simple act of making a photograph

[petemillis]

I wonder...I look at many photographs by popular photographers, and then read

what the expert people write about them. I often get the feeling that some of

what is written has just come about because the writer is trying to

demonstrate some higher level of intelligence and is full of Something Highly

Important To Say. When the photographer took the photograph, did they do so in

a simply thought out manner knowing that it would make a good photograph, or

with the intention that it should have Something Highly Important To Say about

it?

[ellis_vener_photography]

"I often get the feeling that some of what is written has just come about because the writer is trying to demonstrate some higher level of intelligence and is full of Something Highly Important To Say."

 

More likely, they are needing to fill space on a page or get their word count up.

[ellis_vener_photography]

I say that as someone who sometimes gets paid to write about photographers and photographic gear. I'm not an academic writer.

[mrstubbs]

It probably has more to do with the opinion an editor has. Will this story, written by this person, keep someone interested for long enough to notice the ad, ....will it sell more advertising space, so I can make more money. The photographer is only part of the story.

 

Or you could be reading a book written by a critic, making money by selling his book.

 

The world is a stage.

[neesha_lin1]

Perhaps some examples of the type of articles you mean.

[william-porter]

<p>Peter Millis writes:</p>

 

<blockquote>I wonder...I look at many photographs by popular photographers, and then read what the expert people write about them. I often get the feeling that some of what is written has just come about because the writer is trying to demonstrate some higher level of intelligence and is full of Something Highly Important To Say. When the photographer took the photograph, did they do so in a simply thought out manner knowing that it would make a good photograph, or with the intention that it should have Something Highly Important To Say about it?</blockquote>

 

<p>There's a lot of writing about photography and it's not clear what you're referring to -- but it SOUNDS to me as if you're talking about academic or high-brow criticism. And in that case, you should try to keep in mind three things.</p>

<p>First, the academic world is a marketplace, too. Academics have to publish, which means they're forced to be clever or at least sound clever. For this, you should pity them. Why pity? Because most of them got into academics in the first place because they loathed the world of business, where people produce and sell stuff that nobody wants. And now they're stuck in a market where absolutely nobody wants what they have to sell, but they're still forced to produce it and try to market it.</p>

<p>Second, most would be art (painting, poetry, novels, photography) is mediocre at best, and most criticism doesn't rise to the mediocrity of the art that it attempts to criticize.</p>

<p>But third -- some few academic or high-brow critics actually know a lot about their subjects and have insight into them. Which is really too bad because it means you can't write off the entire academic world so easily.</p>

<p>In short, criticism is like almost everything else in life: mostly pretty bad, and produced by people with more ambition than talent. But because some criticism is actually very good and useful, you have a responsibility to try to read critically yourself, so you can learn to tell the garbage from the gold.</p>

 

<p>I write as someone who spent 15 years as a university professor of Classics and Honors, got tenure, wrote books, went to conferences, won awards, the whole nine yards -- and then I realized I didn't very much like what I was doing. So I quit, giving up a job for life and the pleasure of teaching. In retrospect, it may have been a stupid decision, but most days of the week, I don't regret it.</p>

[iliafarniev]

Basically, they just shoot on and sometimes it comes to look like there is SOMETHING HIGLY IMPORTANT ABOUT IT or something like that but it does not matter anyway. Same applys to writhing.

[ian_tindale]

I think it depends. A photograph that in turn catalyses other people to write Brutally Original Long Lists Of Critical Knowledge Semblances is probably earning its keep by stimulating such conversational outbursts. Better a photograph is talked about at all, than ignored?

[jtk]

People who hate reading that someone else's work is "HIGHLY IMPORTANT" properly have doubts about their own, and don't want to admit it.

 

I know that I do :-)

[iliafarniev]

Absolutelly. The verbal communication is as important as visual, after all. Don't knock the critics off, they basically are just as good people as anybody else.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Robert Adams and Stephen Shore are both great photographers and great writers about photography. Like the photographs they make, their writing is clear and concise.

[petemillis]

Thanks everyone so far on your thoughts on this. I agree about the comments re academics - being a bit of an academic myself (still trying to finish that damned PhD) I come across a lot of theses and papers in which there is unnecessary verbage and cleverness, and find it refreshing when I read something that says the same in a far more straightforward way. It is the same with presentations at conferences - some are made by people so "clever" that they delight in astounding people with their Brutally Original Long Lists Of Critical Knowledge Semblances! (nice one Ian :) )

 

The reason I asked the question initially is that I sometimes find I take a picture with the purpose of making a statement, and then upon reviewing it I really can't find Something Highly Important To Say about it. Other times, I will take a picture because I like what I see, and then on closer analysis I find more and more of significance in the picture. I find this mainly when photographing on the street. When I'm photographing my kids, and friends and family and other portraits where the aim is to make a portrait, then I don't have this issue at all as I know exactly what I want and that's what I get.

[root]

If someone with an imagination, attention to detail, familiarity with the style, and the ability to write clearly has something to say about an image, I'm interested. A technical background that would explain how the shot was made might also be helpful, but is really a separate discussion.

[jeff bishop]

I think that the technical side of a photograph is basically mechanics. A good meter and a basic understanding of exposure is the easiest part of photography. While this is in it's own right an important attribute, and perhaps the foundation of an image, it isn't about art.

 

Art, or what is art, is subjective. How does one describe what one sees when everyone see it differently?

 

If this were easy, there would only be one love poem, or one love song. As many are the ways of expressing something, many would be the ways of describing it.

 

I don't think the critics are full of hot air. I think they are more mindful of what it is that they are trying to express. I, like many others will read some review and have half or three quarters of it go over my head. I suspect that this is my own shortcoming, not the author trying to appear to be at some higher level of understanding.

[jgalyon]

Mr.William Porter, very well written and insightful comment. a pleasure to read what you had to say.