How to 'read' a photo book

[je ne regrette rien]

After a time when I thought photography meant 'photographic equipment' and I used to talk - not always appropriately - about photographers I didn't really know, I discovered photo books.

I have always been very attracted to literature, and it seems to me that reading a book of words is less complex than reading a book of photographs.

We are all used to the meaning of single words, syntax, rules and verb forms. The author/writer defines the structure of the text, names the characters; nouns, adjectives, verbs and the other linguistic elements give the possibility to describe the essence and evolution, define and describe the main action and the various, parallel narrative flows. All this, words and word combinations, sentences, structures, are used by the author to realise and transfer the narrative to the reader. The 'written language' is a traditionally codified instrument and thus transmissible and comprehensible. The arrangement of the text, the length, the articulation into chapters, the greater or lesser structuring all contribute to the composition of this narrative.

A photographic book does the same, but the language is different, the expression is different, the elements are different. First of all it has to be emphasised that a photographic book must be considered as conceived as a unitary work, even if oftentimes we are tempted to look at the single pictures, rather than at the entire photo book. The author of the book, the photographer, the editor, assemble the work by choosing photographs, editing them, sequencing them, arranging them according to their own intention, just like the writer or poet. The 'language of photography' is less codified, perhaps simply less known to most. The captions, the introductory texts may or may not be there and the result less unambiguous, the links between the images are more tenuous, the message of each individual photo potentially ambiguous, very ambiguous and open to inferences and interpretations.

These reflections arise from observing my photographic books, united in my interests but so different from each other: Paolo Pellegrin different from Roger Ballen, Joel Meyerowitz, Valentina Tamborra, Pail Graham, Alec Soth, Davide Monteleone, Raymond Depardon and Evelyn Hofer, Koudelka, Stephen Shore, Martin Parr, Eugene Richards, and many others.

I often leaf through them, some more willingly, others have disappointed me and I am tempted to give them up. I am struck by this or that photograph on the page, but it is not enough, I realise that I have to look further, deeper. Inside a photo book there is more than the single photograph that jumps off the page, there is what the author wanted to include, and transfer, to the viewer. Beyond the individual photographs there is a thread, but this thread is often not clear: there is more, there are more possibilities, more layers, more ramifications. What I see fits into a multidimensional space that can be very rich, and not only because of what the author puts into it. It is equally important what I put into it as the viewer.

Leafing through a photographic book probably starts with the visible and the impressions and associations it arouses, and then ranges through the suggestions of everything that the author has put into the book, and that the 'reader' tries to put in contact with her own sensations and what she knows and is aware of, weaving a web that appears ineffable.

Edited November 22, 2022 by je ne regrette rien

[samstevens]

On 11/22/2022 at 2:48 AM, je ne regrette rien said:

I have always been very attracted to literature, and it seems to me that reading a book of words is less complex than reading a book of photographs.

We are all used to the meaning of single words, syntax, rules and verb forms. The author/writer defines the structure of the text, names the characters; nouns, adjectives, verbs and the other linguistic elements give the possibility to describe the essence and evolution, define and describe the main action and the various, parallel narrative flows. All this, words and word combinations, sentences, structures, are used by the author to realise and transfer the narrative to the reader. The 'written language' is a traditionally codified instrument and thus transmissible and comprehensible. The arrangement of the text, the length, the articulation into chapters, the greater or lesser structuring all contribute to the composition of this narrative.

James Joyce provides a good counterexample. Many book club participants and literature class students might also beg to differ, based on the seemingly endless variety of interpretations and understandings of books great and small. The narrative may be only the beginning, just as the content or subject of a photo may be only a start. There are underlying themes to figure out, symbolism and metaphor to reckon with, cultural underpinnings to consider!

On 11/22/2022 at 2:48 AM, je ne regrette rien said:

I have to look further, deeper. Inside a photo book there is more than the single photograph that jumps off the page

I do this, too, though I don’t feel I have to. Some days, single photos will jump out at me.

On 11/22/2022 at 2:48 AM, je ne regrette rien said:

there is what the author wanted to include, and transfer, to the viewer.

Yes. And, often, more even than that. The photographer determines much but also loses control not only over single photos but potentially even more so by putting photos together, which can start getting to many unrealized and undetermined subconscious inspirations and passions. I think much is included in a book of photos that wasn’t necessarily wanted or intended by the photographer but is vital and still owes to the photographer. Many photo books seem as much like invitations or offerings as they are communications. 

On 11/22/2022 at 2:48 AM, je ne regrette rien said:

Beyond the individual photographs there is a thread, but this thread is often not clear: there is more, there are more possibilities, more layers, more ramifications. What I see fits into a multidimensional space that can be very rich, and not only because of what the author puts into it. It is equally important what I put into it as the viewer.

I think most if not all viewers won’t and maybe can’t know what they put into it. The supposed subjectivity of art can be significant but can also be, at times, misleading. The photographer and the photo are having an impact not only beyond the knowable intentions behind the work but beyond many viewers’ agency over their reactions. That a reaction to a photo seems and is personal doesn’t negate or sometimes even balance the universal and communal factors helping direct that seemingly individual reaction or association, much emanating from and through the photographer and the photo (and the guide of shared photographic and visual history) as a source or at least a medium.
 

Edited December 7, 2022 by samstevens

[inoneeye]

9 hours ago, je ne regrette rien said:

First of all it has to be emphasised that a photographic book must be considered as conceived as a unitary work, even if oftentimes we are tempted to look at the single pictures, rather than at the entire photo book.

I have a library of hundreds of photo collections... the majority are no more than collections of single photographs, photographer monographs-with a great many edited and arranged thoughtfully. But often with the intent to display the photographers trajectory and voice. Some others are composed to become a standalone composition created by selective individual images gathered and arranged as notes are in music. This creates a single piece of art that has rhythms, tones, scale, highs & lows, narrative .... a journey i liken to a sample of music. There may or may not be a message intended but as a viewer I am free to absorb and feel where it takes me which may coincide with the intent of the photographer. But such a book is characteristically non literal and that creates looser fluid boundaries. Just as literature can be open to interpretation and influenced by the readers experiences I think photos and photo books are even more open-ended by their inherent attributes.

Any photographer composing a book with a prioritized intent of communicating a specific message with clarity is limited to keeping it short and simple. for example here is a collection/study of images of gas stations or here is my take on America or here is a book showing the decay of coal mine towns. It becomes more challenging to depict and reflect on and use emotions while composing a journey through a book format. If one is hoping that the viewer sees what you do as the photographer there is no magic other than keeping it simple and focused. The more complex the 'message' the more likely someone else will see the journey differently. 

The answer to Me is use your voice, present it harmoniously and then let it go where it will.  or have an introduction written - nothing wrong about that.

While I was thinking about this a few books in my collection stood out to me for various reasons... one is Fukase's Karasu (Ravens) - as a book that felt like a harmonious journey was an eye opener for me even before i looked behind the curtain and discovered his frame of mind and purpose while creating it. I experienced the book with coinciding emotions that he likely had at the time he produced the imagery and book (based on deep background). The book is melodious & lyrical, very fluid from beginning to end. deeply personal.

In recent years I have noticed a significant increase in self published books that are exceptionally well composed and treated as a singular piece of narrative art... made with images that may not appeal to me as standalone photographs but are integral to the book. It is a good time imo to be creating a photo book.

[AlanKlein]

A picture is worth a thousand words.

[je ne regrette rien]

21 hours ago, inoneeye said:

I have a library of hundreds of photo collections... the majority are no more than collections of single photographs, photographer monographs-with a great many edited and arranged thoughtfully.

I tend to choose authors and their works that have a narrative intent and do not privilege monographs, even though also monographs normally have a structure and rhythm.

21 hours ago, inoneeye said:

Any photographer composing a book with a prioritized intent of communicating a specific message with clarity is limited to keeping it short and simple.

That is correct. As I tried to say, I perceive an intrinsic limitation of the language of photography in presenting a narrative structure.

 

21 hours ago, inoneeye said:

If one is hoping that the viewer sees what you do as the photographer there is no magic other than keeping it simple and focused. The more complex the 'message' the more likely someone else will see the journey differently. 

Yes. I think that "art" is exactly balancing the border between the clarity of the 'message' and its ambiguity, the latter in fact makes it attractive.

Reality is actually boring if presented 'as it is'.

21 hours ago, inoneeye said:

The answer to Me is use your voice, present it harmoniously and then let it go where it will.  or have an introduction written - nothing wrong about that.

Exactly, that's what I do. As I must have said a couple of times, photography as a visual expression and as a medium for interaction is based on intent (of the photographer) and understanding (of the viewer). They may match, they may not, the unsaid is what makes the interaction interesting.

In the end, one photographs what one is, and one sees what one knows (and one is).

Edited November 23, 2022 by je ne regrette rien

[David_Cavan]

I wrote about this (not nearly as eloquently) in a blog entry on my website recently.  I think it's something that photographers often consider more than viewers do - the language of a photograph is open to interpretation, no matter how much effort we put into trying to make it clear.  The viewer takes their experience and memories, and they create their own nouns and verbs and adjectives (especially adjectives) to come up with their idea of the story behind a single photograph, or as the original poster describes it, a carefully curated series of photographs. 

[je ne regrette rien]

On 11/22/2022 at 6:36 PM, samstevens said:

There are underlying themes to figure out, symbolism and metaphor to reckon with, cultural underpinnings to consider.

There definitely are!

There maybe symbolism and metaphor even in the picture of your cheeseburger with fries (or Coquilles Saint Jacques for that matter), but the photographer needs to know how to do that.

On 11/22/2022 at 6:36 PM, samstevens said:

I do this, too, though I don’t feel I have to. Some days, single photos will jump out at me.

I used to consider books as nearly-sacred objects. No more.

Now I think that I have the right to do with them whatever I want, read them, not read them, give them a special place or even give them, or throw them away. If I perceive a deeper intent, I try to understand how I see it and make it my own. But it's never a MUST.

And certainly the photographer, or the author at large, looses any control over their work when I handle, absorb it, and use it.

On 11/22/2022 at 6:36 PM, samstevens said:

I think most if not all viewers won’t and maybe can’t know what they put into it.

That depends on what they know and which connections they are able to make. As I said (also above), we see what we know. That may mean that knowing little leads to seeing little.

 

On 11/22/2022 at 6:36 PM, samstevens said:

I think most if not all viewers won’t and maybe can’t know what they put into it. The supposed subjectivity of art can be significant but can also be, at times, misleading. The photographer and the photo are having an impact not only beyond the knowable intentions behind the work but beyond many viewers’ agency over their reactions. That a reaction to a photo seems and is personal doesn’t negate or sometimes even balance the universal and communal factors helping direct that seemingly individual reaction or association, much emanating from and through the photographer and the photo (and the guide of shared photographic and visual history) as a source or at least a medium.
 

There are several subjectivities: the photographer's, the viewer's. There may be connections, there may be not. The photographer may manipulate elements of common awareness to artificially create connections, to just pursue praise. Exercises, which are genuine, are better.

For that matter, the avenues of manipulation are infinite.

[samstevens]

34 minutes ago, je ne regrette rien said:

Yes. I think that "art" is exactly balancing the border between the clarity of the 'message' and its ambiguity, the latter in fact makes it attractive.

I don't often take art and photos or photo books to be message oriented. I find more expression than message a lot of the time.

35 minutes ago, je ne regrette rien said:

Reality is actually boring if presented 'as it is'.

There's a fascination to "framed" reality, which is what a photo can be even when reality is presented as is. Walker Evans comes to mind. Robert Adams.

38 minutes ago, je ne regrette rien said:

photography as a visual expression and as a medium for interaction is based on intent (of the photographer) and understanding (of the viewer)

I think photos are more, on the photographer's side of the ledger, than intent. There are so many unintended aspects to photos and I think it's the photographer's bigger self (including instinct, history, luck, being there, culture, predilection and habit, subconscious, willingness, openness) that goes into photos. A photo, even just from the photographer's perspective, is bigger than their intentions.

Intent and understanding are important, no doubt, as well as literal. But there's also the emotional and the figurative connection which I think can go well beyond intent and understanding. There's a kind of wave, sometimes calm, sometimes wild, with room for all kinds of peripheral splashes, from the photographer's act to the viewer's react. A response or reaction to a photo often isn't an understanding of it.

32 minutes ago, je ne regrette rien said:

And certainly the photographer, or the author at large, looses any control over their work when I handle, absorb it, and use it.

Loses some but not all control, IMO. I think a photographer may already lose control before a viewer gets involved, when the photographer finishes his work and steps back from it. When I handle, absorb, and use another's art, control doesn't somehow pass to me. As a matter of fact, control may be a misleading concept here. When art is viewed or heard or touched or read, I think a sharing happens and whatever control there might be is subject to ebbs and flows, greater and lesser pulls even with the same art and the same recipient over the course of a viewing or listening. For me, thinking about some kind of shared experience works better than thinking about who's in control.

[samstevens]

22 hours ago, inoneeye said:

or have an introduction written

And even a good introduction won't always try to explain or put into words the photographer's intent or the photos' meanings. Some great intros take a more poetic or metaphorical approach, written companions to the photos rather than motivation or content elucidators.

22 hours ago, inoneeye said:

But such a book is characteristically non literal and that creates looser fluid boundaries.

That porousness is such a key and it's why precision and categories so often fail when discussing art, even though it's hard not to be restrictive when applying words to photos or groups of them.

22 hours ago, inoneeye said:

rhythms, tones, scale, highs & lows, narrative

Nice analogies, also can be applied to exhibitions. While a photo may (or may not) be a stilled moment, it takes longer than a moment to experience the photo and, especially, a group or series of photos. A good presentation will take time, pacing, and orchestration into consideration. Typically, music is thought of as the more "temporal" art form but, in terms of visual experience, some musical lessons about temporality can pay dividends.

[inoneeye]

59 minutes ago, samstevens said:

As a matter of fact, control may be a misleading concept here. When art is viewed or heard or touched or read, I think a sharing happens and whatever control there might be is subject to ebbs and flows, greater and lesser pulls even with the same art and the same recipient over the course of a viewing or listening. For me, thinking about some kind of shared experience works better than thinking about who's in control.

👍.

 

“a good (or thoughtless) presentation” for a book or gallery or a framed single photo can have a significant influence on the shared experience… it’s a flavor added to the viewer’s perception.

Edited November 23, 2022 by inoneeye

[je ne regrette rien]

On 11/23/2022 at 8:28 PM, samstevens said:

Loses some but not all control, IMO. I think a photographer may already lose control before a viewer gets involved, when the photographer finishes his work and steps back from it. When I handle, absorb, and use another's art, control doesn't somehow pass to me. As a matter of fact, control may be a misleading concept here. When art is viewed or heard or touched or read, I think a sharing happens and whatever control there might be is subject to ebbs and flows, greater and lesser pulls even with the same art and the same recipient over the course of a viewing or listening. For me, thinking about some kind of shared experience works better than thinking about who's in control.

Sure. A relationship.

But the relationship is in most cases mediated by the photographic work and generally little chance there is to initiate an iterative exchange between the author and the viewer. In some way, once the photographic work is "handed over" to the viewer, the message passed, the relationship is established and the level of complexity is set: only a level of complexity as high as the viewer can perceive it (One sees what one knows. B. Munari). There are certainly avenues to acquire a deeper meaning, but realistically, how can the author actually "lead" the viewer, or viewers, to the originally intended message. If there is any.

We may discuss the concept of control here, it may mean to me something - significantly or minimally - different than it means to you. To me, it means being able to determine the outcomes of a communication, a relationship, an action.

[samstevens]

2 hours ago, je ne regrette rien said:

how can the author actually "lead" the viewer, or viewers, to the originally intended message. If there is any.

For me the difference between sharing and control would be akin to the difference between empathy and didacticism. 

Authenticity also speaks volumes … “The only way to get rid of my fears is to make films about them.” —Alfred Hitchcock

And keep your eye on the prize … “If you’re not trying to be real, you don’t have to get it right. That’s art. Every social action is a negotiation, a compromise between their wish and yours. The most exciting attractions are between two opposites that never meet.”  —Andy Warhol

 

[je ne regrette rien]

I understand that the term "control" may have a kind of negative flavour and I am willing to refer to "surrendering the intent".

Also didacticism sounds quite negative, close to "instruct".

What I think

• empathy is one of my favourite talents. It is crucial to establish relationships, and photographic relationships;
• teaching, in the sense of making other people grow through the interaction with the scholar. Not treating pupils like vessels to fill, but subjects to grow with;
• in photography, empathy is possible and desirable with the subject, much more difficult with the viewers. The photographer may know them or, in most cases, not know them. How can an empathic relationship be established with an unknown viewer?
• on didacticism: how can I be "didactic" towards a viewer that might be, or most likely is much more knowledgeable than myself? Between a photographer and their viewers there may be no connection and no interaction at all. There may be an didactic intent, but due to the means it needs to be surrendered.

My reflection on "surrendering the intent" has come up when I saw the publications of the 2022 Leica Oscar Barnack Award. The winner, with an outstanding project on women in Afghanistan by Iranian-Canadian Kiana Hayeri, has surpassed Lynsey Addario, certainly one of the most accomplished reporters of our times. Addario "surrendered her intent", ending up in the shortlist.

[samstevens]

27 minutes ago, je ne regrette rien said:

How can an empathic relationship be established with an unknown viewer?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sympathetic_resonance

Edited November 25, 2022 by samstevens

[samstevens]

Intent motivates a photographer. I don’t think of it as a medium between photographer and viewer. 

It’s said “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” What’s often added is “heaven is full of good works.”

The photo is what the photographer offers the viewer, not his intent.

Once the photo takes shape, intent recedes in significance and the photo is the thing in the world, more than its just being a reflection of the photographer or his desires. Being in tune with that throughout the process may (ironically?) get a photographer out of himself enough to make himself coherent.

[je ne regrette rien]

1 hour ago, samstevens said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sympathetic_resonance

Maybe a bit far fetched, since here we are considering a musical effect and a visual one (not considering the possible similarity of sound waves and light waves).

I was talking about emotional, interpersonal empathy.

[je ne regrette rien]

41 minutes ago, samstevens said:

The photo is what the photographer offers the viewer, not his intent.

In fact, the photographer’s intent is making the photo, which then is offered the viewer.

Who (the viewers) may see the intent or not, or infer their own perception of the intent. Whatever comes up.

[samstevens]

4 minutes ago, je ne regrette rien said:

Maybe a bit far fetched, since here we are considering a musical effect and a visual one (not considering the possible similarity of sound waves and light waves).

I was talking about emotional, interpersonal empathy.

Metaphor can be helpful both in written communication and in thinking about portraying and conveying meaning and feeling with photos. My introduction of sympathetic vibration was meant to go beyond the literal. 

[samstevens]

5 minutes ago, je ne regrette rien said:

In fact, the photographer’s intent is making the photo, which then is offered the viewer.

The intent is not making the photo, IMO. At most, it’s stimulating it, along with so many other non-intentional factors also at play I’ve mentioned in an earlier post. Intention is significant and powerful. I think there’s also a point where strained awareness of one’s own intention becomes self-conscious and can get in the way. 

[je ne regrette rien]

7 minutes ago, samstevens said:

My introduction of sympathetic vibration was meant to go beyond the literal. 

I love metaphors.

But was literal when referring to empathy …

[samstevens]

5 minutes ago, je ne regrette rien said:

I love metaphors.

But was literal when referring to empathy …

Right. And I think artists use metaphor often to create literal empathy with viewers and readers. 

Edited November 25, 2022 by samstevens

[je ne regrette rien]

Would you help me with photographical metaphor?

Edited November 25, 2022 by je ne regrette rien

[samstevens]

Well, maybe a rather simple example would be showing a child crying as a literal portrayal of sadness. On the other, more metaphorical hand, sadness might be suggested/conveyed with an empty chair seen through the blur of a rain-soaked window, perhaps aided by lighting and other objects visible in the room.

Even the most literal-seeming of photos has abstract qualities (light, texture, mood, tone, shape, scale) that evoke more than denote. Photos, paintings, and sculptures, no matter how representational and literal are also inherently figurative.

Think about what might have been literally going on when you took a picture, and then the kind of transformation that takes place when you still the action, frame it, isolate lighting, remove periphery, when context and environment become more intimately attached than they might have appeared to be in the original unfolding, when a more permanent and individual perspective becomes forever embedded in the moment.

[inoneeye]

I can effortlessly empathize with the subject of sam’s photo. But I find it much more challenging to get a grasp on the photographer’s intent… cognitive empathy aligned with the author.  Was there intention beyond capturing a special moment or is sam wanting to communicate something more from his perspective more than empathy for his subject which I sense.
 

the abstraction, angle, lighting and tones have me feeling optimistic. and more connected. Indicative?

Edited November 25, 2022 by inoneeye

[samstevens]

2 hours ago, inoneeye said:

empathy aligned with the author.

Good way to put it. Not so much direct empathy as shared empathy. Not so much viewer empathy for photographer as viewer and photographer in an empathetic sync for what’s in view. 

2 hours ago, inoneeye said:

Indicative?

Indicative!

2 hours ago, inoneeye said:

Was there intention beyond capturing a special moment or is sam wanting to communicate something

I wouldn’t try to diagram what was intention, what was spontaneous or serendipitous, what came from intentions about what I was doing generally vs. more specifically for this particular moment, what was gifted by the situation I was in. In post processing, I’ll often go after the significance of what I felt more than trying to give it a name. I may not think of communicating a meaning as much as crafting an experience. Not being surprised, however, that this can take on meaning.