Beginner's Mind... The Incredible Lightness of Seeing

[paul_coppin]

Ann, don't run away from anthropocentrism if you want emotion in your pictures! Its the only route any of of us have to that vision. A photograph of a landscape is a record of a time and place. An evocative photograph includes an anthropocentric trigger of some type, and evocative photos only occur in one of two ways: by serendipity or contrivance. The challenge for the artist is to find the "contrivance" that conveys to the audience the emotion intended. The first part of the challenge is to figure out who the audience is.<p> I'm not sure that your goal is attainable by photography alone, at least at the level of the landscape, because people tend to overlay their own emotional world and sensitivities to what they view. The world is full of coffee table books of fine landscape shots that evoke a range of personal emotions in people without conveying any particular vision, and this includes AA, Weston and all the rest. You have demonstrated an ability to write visually - maybe your real talent ultimately lies in a finely crafted amalgam of visual word <i>and</i> image.

[michael_a._smith1]

When photographing, we bring our total life experiences to the

process. Ideally, these experiences include (or should include) a

thorough knowledge of what has gone before in the medium.

The broader your historical base, the broader a base you have to

spring off from. If you come across a photographer's work that

touches you deeply (Weston's in this case), it is only natural that

you would make some photographs that might look like his,

especially if you are photographing in similar terrain. There is

nothing wrong with that. With continued work over time you will

come across other influences--in photography, in other

mediums, from books, from other people (non-photographers),

and just from living and observing. These influences will change

your photographs. If your original influence is truly right for you it

will remain always, although merged with all the other new

influences and direct new life experiences that have gone into

your work. If this original influence is not meant for you, it will

disappear from your work. This is a natural function. It is nothing

to strive for or worry about. Everyone is unique. With continued

work over time one's uniqueness will emerge. Or it will not.

There are few original artists in any age. If you get pleasure in

the process of making photographs, that is enough. The rest will

come of its own accord when it is ready.

 

The worst thing you can do is intellectually "try to be original" or to

"show your uniqueness." Someone suggested perhaps placing

personal objects or yourself in the landscape, and someone

else suggested doing something different technically (changing

depth of field). These are ideas. Doing something like that,

unless you are impelled to do so, is like picking a "different way

of looking at something" off of the shelf. Because it would not be

coming from the organic process and development of your life,

working from such an idea or concept would likely prove a dead

end in many ways. Those who work from ideas like that in an

attempt to be "original" are more often than not, merely following

other influences--and one's not even suited for them.

 

This happens all to frequently with students. There are

commanded to "do their own thing." And so they pick something

off of the shelf. Because this "something" is not part of the

organic process of their lives, but something picked off of the

great shelf of all possibilities, at best they get something clever

and "different." But because there is no depth to it (it couldn't

possibly have depth, not coming from what I call "the organic

process of their lives," the work is ultimately boring (even to

them). So they go on, and in an attempt to be different, they pick

the next thing off of the shelf. But each of these "different" things

more or less quickly burns out and not long after school is

finished, they stop photographing altogether. I have seen this

hundreds, no, thousands, of times.

 

Besides the articles I mentioned earlier, you might want to get,

and read, my book. "Michael A. Smith: A Visual

Journey--Photographs from Twenty-Five Years." It was published

in 1992 on the occasion of my 25-year retrospective exhibition at

the Eastman House. The essay traces the development of my

vision (the visual journey) and mentions the various influences

that went into that development. For you, or for anyone else

reading this thread who wants the book, which is available

directly from me, I'll take $10 off of the price (normally $85--there

are 176 reproductions) and throw in the shipping (a $7 savings).

 

This did not start out to be a plug for my book, but that book truly

is relevant here and I believe that few contributors to this forum

have read it and many do not even know of it. If you or anyone

gets a copy but decides they do not like it, I'll offer a full refund if

the book is returned in pristine condition (less $7 shipping,

which I would then have to charge).

[paul_coppin]

This may turn out to be an interesting slug-fest :) With considerable deference to Michael Smith and with immense respect, forget the book, and the references to other books mentioned in this thread. The last thing you need in your mind right now is the clutter of other perspectives on how to find a vision. You <i>have</I> your vision. Its abundantly clear from your writing what your vision is. What your dilemma is, is how to get that vision across in a photograph, and the solution to that can only come from your own explorations. My comment about placing objects in the picture wasn't about "placing objects in the picture", it is about recognising and incorporating what constitutes a visual link to your emotions that can convey those emotions in the picture. I truly suspect you will discover that photography alone will not convey what you want to convey because your vision contains more elements than photography can describe. A picture isn't always worth a thousand words; sometimes, it isn't even worth one word.

[sjmurray]

This is a great question and a wonderful thread of ideas. I'd like to add only a couple similar ideas: Don't think too much! Be fearless, by not worrying about your photos looking like someone else's. My own biggest fear is mediocrity, and making images that are common and postcard like. I still fearlessly go ahead and take any image I like, regardless. I can always edit later and bury the "postcards" in a file cabinet. I still learn from the experience.

 

Just getting out there and setting up, framing, focusing, developing and printing makes you better and better each time. Its very much like learning to play a musical instrument. Most jazz greats developed their originality only after years of playing, developing their "chops." Develop your "chops." And have fun!

[ann_m]

Paul.... I know what you meant.... no slugfests.... Michael thank you for the generous offering of your thoughts and your book..... ...sorry about all this 'thanking' but I must respond to people's kind efforts.... I think it might be a Canadian 'thing'.... I will now thank any new posters in advance, so as not to be too 'chatty' (I know that bothers some).... Must fly..... there is a lenticular cloud forming over the point that is suspiciously evocative of Diego Rivera's hat.... (hoping to find my chops)...... Annie

[emile_de_leon9]

Interesting thread....Last night I looked at it briefly and was thinking that it was really just self indulgent grade school...trash-head- music. Admittedly I was a bit depressed and that probably colored my perceptions. Today it seems better in a sense...I guess...I would really like to ask... what really matters? What is important to you? On the other hand I could ask...who is really behind the camera when the shutter goes off? Is it the one who wants money and fame? The one who seeks photographic enlightenment? The one who worships others and imitates them? The technical one? The one that wants to be special and different? Just who is clicking the shutter? Or is it something more affiliated with you? A question I asked myself this morning.... What would you photograph if you were the last person alive on earth? No one to see what you photograph. No one to criticize your photos. No one to buy them.Just you and the photo...till the end of your time.Just what would you photograph?Would you continue to photograph? Or would "SEEING" just be enough?

[robin_coutts]

Ann, 'Art and Fear' is a good ' keep on keeping on' sort of book, but you may be interested in the findings by a new book by John Tusa

'On Creativity: Interviews Exploring the Process'

available soon from Amazon (UK and prob. . com as well)

This was the result of a series of interviews with composers, artists and photographers. In the radio review I heard, amongst the common values/trends were these:

 

 

Never use language such as creativity and origionality - too high powered words.

 

Their art was a product of an accumulation of work, (and therefore experience), amassed over years of work. Some artists had many projects they were working on at the same time. Working on the one which they felt able to do that day.

 

The element of craft was important in their work.

 

They would rather be making work than doing almost anything else.

 

These are all I can remember!, but Ive ordered the book. The synopsis is below:

 

Synopsis In this series of interviews drawn from his BBC Radio 3 series, John Tusa talks to some of the leading creative minds of our times - Howard Hodgkin, Antony Caro, Elliot Carter, Eve Arnold, David Sylvester, Edward Bond, Nicholas Grimshaw, Gyorgy Ligeti, Milos Forman, Paula Rego, Harrison Birtwistle, Frank Auerbach, Tony Harrison and Muriel Spark. Two essays by John Tusa on creativity and on interviewing are also included. With three painters, three composers, a sculptor, a photographer, a playwright, a critic, an architect, a film director, a novelist and a poet, this book offers a guide to our contemporary art and artists.

 

Finally, it only will tell you what you and I already know, only making pictures can tell you how to make pictures and eventually we will arrive at pictures which are truly ours and come from no one else.

 

good luck

 

Robin

[ann_m]

I raised this thread again as an addenda to Robin's post... The transcripts of many of Tusa's interviews of creative masters is on line at...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/playlists/johntusa.shtml

 

Enjoy.... A.

[mats_hellman]

kind of late in the thread, but hey, I would still like to add:

 

It sounds like you know what you feel (you're a good writer I find)

It sounds like you know what you want to convey, show in the photo.

 

the question you maybe should be asking is: how am I going to convey this with a photograph?

You could start the thinking way: lower angel, ad something, bla bla.

Or you could just try and find out by shooting.

 

Either way, maybe it will help you to considder: this is what I want to show, how am I going to show it?

 

good luck and thanks for starting a very interesting thread.

[rrx_jones]

Your "literal" knock-off interpretations of Weston are perhaps the result of your own fluent and ebullient "literacy", made abundantly clear in your post: 'porn for geologists' and 'stretch(ing) a common housecat into a weasel' these are phrases coined by an original and humorous mind adept at expressing itself. The expression of a lenticular cloud evocative of Diego Rivera's hat has enough subtle humor to satisfy S. J. Perelman in his prime, so I wouldn't worry one whit further about your own originality. I would offer this bit of advice, though: The 'morning after' reaction is often misleading. Do not throw this work away in frustration. I often go through contact prints and negatives a year -or five, or ten years old - and discover what I thought was dreadfully mediocre was actually damned good. Click.