06/17/06 #5 Laser Sun #3 June 17,2006

I was thinking this morning about the implications of a photographic portfolio, what are we really reading when we see a selection from a single photographer. You know I have been posting a bunch of my old pictures from two years ago and in doing so it's forced me to assess the Jack McRitchie of that time, the Jack McRitchie photographing currently, and the distance between the two. I think that the artist's oeuvre, taken chronologically, forms a kind of map charting the interior landscape and little by little illuminating his internal world . Viewing one picture alone tells you as much about the man as seeing one point on a map and ignoring the context of surrounding roads and towns; both, at their most essential, are simply records of a journey. perhaps if a single picture is interesting enough it can indicate that there may be something of value here and it may be useful to dig a little further. For me pictures are both a record and a creative manifestation of the impelling sense of curiousity and wonder that leads artists to move restlessly onward, always looking to see what lies beyond the next hill. Such are the thoughts sparked from this series of pictures.

Thanks for understanding, Jack. I wish more people liked that kind of stuff.

These shots I took between March and October 2006 are my favourite ones. I'm not quite satisfied with some of the stuff I've come up with lately.

I kind of gave my thinking on these kinds of images in an answering comment to Laurent Jaussi on my Bigoudi Hair Salon picture, posted a couple of days ago, if you're interested.

this photo is original and really make me think of a laser cutting the curtain (shower curtain or table protection stuff right ?)...well you added so much images I am really a bit lost but will continue my way day after day through them....

 

Just a quick quote on this discussion Jack raised:

 

Quote from Marilyn Silverstone:"A photograph is a subjective impression. It is what the photographer sees. No matter how hard we try to get into the skin, into the feeling of the subject or situation, however much we empathize, it is still what we see that comes out in the images, it is our reaction to the subject and in the end, the whole corpus of our work becomes a portrait of ourselves."

 

That's also why as you I like to follow what people present in the long run rather than looking at the TRP's single image...but not everybody want to play PN like that

Thanks for critique.

Laurent, thank you very much for this interesting quotation. But in the end, if you dedicate yourself to what you do, your biggest fear is to be really poor at it. Who's gonna tell you if you're average, good, bad, terrible?

That quote from Marilyn Silverstone absolutely mirrors my thinking on the subject, Sometimes we critique a picture as if there were an absolute truth out there by which we can objectively judge every picture. That's the great fallacy. When one of my pictures was chosen as picture of the week last year I was amazed at some of the criticism. People were approaching the picture as they would shoot it, cropping it every which way and even going so far as to suggest removing the person in the center of the frame. In reality we can only react subjectively to a picture and honestly report how it effects us, which is always through the filter of our own experience. The artist's work is the artist's personal expression, in itself a subjective reation to what he sees; our reaction to it is also personal and subjective and we can only say whether it has touched us or not and perhaps speculate on the reasons why. They're two different things. I don't think I'm putting this very clearly but it's 7am and my brain isn't quite up to speed yet.

Laurent, I really think only the technique can be bad or terrible..the choice of the subject and the way to approach never can be terrible...it can only touch or not the viewer...but never be terrible....I totally agree with Jack on what he says....I think there is not a true or correct way to photograph a subject...just a way that supports the initial intention or put the subject in touching light for viewer to appreciate it...that's why I think the reaction to an image is also personal and people should not try to generalize their opinion...I am sometimes amazed when people say this cropping is much better, this is the way to do it and so forth...I would begin to ask what was the intention before discussing these issues...when the intention is clear (even if it's only an aesthetical one) and the technique can be forgotten I think we have a good image whatever the subject...

Thank you very much for taking the time and speaking so frankly and straightforwardly. It's great pleasure and comfort to be able to share ideas about our common passion for photography and art as a whole. These discussions are a great moment for me each time, and I wish there were more friends here to talk about those matters simply and sincerely.

 

First, I'm sorry about taking a few days answering you but I haven't much time lately between my new house and new job, so I'm taking this opportunity on a saturday morning to take a little more time to answer you.

 

You know that I totally agree with you about subjectivity in judgment, and that it should be a school for tolerance rather than the opposite. I always tell myself that I have no certainty and certainly hold no truth, and that everyone ought to keep their minds open for that very reason. There's no simple truth of course.

 

Unfortunately, not every body has the same tolerant approach, and it is sometimes difficult to evaluate oneself in front of the diversity of viewpoints and reactions to one's work, especially when that work has very little positive feedback. I think as Laurent put it that there are technical standards and shared by a congregation or profession that make a piece of work uninteresting for most if it doesn't reach those minimum standards (I can hear you, Jack and Laurent, thinking that even that can be discussed of course). I think we all apply that kind of technical censorship to our own work when we say to ourselves: " Come on, what you've just done is crap, you can't show that, man, you're gonna be ridiculous". That is all the more true since I'm a self-made photographer that has no real references and always tells himself real photographers share secrets and knowledge to sort a good photo from a bad one, secrets and knowledge of which I have no idea.

 

Eventually, having accepted all that, I have the impression that one of the most difficult things for some artists may be to keep on going, not really knowing where they're going, especially when they have very little positive feedback on their work. And here we go back to subjective judgment on art, and what could be considered as the Great Illusion. Some people decide what is good and what is bad, what is interesting and what must be done, what is fashionable and what is out-of-date. Thus, how many that are now the greatest artists in the history of art died in complete misery and poverty, totally self-defeated and humiliated just because they were considered as untalented and uninteresting by those who decided in their own time. And how many who were then praised and fashionable are now forgotten?

 

Jack, Laurent, I'm telling you that because as a simple hobbyist trying to improve and find ideas, I sometimes ask myself that dizzying question: how can I know if I'm terrible, bad, average, good?

 

 

Beautiful! Striking! The sun goes so well with the flowers.

Such a hard question you ask here....well you've answered it partially already I think...some great artist died unrecognized, so you can never know really...:-)....on a short time you can only evaluate popularity of your technique (composition and so on) and popularity of the subject you are choosing to shoot...I think you already know that your technique is consistent Laurent...

 

Then I observed you've had big popularity on subject that are known to score well here in PN, and a bit less popularity on more original ones, and then also some surprises in-between...the surprise in-between are often the most interesting as are the original images...the rest is up to the way PN works and up to the participants....but I would not expect too much or at least not more that this site can offer...that is a window open for discussion and sharing of photos...the level and interest of participants being so diverse, it is really difficult to draw real conclusion from people's reaction, unless you take the time to know the people, that's why following what they do over a longer period is so interesting...

John, thank you very much for your kind visit and comment.

 

Laurent, yours are words of wisdom. I couldn't agree more with you about how things work on the site and what to expect from it. We all think that Pnet is a great site in so far as it offers rare opportunities to show one another's stuff and share views and ideas about photography with other people. But, as you added, it is also true that it has its own mainstream style of photography that is much more appreciated than other ways of making pictures. What strikes me most is the fact that some things that work best outside Pnet don't always work here and vice versa.

 

Laurent, thanks again, it's always great pleasure exchanging thoughts with you and all our friends here.