How Often & Why?

[Overread]

You think you can create masterful work by imitating a master? Then you just come off as an imitator. Real masters are original and created not just the frosting but the cake underneath it too. When you try to copy the style of a master you don't understand the cake underneath, and just do a crappy job of applying the frosting on top.

If you wish to become a master you need to learn not just how to bake a cake, but make an original recipe.

If you copy the cake well - copy the recipe the frosting and all then you can start to understand the master and what they were looking for in the cake when they created it. Once you then understand many cakes made before you you can then build on those building blocks and thus be able to start creating your own cakes - based on what you understand of cake and its formation from copying and viewing the works of others.

Copying is a key skill and if you ever take up something like drawing then a lot of the early work is copy work - copy how to draw a shape well - then once you have those shapes copying how to put them together into a form - then into a full drawing. Once you have that basic level again you have the building blocks to start creating your own drawings - the shapes won't change and the hand skills won't alter - those are set things just like aperture, shutter speed and the behavour of light.

and after all that --- I want cake now!

 

[Arch]

How often and why do you ask for C&C?

Rarely..

Do you attempt to figure out for yourself where your strengths and weaknesses lie?

I'v already figured it out for the most part through formal education and general feedback.

Do you ever express your intent in taking a photo?

Yes sometimes (and many people do) by the use of titles.

Do you just put it on someone else to figure it out for you?
Never.

Do you ever express your intent in taking a photo?

No, because a photo must stand on its own merits. Intent is not relevant to whether you succeeded or failed.

As i mentioned, people often forget that adding a title to your work expresses intent.
An image can be fairly meaningless and bland if viewed without knowing any intent. Often adding language, even if its a single word can add new meaning to the image.
This is of course used by all kinds of artists mainly painters and sculptures but also some photographers (if its the kind of photograph that benefits from a title, as you say there are areas which simply don't need it).

You think you can create masterful work by imitating a master? Then you just come off as an imitator. Real masters are original and created not just the frosting but the cake underneath it too. When you try to copy the style of a master you don't understand the cake underneath, and just do a crappy job of applying the frosting on top.

If you wish to become a master you need to learn not just how to bake a cake, but make an original recipe.

I think you've misunderstood Torus, we can all learn something from the masters, that's not to say he's trying to be a master.
Also you are talking to someone who has probably been shooting longer than you've been alive, so no offense but you can't really teach him anything about the philosophy of learning.

 

[Torus34]

In response:

Writers read writers. Painters look at the work of painters. Architects visit buildings designed by other architects. Fashion designers know well the works of the Titans of the runways.

There is nothing inherently wrong with a photographer viewing the works of other photographers. It's part and parcel of stocking your own 'tool kit' of ideas and concepts. Consider, if you will, the explorers of Antarctica. Would you fault them if they first tried to learn all they could from previous expeditions before setting off for the cold continent themselves? I thought not.

Absent the rare 'portrait' of a grandchild, I make pictures solely for the decoration of my home. I strive for improvement, replacing old pictures with new ones based solely on my own judgment. I've lived long enough, seen enough and reflected upon what I've seen enough to eliminate angst with regard to my own taste. I have, in the past, posted one of my pictures on this site. That was done in the spirit of 'It's time for me to put my money where my mouth is.' I see no need to post more. It would serve no purpose.

My general mindset is focussed [sorry] on composition and subject choice. I feel I've gained as much from studying the works of painters and from reading various writers on composition as I have from the careful observation of many, many thousands of photographs. Gear and photo techniques such as cameras, lenses, filters, the darkroom and digital image processing come in a distant collective third on my prioritized list. Again, consider whether artists working in, say, oils spend a lot of time in discussing their brushes and pigments with other artists.

If a piece of gear or technique is needed to make a specific envisioned picture, it's added to my 'kit'. I no longer purchase gear to see what it can do. I no longer experiment with film developers. I've standardized on a few films and papers. They are old friends I can trust. I'm free to concentrate on subject and composition.

Thank you, all, for your discussion of my post. I must admit some surprise in finding that it generated comment.

[Sidebar for Blash: Torus34 enjoys a late afternoon of creative cooking so that he can share a new dining experience with his OAO. He's also quite competent in selecting the appropriate wine to compliment the original one-off dishes. ;-))]

 

[Overread]

That was done in the spirit of 'It's time for me to put my money where my mouth is.' I see no need to post more. It would serve no purpose.

My general mindset is focussed [sorry] on composition and subject choice. I feel I've gained as much from studying the works of painters and from reading various writers on composition as I have from the careful observation of many, many thousands of photographs. Gear and photo techniques such as cameras, lenses, filters, the darkroom and digital image processing come in a distant collective third on my prioritized list. Again, consider whether artists working in, say, oils spend a lot of time in discussing their brushes and pigments with other artists.

Thank you, all, for your discussion of my post. I must admit some surprise in finding that it generated comment.

I can certainly understand your viewpoints and have no problem that gear is not the central focus of your hobby. I can also respect you line not to share your work, though I do very much feel that exchanging ones ideas, compositions, creations and such is part of what brings photographers together - beyond talks of gear.

But as for artists they certainly do talk of gear - different brushes, papers, easles, paints - they are as important a part of the creation as their inner vision and compostion are. Just like with cameras poor paints and tools will limit what they are able to create and can damge the end look of a work if they are not up to standard

 

[Dao]

If you copy the cake well - copy the recipe the frosting and all then you can start to understand the master and what they were looking for in the cake when they created it. Once you then understand many cakes made before you you can then build on those building blocks and thus be able to start creating your own cakes - based on what you understand of cake and its formation from copying and viewing the works of others.

Copying is a key skill and if you ever take up something like drawing then a lot of the early work is copy work - copy how to draw a shape well - then once you have those shapes copying how to put them together into a form - then into a full drawing. Once you have that basic level again you have the building blocks to start creating your own drawings - the shapes won't change and the hand skills won't alter - those are set things just like aperture, shutter speed and the behavour of light.

and after all that --- I want cake now!

Overread, I 100% agree. Look at the Japanese car industry. It is the same way.



How often and why do you ask for C&C?
I post photos once in awhile. I never ask for C&C. But I usually like to see the reaction of others. If the photos did not get much response, I will assume the photo I post was just average. No major technical errors, and not interesting enough neither.




Do you attempt to figure out for yourself where your strengths and weaknesses lie?
Yes, I prefer that way.



Do you ever express your intent in taking a photo?
Sometimes. And few times I even have the name of the photo before I took them and hoping I will capture something that I want to show.



Do you just put it on someone else to figure it out for you?
There is always a chance that someone else see things differently. Especially in the composition area.

 

[Mike_E]

If I want C&C I hand somebody a print. I have little use for what someone says, I want to see where their eyes travel and whether their brows move and in which direction. Facial expression is important as well as body language in communicating the impact of a photo- what someone says after going through the 'how do I want him to feel about what I say and will what what I say be in keeping with the persona that I want to project' filter that everyone uses in conversation.

None of this comes across the web. The only thing that might happen on the web is that the 'how do I want him to feel' portion of the filter gets dumped.

So if you really want C&C (unless it is of the technical variety) hand somebody a print.