What does it mean to you?

[dancingsphinx22]

I did a search on this site, and couldn't find anything, but if there's already a thread on this subject, feel free to post the link...

So, anyway, I'm curious to know how other photographers view "photography".

For me, I always try to use it to convey a feeling, emotion, mood or message. When I go out and compose a shot, I try to think about what I want to express, and if I'm going about it in the best way. I know I don't always succeed in doing so. :blushing:

The reason I'm asking is, earlier when I was checking out local photogs websites, I found myself being judgmental and thinking to myself - that's a terrible comp, or why did they shoot that, or why did they shoot it that way? Then I realized that I was being closed minded in thinking this, becuase maybe they were trying to capture something I didn't see, or something that was important to the client, etc.

Or, maybe they just sucked. I don't know...:lmao:

Either way, please tell me what you think photography is about, or what it means to you.

 

[JG_Coleman]

Well, I don't think I have it in me to philosophically discuss what photography means to me. However, in reference to looking at others photographs, I have done a bit of thinking about that myself.

First off, the advent of D-SLRs has allowed many relatively crappy photographers to inundate the internet with photographs. So... it's quite possible that the photographs you browsed really did just suck.

However, I tend to think that many photographs that don't appeal to me may simply portray subject matter that I am not very interested in. For instance, my prime subjects are nature and horticulture... two areas for which I have a real passion. I am truly dedicated to photographing these subjects in a way that moves me and I feel genuinely fulfilled when I achieve that. In contrast, I am completely bored by most photographs of people. Whether they are wedding photographs, vacation shots, stock photos depicting individuals doing anything and everything under the Sun... I find them all very unexciting.

Now, it isn't that they are bad photographs. In fact, some images of people are positively impressive from a technical and creative standpoint and I can appreciate them in that respect. But, personally, my heart just isn't there... they don't move me. I would say that only about 1%-2% of my catalog portray people... and most of those just feature them as nameless silhouettes. Suffice to say, if the world left photography entirely up to me... there wouldn't be much record that humans even existed. I even tend to avoid landscapes if I can't frame a scene such that all traces of civilization are erased. Maybe it's a reaction to my environment... Connecticut ranks #4 on the list of the most densely populated states, with over 700 people per square mile.

Anyhow, my observation of my own bias against "people" photography probably applies to many other subjects, as well. In such cases, I just try to stay open-minded and think of the photographs from a technical and creative standpoint. Although we all have varied tastes, any photographer should be able to appreciate creative vision and technical virtuosity regardless of subject matter.

 

[dancingsphinx22]

Hey, a fellow New Englander! :mrgreen: Thanks for your input.

I have to say, I feel much like you do - some subjects may not hold my interest, but I can still appreciate the technical and artistic effort put forth by the photog. With that in mind, it seemed to me that most of the images I'm referring to seemed to lack technical effort behind them (in my opinion of course.) Or, they didn't convey the intended message the photog was trying to present, which turned me off to their work.

For example, I saw an image of wedding cake serving utensils. I believe the photog was trying to convey the "sentimental value" of the utensils. However, the utensils looked sharp and shiny, and were surrounded by deep red rose petals. Instead of feeling warm and sentimental, all I could think was "blood, murder and stabbing" Intended results? I don't think so.

 

[JG_Coleman]

For example, I saw an image of wedding cake serving utensils. I believe the photog was trying to convey the "sentimental value" of the utensils. However, the utensils looked sharp and shiny, and were surrounded by deep red rose petals. Instead of feeling warm and sentimental, all I could think was "blood, murder and stabbing" Intended results? I don't think so.

Yeah, sounds like a failed concept to me!

 

[Josh66]

Photography is just making photos. It's that simple.

There's good photography, bad photography, and everything between.

Sometimes a snapshot is good enough.

Everything doesn't need to have some deep cosmic meaning...

 

[dancingsphinx22]

Yeah, sounds like a failed concept to me!

Unless they were trying to say marriage is like murder?? :lmao:

Oh lord, this is going to open a can of worms when a certain someone gets a hold of this...

yeah...I just thought about that.

Before anyone gets angry, I'm not trying to say one opinion (or mine) is better than another. I just want to see how different people view photography. That's all...

 

[Flash Harry]

Memories

 

[white]

I like photographs that tell stories, and I like philosophy, so I guess I am one of those people.

 

[Petraio Prime]

Oh lord, this is going to open a can of worms when a certain someone gets a hold of this...

Ha ha ha

Not going to get in on this one...

 

[Christie Photo]

Posterity... at least for portaits.

This is largely why I had the troubles I did when moving from film to digital.

I've been in my studio since 1983. When asked, I can easily retrieve a negative from my archives and make a fresh, new print.

I have some glass negatives made by my great uncle. Likewise, I can make new prints of his work.

What happens twenty, thirty years from now when my files are corrupt, or the technology to read a DVD is no longer available?

So, back to the original question... photography for me is presevation. But it does have to pay the bills too.

-Pete

 

[Petraio Prime]

Oh lord, this is going to open a can of worms when a certain someone gets a hold of this...

Ha ha ha

Not going to get in on this one...

But I'm not, I'm not!

 

[table1349]

I did a search on this site, and couldn't find anything, but if there's already a thread on this subject, feel free to post the link...

So, anyway, I'm curious to know how other photographers view "photography".

I view questions like this as a waste of photographic time. Kind of like the ole boy in the boat with the game warden out in the middle of the lake. The ole boy light a stick of dynamite and handed it to the game warden. When the game warden protested, the ole boy asked him real polite like, " You gonna argue, or you gonna fish???

 

[Morpheuss]

To me photography is a beautiful art. You have to have that eye and that compisition to take a beautiful Landscape (what I'm into). I love to just park my car and just go walking through the woods or along some path out into the woods and just take pictures here and there and sometimes I get a shot that is just breath taking and I stop dead in my tracks and raise up my camera and grab it. To me it is photography is a reminder that there are more beautiful things in this world that haven't been created by human hands, and I better stop there before I start a discussion about religion

 

[dancingsphinx22]

I did a search on this site, and couldn't find anything, but if there's already a thread on this subject, feel free to post the link...

So, anyway, I'm curious to know how other photographers view "photography".

I view questions like this as a waste of photographic time. Kind of like the ole boy in the boat with the game warden out in the middle of the lake. The ole boy light a stick of dynamite and handed it to the game warden. When the game warden protested, the ole boy asked him real polite like, " You gonna argue, or you gonna fish???

Well then, thank you for wasting your time here! :hugs:

Perhaps it is a waste of time for some people, but for me, I learned something new. I've always used photography for memories, like someone suggested, and presently to make a statement or portray something, but using it for preservation is an interesting concept, and something I never thought of.

 

[desertdave]

Then there is the philosophy that when you capture an image you are actually capturing a brief moment in time that will never ever take place again......Put that in your pipe and smoke it. Oh yeaaaa