The psychology behind photography

[Hocus Eye.]

Hey Hocus did you ever get your head around Colour Zone System techniques see Brett Weston....zzzzzzzzzzz

No I always associate Brett Weston with powerful black and white images. I had never heard about his colour zone work (a quick web search revealed nothing). And zzzzzzzzzzz to you too

Hocus Eye

 

[boskysquelch]

And zzzzzzzzzzz to you too

I found a book about 30 years out of print by him in Harrogate Art College Library bin,,,,<<<and that was in 1985!!!!...jeeeez it was booooring! tbh I tried the b/w Zone System out toooo...:brain_hurts:...but then discovered Record Rapid and how to snarl at fellow students so the darkroom cleared whever I went in it...oh those we're the days,,,,

As it happens I think I took his Dad's diaries to much to Heart...and that what's got me to where I am today...

It's been 'kin good fun tho'


a pickee I did to start off exploring Photoshop after a hiatus in My photography which lasted for almost 10 years....

 

[Hocus Eye.]

Yes I like Edward Weston's work a lot myself. He was an amazing chap - probably the original hippy - long before hippies were invented. He would work as a commercial portrait photographer in town to get enough money together to go off into the country and work in his wooden shack of a studio/darkroom on his artistic stuff photographing peppers and nude women among the sand dunes of New Mexico. But then I am sure you know all this.

Hocus

 

[Stanley Edwards]

I really can't explain my photography in words. I just made a post on the BJP forum to a similar question and I'm running out of internet cafe credit so:

John (sorry, that should be Stanley), being a sort of devils advocate here, answer me this...
If I walk down the road and see something that I think is art i.e. a building, an object or whatever, do I then qualify as an artist, or do I have to record it to qualify, even though all I have done is to point a camera at it and let the lab print it?


No. Not quite where I'm coming from.


There are many examples of others art within the built environment. Architects consider the location of a building as much as the building itself. Architects are artists to my way of thinking. However, the skill of a good architectural photographer will recognise the design aspects and record them with their own personal style. It is possible for a photographer to create new art from other peoples creations.


Then there are examples of 'accidental' art within the manmade and natural environments. For an individual to spot this and record it in their own personal way is also art.


However, what I consider to be good photographic art is very different. My own goal is to record a very personal experience and convey that experience to others. The links below are to two of my favourite shots to date. They both include manmade objects in a natural environment. Both objects have been designed by other people. You could argue that I am just capturing others art but, I don't see it that way. The light, the location, the time, the angle of view and much, much more goes into creating a scene that is uniquley personal to me. The objects themselves are nothing without all other factors and the landscape or, location is nothing without all the others.


It is something I consider to be very personal. A portrayal of my own experience (often a very solitary one - just me and my camera) from a very unique point of view. The photograph is an attempt to record and convey the experience rather than a simple object.

snipped links


If I could explain all this effectively in words I would probably be a writer not a photographer!

--/

Time to stop the talking and do the walking!

 

[Agent Sparrow]

I once met a guy in Vietnam who said he hated taking photos when he was travelling because when he got home he only remembered the photos. In a way I do agree with him - after time your memories become inextricably linked to the photos, possibly even are altered by the photos in the ways which memories can be changed over times. However, I think that is part of the reason we do take these documentary type photos.

We all want control over our world, and it's a way of enforcing that control; we decide what events and what details we will remember in the future. We are editors of the newspapers of our lives - we decide what details are to be unecessary, which are to be the headlines (the ones we frame), and which are to be the smaller stories (the ones which get put in boxes in our draws). I don't think we're conscious of doing this but I think subconsciously there is a real decision that "this is valuable, I want this to be part of my memory in future years, this is not so valuable so I won't document it" etc. Thus we edit out the bits we'd rather forget in favour of things we'd rather remember.

In re: to more "artistic" photos, while I do also agree with Garf's statement that it is to get better, I think the actual desire to take photos at all is based on a desire to communicate though processes which can't even be articulated when you see an image through the medium of a well set up shot (the whole a picture can paint a thousand words thing). The image might often be nothing to do with you but the interpretation is deeply personal, and that is what the photo is trying to acheive.

Sorry to make the distinction as well - in reality I think there's a lot of overlap between the two.

 

[5T3R30TYP3]

I once met a guy in Vietnam who said he hated taking photos when he was travelling because when he got home he only remembered the photos. In a way I do agree with him - after time your memories become inextricably linked to the photos, possibly even are altered by the photos in the ways which memories can be changed over times.

This is why I started a thread saying that I hate photography (not photography itself, but taking photos during good times / events / travels etc.).

The whole thing can become a photo opportunity, and later on you can end up either just remembering the photos, or looking back thinking "If only I had taken a photo of that" rather than "Wow, that was beautiful/amazing/will never happen again, I will never forget it". You can end up treating experiences as commodities, something that you can record, turn into a material posession that you can hold, look at, show to other people, even sell if you wanted to. I hate the idea of 'owning an experience'... 'owning' them makes them less special... just living them and remembering them is what makes them good.

 

[Robster970]

The whole thing can become a photo opportunity, and later on you can end up either just remembering the photos, or looking back thinking "If only I had taken a photo of that" rather than "Wow, that was beautiful/amazing/will never happen again, I will never forget it".

It helps me remember just how wow/sad/indifferent/special/stupid/amazing things are, whether it be a picture of my shoe or the most amazing thing i'd ever seen. It doesn't have to replace the memory, the two can coexist and work together. Why does it have to be so polar?

 

[Agent Sparrow]

This is why I started a thread saying that I hate photography (not photography itself, but taking photos during good times / events / travels etc.).

The whole thing can become a photo opportunity, and later on you can end up either just remembering the photos, or looking back thinking "If only I had taken a photo of that" rather than "Wow, that was beautiful/amazing/will never happen again, I will never forget it". You can end up treating experiences as commodities, something that you can record, turn into a material posession that you can hold, look at, show to other people, even sell if you wanted to. I hate the idea of 'owning an experience'... 'owning' them makes them less special... just living them and remembering them is what makes them good.

I think it might be somewhat connected to us being told we can own anything, we can purchase anything, but that might be me going a little far...

On the other hand, I got some photos of Tai Shan (sacred mountain in China) back about 3 years after I had been, due to one of my friends being a bit late in getting them developed. The photos did truely act as memory promts, not just of the things in them but of the whole experience, both going up and down the moutain and of our time in the village. So sometimes they can act as promts. Maybe it's just over looking at them which has that potential for selective amnesia?

I have once in my life and possibly more wasted a wonderful sight through worrying if I was framing it right.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I look at sooooooooooo many images...but the "good" ones with make me experience a feeling akin to that shortly before you weep, or experience Love...it's a phsically sensation that feels like jealousy and loss too...a warmth in a depth only You feel....

I like that explanation.

IMO, we take photos for different reasons. For one thing, we do it as a recording of what's happened, like a birthday party, and also as a way to evoke the emotions attached with some event or situation.

The other thing, for some people, is making 'artistic' photos. I've tried to do that, and I think the reason is something like what squelch says.

I look at something, and it brings some sort of emotional response, and I want to see if I can make an image that will bring out the same response in others who look at it.

It's a way to try and let others into your, the photographer's, point of view; where are you coming from, how do you see the world, how does the world make you feel.

 

[tastebud]

I used to think a bit like that actually. (That photography can ruin the natural process of memory). However, as you get older and your memory isn't as amazing as it was e.g. when you were a teenager; I think the positives gained from filling in memory gaps with photography outweighs this. My memory for events is shocking nowadays!

 

[thefuse]

As Hocus Eye says; It's about showing the world through our own eyes. We all perceive the world differently but, photography is a recording of a shared reality. If I manage to record something I experienced exactly as I want others to experience the experience then I'm happy.

This photograph still remains one of my favourites:

This one comes close to my idea of perfect also:

Not everbody's idea of good photographs (very few peoples actually) but, for me, they work exactly as I want them to. Whether the viewer gets as much out of them is a different matter entirely. It's about me, my camera, my unique experience and trying to convey what I felt at the time.

this post pretty much sums up what i was thinking during the february photo competition. it had never really occured to me, even after 30 years of photography that people wouldnt like my pictures. i get so much joy out of them and i'm constantly amazed by some of the images i've 'produced'.
part of the joy of it for me though is that i can always improve and theres always something new to learn. i'd soon get bored of it if i took perfect pictures every time.

 

[alef]

Agree with Squelch, recommend reading Susan Sontag's On Photography.
http://www.susansontag.com/onphotography.htm