Expounding the feeling: Photographic Philosophy.

[Wisp]

Debate:

As in the forums, all that had been discussed is basically about techniques and how to utilize equipment. As such, another member Tetrode had discussed about starting another subforum to discuss purely the aesthetics or the non physical responses/advent of creating/viewing the photograph: The feel.

Some call it the Eye. Some call it Inspiration. Others simply put it away as Pure luck. However, it is pretty difficult to describe something that is not quantifiable, but some people do come quite close (in their own interpretation of course).

Of course, art is subjective, and perhaps the pressures to inculcate each person's inspiration is simply just as diverse. Some do it via their past sufferings (kouldeka), or artistic identity (Weston, Cartier Bresson). Some do it with the need to spread the word (Capa/Salagado), while others do it as a testament of respect (Ansel Adams).

So perhaps, and I believe alot of folks here have lots to say, so pen your thoughts:

(To the mods: Hopefully this thread will give an idea how's the new subforum gonna be..)

 

[eikin]

we live in a world where values collapsed into a depthless thin surface dictated by jumping digits in the stock markets.

before consumerism erased humans' ability to feel, there was Art. after Warhol's Diamond Dust Shoes, there is very much only superficial stimulation ... and ART.

So, where do we go from here? Is there anymore meaning in art? What is art?

 

[Tetrode]

Wisp,

I admire your eagerness in starting this new subforum but me thinks perhaps you are setting the bar a tad too high. While what you have penned down might not be too esoteric for some, it might be for others.

If we want to encourage participation in these type of discussions, we should start at a layman's level of understanding and not with abstruse discussions. Other approaches are needed otherwise you stand to alienate a lot of people.

Perhaps backing up what you have said with explanations and examples, a glossary of terms, links to other sites (sites of the people you have written about).

There will be people here who haven't heard of Koudelka, Weston, Cartier Bresson, Capa, Salagado and yes even HCB.

 

[synapseman]

Sorry man. The first thing that came to my mind on opening this thread were two words:

"Wah piang..."

I do (try to) think about what I shoot, but not to the point where it hampers what I've set out to do - take pictures! Yup, I'm a simpleton. I make an image in my head, link it to a feeling I have and try my best to reproduce it as a photograph. I like, I shoot. I don't like, I delete.

 

[Clown]

i think debates on the technical aspects of photography is better than this..
+0 cuz kopitiam no post count

 

[Wisp]

Ah, an oversight. Thanks alot.

 

[jsbn]

I'm not exactly sure how to describe that form of feeling given my extreme lack of vocabulary.

But whenever I attend model shoots (a rarity these days since models these days are so cheerful looking), a day or two before, I would think thoroughly what exactly it is I would like my series to portray and how are my feelings for the past couple of days.

Of cos, my personal mood and feeling sets the centerstage for most of my shoot. If something happens at work or if I'm just in my black (yes, 'black'. 1 grade lower than 'blue') days, there's a chance it would affect the overall compositional mood of my photos as well as how many times I would tell the model to smile.

Before an event like a wedding, its really hard (since I'm much a blue person), but psyching myself up to the event (serious, fun, etc) would be necessary otherwise it would not only affect my shooting but the overall mood since I will unconsicously filter out scenes.

 

[Wisp]

Nah don't worry about the vocabulary part. It's just that way I speak/write. Just say what influences you and what you think says most about your photography. Thanks alot anyway!

 

[Wisp]

i think debates on the technical aspects of photography is better than this..
+0 cuz kopitiam no post count

Whatever roast your goose..

 

[shinken]

Well, the thread title is kindda immense. But under this umbrella, I would, if I could (if there was indeed a sub forum): I would start a thread with the title:
Do your photograph have souls?
And in the content dialogue box, I would type:

Exercise 1: Look at all the photographs you have taken. Can you find any photo that seems technically correct or near perfect, but somehow seems flat and forgettable?

Exercise 2: Look at all the photographs you have taken. Can you find any photo that's just crappy, technically wrong, and you know you'll be die of multiple gunshot wounds and buried without a coffin if you had posted on Clubsnap's "Portraits and Poses" forum, but somehow it reaches a deep part of you?

Exercise 3: If you're gonna throw away unwanted photographs, please go through Exercise 1 and 2.

 

[Tetrode]

Well, the thread title is kindda immense. But under this umbrella, I would, if I could (if there was indeed a sub forum): I would start a thread with the title:
Do your photograph have souls?
And in the content dialogue box, I would type:

Exercise 1: Look at all the photographs you have taken. Can you find any photo that seems technically correct or near perfect, but somehow seems flat and forgettable?

Exercise 2: Look at all the photographs you have taken. Can you find any photo that's just crappy, technically wrong, and you know you'll be die of multiple gunshot wounds and buried without a coffin if you had posted on Clubsnap's "Portraits and Poses" forum, but somehow it reaches a deep part of you?

Exercise 3: If you're gonna throw away unwanted photographs, please go through Exercise 1 and 2.

Well explained! :thumbsup:

 

[synapseman]

Well, the thread title is kindda immense. But under this umbrella, I would, if I could (if there was indeed a sub forum): I would start a thread with the title:
Do your photograph have souls?
And in the content dialogue box, I would type:

Exercise 1: Look at all the photographs you have taken. Can you find any photo that seems technically correct or near perfect, but somehow seems flat and forgettable?

Exercise 2: Look at all the photographs you have taken. Can you find any photo that's just crappy, technically wrong, and you know you'll be die of multiple gunshot wounds and buried without a coffin if you had posted on Clubsnap's "Portraits and Poses" forum, but somehow it reaches a deep part of you?

Exercise 3: If you're gonna throw away unwanted photographs, please go through Exercise 1 and 2.

One word that comes to mind when I read this:

LOMO!

 

[Witness]

well...i have never looked to photography as the means to an end (producing an image). rather, i view it as a process for me to define photography for myself...

for me, the word photography is dynamic and is constantly taking on new meanings and broader definations....

 

[Clown]

Whatever roast your goose..

same to whatever stuffs your chicken

 

[pai]

actually my personal experience with creative pursuits (writing, music, painting, photography) is that all this talking/thinking/analysis/criticism takes place rather separately from the creactive act. lots of artists (and "artists") talk about their philosophy, but often we find there's a disconnect with what they've actually produced. what actually happens during the creative act is often something that we're not conscious of. :angel:

 

[Deadpoet]

... some call it the Eye. Some call it Inspiration. Others simply put it away as Pure luck. However, it is pretty difficult to describe something that is not quantifiable, but some people do come quite close (in their own interpretation of course).

Of course, art is subjective....

Even if there are agreements between 2 photographers, ultimately what they say will be different. Art is a very personal thing. As long as I like it, it's art, and if I hate it, it's trash. This has nothing to do with how famous the artist is, can be a master or an amateur, same rule applies.

 

[pai]

Art is a very personal thing. As long as I like it, it's art, and if I hate it, it's trash.

curious, is there room for something outside like and hate? i admire the structure and wordplay in joyce's novels, and the elegance of mozart's music. unfortunately, joyce is inaccessible to me, and mozart puts me to sleep. i don't see either as trash though.

 

[zaren]

interesting topic...

my view is that "photographic philosophy" simply means "photographing what moves you".

be it the yosemite national park, decisive moments along the streets of paris, everyday humdrum objects that people tend to overlook, or heart-rending scenes of war and disaster.

it's no surprise that the most powerful and moving images are captured in this way, because they are inspired by what moves the photographer's heart and soul.

so....what moves you to photograph?

do your photographs move others as well? if so, then you have shared some of your photographic philosophy with them. no words required.

 

[Deadpoet]

interesting topic...

my view is that "photographic philosophy" simply means "photographing what moves you".

be it the yosemite national park, decisive moments along the streets of paris, everyday humdrum objects that people tend to overlook, or heart-rending scenes of war and disaster.

it's no surprise that the most powerful and moving images are captured in this way, because they are inspired by what moves the photographer's heart and soul.

so....what moves you to photograph?

do your photographs move others as well? if so, then you have shared some of your photographic philosophy with them. no words required.

Of course, world is not black and white ... but it's very difficult to define grey ...

I will let you define it for yourself ...