Sunday, September 07, 2008
To Take a Picture and To Be Taken by a Picture
There is constant debate in the world of photography regarding technology, technical prowess, process and idea. Why? That I don't fucking know, because there is room for everything. Wide-Field Planetary Camera 2? OK. Cell phone photos? OK. A constant discussion of film vs. digital (or numeric, if you're European) is presented as if one could best the other as opposed to exploring the differences...photography is a burgeoning medium and it's thrilling to figure out what technique best suits one's work. There's room for mistakes, and personal preferences. I think film is "warmer" than digital, and that the difference between "noise" and "grain" is significant, but I don't think it makes one "better" than the other. It makes one different from the other. Is process a part of the work? Is the production of the printed image important? Is the medium the work? Or is the image or the idea the work? And why isn't there room for all of it? Guess what? There is!
----
One thing I've seen more than ever in the last year is people thinking that if a medium or large scale camera is used, somehow that makes the content of the photo weightier. Really, that by use of technology you can automatically make a "good" photo. Are you out of your fucking minds? Even people who should know better sometimes think this. Maybe because I know more photographers and people interested in photography I'm seeing this now, I don't know. And let me clarify that I'm not talking about the skill involved in correctly exposing a photograph, or the quality of a beautiful print, but rather the content of the image.
And conversely, sometimes people think that "lo-tech" somehow means "more authentic." I saw a piece in the last couple of months that was presented as if because the piece was primarily made of xeroxes it was intrinsically interesting, with a lot, A LOT, of talking telling viewers why that was important. Seriously, no, it wasn't important. It was actually a terrible piece with xeroxes and a tv with a black and white video of an empty road. I was thinking, "I'm pretty sure I saw this in someone's basement in West Philly in 1982." Actually I'm almost certain I saw a very similar piece in West Philly and we were like let's go see Liquid Sky again instead of looking at this crap, so we took the 42 down to the Ritz.
These things seem remarkably old to me and not even worth discussing, and yet I've had experiences in the last couple of months where these issues were presented as if they were fresh. That's crazy, right?
----
For me the image is paramount, and while the technology is important because it does the recording, it really doesn't matter to me as long as the job gets done.
Here's all my cameras:
35mm Canon Rebel- I mostly used this camera from 2000 to 2004
here's a photo I made with that camera
......
A 4.1 megapixel point and shoot Minolta DIMAGE S414- I mostly used this camera from 2004 to 2006
here's a photo I made with that camera
......
Nikon D70 SLR- I mostly used this camera from 2005 to late 2007
here's a photo I made with that camera
......
Nikon D300 SLR- This camera is my newest, and I got it about 9 months ago.
here's a photo I made with that camera
----
Not pictured here, my high school camera, a Pentax K-1000
----
One thing I've seen more than ever in the last year is people thinking that if a medium or large scale camera is used, somehow that makes the content of the photo weightier. Really, that by use of technology you can automatically make a "good" photo. Are you out of your fucking minds? Even people who should know better sometimes think this. Maybe because I know more photographers and people interested in photography I'm seeing this now, I don't know. And let me clarify that I'm not talking about the skill involved in correctly exposing a photograph, or the quality of a beautiful print, but rather the content of the image.
And conversely, sometimes people think that "lo-tech" somehow means "more authentic." I saw a piece in the last couple of months that was presented as if because the piece was primarily made of xeroxes it was intrinsically interesting, with a lot, A LOT, of talking telling viewers why that was important. Seriously, no, it wasn't important. It was actually a terrible piece with xeroxes and a tv with a black and white video of an empty road. I was thinking, "I'm pretty sure I saw this in someone's basement in West Philly in 1982." Actually I'm almost certain I saw a very similar piece in West Philly and we were like let's go see Liquid Sky again instead of looking at this crap, so we took the 42 down to the Ritz.
These things seem remarkably old to me and not even worth discussing, and yet I've had experiences in the last couple of months where these issues were presented as if they were fresh. That's crazy, right?
----
For me the image is paramount, and while the technology is important because it does the recording, it really doesn't matter to me as long as the job gets done.
Here's all my cameras:
35mm Canon Rebel- I mostly used this camera from 2000 to 2004
here's a photo I made with that camera
......
A 4.1 megapixel point and shoot Minolta DIMAGE S414- I mostly used this camera from 2004 to 2006
here's a photo I made with that camera
......
Nikon D70 SLR- I mostly used this camera from 2005 to late 2007
here's a photo I made with that camera
......
Nikon D300 SLR- This camera is my newest, and I got it about 9 months ago.
here's a photo I made with that camera
----
Not pictured here, my high school camera, a Pentax K-1000
Comments:
<< Home
Great stuff, once again, Zoe. I have recognized this theme passing through a few of the blogs I frequent, and no doubt there seems to be a hierachy implied. top: Large Format, Second: Medium Format, Third: film, 4th: digital.
I never understood it outside of using the tool that best fits your process. I used to use film long ago, and now I use digital. It allows me to interact with the people in my area, and the area itself in a way that allows me to realize my goals.
I do have my Dad's old medium format on its way out to me for a particular project I have in mind. But the use of a medium format camera does not automatically give this project any special weight, but will prove to be a better fit for my goals. Of course if the project turns out to suck, it won't be a result of the camera - just me.
Gotta admit to a major photographer's crush on you, and can't wait for the book. I've had it on pre-order for quite some time now.
I never understood it outside of using the tool that best fits your process. I used to use film long ago, and now I use digital. It allows me to interact with the people in my area, and the area itself in a way that allows me to realize my goals.
I do have my Dad's old medium format on its way out to me for a particular project I have in mind. But the use of a medium format camera does not automatically give this project any special weight, but will prove to be a better fit for my goals. Of course if the project turns out to suck, it won't be a result of the camera - just me.
Gotta admit to a major photographer's crush on you, and can't wait for the book. I've had it on pre-order for quite some time now.
very cool to hear your thoughts on this and to see the camera lineage as well. i've been rediscovering film (and medium format for the first time) in the past year and it's been a fun change of pace.
have you ever considered medium or large format in film or digital?
have you ever considered medium or large format in film or digital?
Always thinking about this stuff as well. Often find, in the words of McLuhan, ... the medium and the message are often inextricably linked. Some cameras dictate a certain type of image. The better image makers make whatever image look effortless, proof in your pudding!
Can't wait to see your book Z.
Best.
Can't wait to see your book Z.
Best.
I love this train of thought, and so intrigued by your identifying the actual cameras used for those images, some of which are my top ZS favorites.
I think all of this just reinforces that photography is 95% emotion and 5% equipment....(emotion might not be the best word choice for what I mean...but hopefully you know what I mean)
I have no doubts that photographers like Minor White, Diane Arbus, Andre Kertesz, etc etc would have produced genius level images if handed a digital point & shoot.
I think all of this just reinforces that photography is 95% emotion and 5% equipment....(emotion might not be the best word choice for what I mean...but hopefully you know what I mean)
I have no doubts that photographers like Minor White, Diane Arbus, Andre Kertesz, etc etc would have produced genius level images if handed a digital point & shoot.
Amen. Thank you for putting it out there. I got my education primarily in film processes but transitioned into digital the last year or so.
I always felt like there was a level of guilt to be associated with my chosen medium. Like there was a hierarchy.
I completely agree with everything you have said. It's the content that matters not the medium.I wish more photo people would just get over it already.
I always felt like there was a level of guilt to be associated with my chosen medium. Like there was a hierarchy.
I completely agree with everything you have said. It's the content that matters not the medium.I wish more photo people would just get over it already.
Yes, yes, and yes. I've nothing remarkable to add but I just wanted to say thanks and thanks and thanks again.
I'm so so sick of hearing about large format vs. digital. If I have to look at one more boring photo that I'm supposed to think is interesting because it came from an 8x10. Snore!
A big virtual high five to you.
I'm so so sick of hearing about large format vs. digital. If I have to look at one more boring photo that I'm supposed to think is interesting because it came from an 8x10. Snore!
A big virtual high five to you.
I will tell you the same thing I told Brian Ulrich a few weeks ago.
''You can take a great photo even with a box camera''
It is the eye telling the story not the equipment!
Glad you put this tabboo out there .
Maybe now everybody can relax and enjoy photography for what it is... capturing a moment or the moment!
Post a Comment
''You can take a great photo even with a box camera''
It is the eye telling the story not the equipment!
Glad you put this tabboo out there .
Maybe now everybody can relax and enjoy photography for what it is... capturing a moment or the moment!
<< Home
