Perhaps those test photos of yours appeal to some people because they are indeterminate and leave room for interpretation. That's mentally and spiritually stimulating.
Doing these without much premeditation, you get out of the way and let the strangeness of things imprint itself on the pictures.
You must learn to judge (and edit) your own work - and this takes lots of shooting and lots of experience and lots of studying art of all kinds.
I agree. The editing process can be fun but takes a lot of energy. And because the the images you want to show other people whether by publishing or not publishing them are 100 percent yours. That means you have to control them in every aspect.
Don't rush, but take your time and think how you want to present your images and what sort of return/reward/revenue you want to receive by doing that. It has to work more like setting up a business plan because it is real. And watch out for scam photo contests and con publishers because there are quite many of them out there:
The greatest sin in pencil sketching - and all of art, is IMHO, overworking. One tries to create a masterpiece ... and it doesn't quite "work" - so more effort is expended ... and more, and more - until the image is a dark, muddy, more or less indistinct collection of lines and smudges. Yes, "We always HAVE to do our best" ... true, but, invariably, our best requires a sort of self discipline - "From this point, I cannot `improve' this image - it is time to move on." The same holds true in photography.
After that move we can return to our work - more often than not, I'll find that I was too close to the work - through fresh eyes my concept of what "works" changes ... and a great deal of my previous work is FAR better than I thought it to be.
"Learn to judge our own work?" We always evaluate our own work (see "works or not"), but to "judge" ... against what standard to we try to do that?
I've worked teaching raw, emerging photographers - I 've yet to meet one who was NOT overly critical of their work. So many times, they have produced *wonderful*, expressive images - and through some veil of .... I don't know - well-meant "expert" advice, relegated them to the circular file. I've spent a lot of time rescuing these images.
Beyond the idea that there is one great secret in photography - and art (there is none) the significant photographs - and this is true of all great art - ALL include a portion of the being of the artist. Once we can learn to drop our defenses.... and display something of our vision, and innards, the experiencers of our work will become more - appreciative ... the chances are far greater that our work will WORK for them, ...I think there is a - more than slightly mystical connection... and that is the measure, the ONLY true measure of external merit.
When you take yours "test shots", you have loosened the binding (and suffocating) demand for something beyond your concept of your capability. (Note 1). The effects of overworking are either eliminated - or at least minimized - and your BEING shines through. That being, spontanteous, fresh, unadorned or encumbered - free from the adulteration of others or society - is a beautiful thing in all of us.
I guess what I am trying to say, is that great... significant, GOOD work ... will only be produced by "free" photographers. Setting oneself free is not easy - freedom is a scary, insecure place ... but compared to the alternatives, the only place worthy of life.
Note 1 ... You are CAPABLE of work FAR surpassing the :best: ever done by anyone. We ALL have that capablitiy.
When people don’t like what you do, ask you questions: your photos are either excellent or a thrash – you’ll guess it. Consequently, you will have either to educate them or to learn from them.
It’s much simple when people like what you don’t: label them “jealous” and do what Sinatra said.
__________________
For me B&W is film and color is digital. But later I’m doing almost exclusively B&W.
The photos have a tremendous sense of intimacy, of being close to a real person's private life.
I took the liberty of jumping up a level from your link. Love the oldcolor series.
It's up to you what you want to present to the world as "Stephanie's Photography". You have no obligation to please the audience that likes these pictures, and you don't have to let your enjoyment of photography be diluted by working in a style that feels too informal and snapshotty. The best path would be to learn how to foster whatever it was that stimuated people to like these photos and incorporate it into work you are more ready to stand behind as your consciously-taken photos.
When I was in grad school studying sculpture, my teachers and fellow students always said they liked the things I built to help me assemble my sculptures as much as my sculptures themselves.
This has just reminded me of a quote from Sir Humphry Davy (English physicist) after viewing an art exhibition: "The finest collection of frames I ever saw"
I think it is easy to dismiss your own work - especially if it was only ever intended as test shots.
But if other people like it then it is obviously better than you think it is.
I think most photographers (and artists in general) are much more critical of their work than someone else viewing it.
Have any of the people praising your work actually asked to buy/have a print? To me, someone wanting to own one of my prints would be the highest form of compliment.
Good photography is when an image appears on the film. Bad photography is when there is no image, it's clear or black. Beyond that, it's in the eye of the viewer. There is good art and bad art, but I think that much of what is "publishable" is a matter of personal taste. Much of the current vogue for old snapshots and found images speaks to the emotional content of the images for people who "remember a time when..." They wouldn't have been considered art at the time they were made. Much the same can be said about the images that many of us make with old lenses and alternate processes. They become "art" when they are put out there for other people to appreciate and to see through there own lens of understanding.
Those people who tell you that certain images are great may be seeing them in contexts that you are not. Accept that they may have a point, but don't get too excited. Keep shooting these quick shots, put the images away for awhile and look at them with a fresh eye a few years down the road. There may be gems there, there may be only the "test" images you intended in the first place. Let the critics sort it all out when you're old and famous.
An artist has a most difficult task:
- has to know oneself
Putting yourself higher or lower than where you are is dangerous.
At the same time, considering your work to be better or worse than it is, is also dangerous.
Good work need respect and bad need to be learned from.
You asked me what I thought of them.
I gave you my honest opinion.
I did not exaggerate, I did not compliment you.
It will be insulting to me if you think I just said something to be polite or make you feel better.
The photos you dismiss, you have to know REALLY why you dismiss them.
Can you approach them differently? Should you try something else completely?
For you to press the shutter, there had to be a reason.
What was that reason?
Was it good enough for a photograph?
Photography is made on the impulse of a moment.
It is up to the photographer to "train" that impulse.
__________________
aristotelis grammatikakis www.arigram.gr black & white film is sexy
I couldn't agree more. Although I am relatively new to photography, I've only been doing it seriously for about five years, I cannot think of how much money was spent on prints tossed into the garbage can without quivering.
The other day I went through my prints, and out of a stack two feet tall I think I was able to identify twenty images that I thought were worthwhile today. They resonated within me, they are according to who I am as a person and caused an emotional reaction. It occurred to me that this is the kind of work I should be focusing on. Very sobering to me.
I wonder what I will think when I look at those prints again in twenty years.
Stephanie, I am probably not the best person here to give advice, due to being such a novice at this, but if the work you have shown us is something that gives you an emotional kick and shakes your senses - continue doing that work. If someone in the publishing business, or an art collector or a gallery wants to stand behind you in getting some of your work out there - that's a bonus and a compliment, but always be true to your own instincts about your work. And I think those instincts will be honed and refined for many years to come.
With best wishes,
- Thomas
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene_Laughter
Looking back, so many years ago, when I was starting out in art photography and falling in love with too many of my images (all of which I thought were great!), I would set them aside for a year or two, and then go back and review them again. Most often, when I returned for another view, I would realize that the images really were not so good after all. I also found that my "darlings" were hardly new, but cliches that had been done many times before and done so much better! As William Faulkner advised young writers, "kill your darlings!" I agree with Keith. You must learn to judge (and edit) your own work - and this takes lots of shooting and lots of experience and lots of studying art of all kinds. I recall one of the best professors I had in college said, "buy a large garbage can and fill it often for that's how one becomes a very good photographer!"
Maybe the shots they think should be published are out of the ordinary for the viewer. It would be the same as seeing the bike and not realizing there's a photograph waiting to happen whereas you see it & make the image.
__________________
A motorcyclist is the only one who understands why a dog rides with it's head out the window.
Linear Mode
