Process for process sake is pretty much useless IMO. Process doesn't make the image. A photographer not in control of their work or "vision" isn't going to be any more so using a different process.
On the other hand, different processes can open other avenues to the person expressing themself and perhaps awaken something in them they had not known existed. Some excellent photographers have worked the same "angle" ... formula, process and format over and over to the point of exhaustion and long after they had anything to say. Using different processes can help in keeping vision fresh and making things fun again. Personally I find that using different processes keeps me interested in continuing with photography in general. Even though I love making them, I couldn't imagine having to face a lifetime of square format, black and white prints!
I think that as long as the process is in tune with the vision of the artist, it can be important. But I don't know if the viewer directly cares, but indirectly they must since it can be a significant part of the artwork creation.
My own example is lith printing. When I hold my camera, setting it up, when inspiration strikes and I decide to make a photograph, I most definitely take the process into account, knowing that it would not be the same without it. That's a fact for me.
But once again - does the viewer really care? Probably not. I know I get irritated when people are in a photography exhibit full of art, and they're cross examining the photographer with respect to film and developer chioce... When I'm a viewer I peak at the plaque to see if I'm correct that it's a pt/pd print, gravure, or maybe silver gelatin. But it doesn't add, neither does it detract from my viewing experience. I just soak the content in, no matter how it was made. I'm just a little bit of a tech geek, but care mostly about composition, gesture, form, content - both visually and emotionally, etc... Those factors are so much more important. My two cents.
- Thomas
Craft or art??? Sometimes, I get taken in by a very well crafted print, and I will just stand in awe of it, but those pictures don't usually stay with me for long. In fact, a lot of crafting is like that... you can be blown away by someone making pictures, paintings, quilts...whatever.. if they are made very, very well. Just be awe struck in the moment you take it in. At the end of the day, though, they don't always "stay with me".
A good, and interesting picture... whether well crafted or not, will stay with me. Long after I see it. Process, or craft, is important to me personally in how I like to work. I think my actual process is less interesting to viewers, I just hope when viewed my pictures "stay with a few people", and not just my technique... despite my stunningly technical brilliance (tongue, planted firmly in cheek )
If you're a musician, you may not care what brand of guitar or drumsticks another musician makes, I concede that.
However, I think the specific medium a photographer uses, particularly if it's a fringe medium, is of great interest to other photographers who use that medium. To make a musical analogy, if you play the oboe, you might be very interested in hearing other good music performed on the oboe. You might not terribly care what brand of oboe the musician played.
Black and white silver gelatin photography is starting to become a fringe medium. I definitely take notice when I see that an image I really like was made with silver products. It doesn't mean I don't enjoy other sorts of images; it's just a preference. I like to see what people can do with the tools I use.
__________________
Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
I enjoyed the reticence and almost apologetic attitude in the OP. Sort of like finally getting up the courage to confront a loved one about being an alcoholic. This is one of my closet issues, too. It's the big pink elephant in the middle of the room that nobody wants to talk about.
It's understandable. It is HARD to talk about intangibles. If I simply can't take my eyes off of an image (which is my ultimate test) what can I say about it? "I just can't take my eyes off of that image!" It's easy to talk about the kind of camera I use.
How about "good" and "bad"? Another dodge. When we look at an image, there are a lot of ways that our minds can go. We can judge, we can analyze, we can follow an associational train, we can try to figure out whether we are better or worse than the maker of that image. It doesn't matter what we do. Every one of those things is a distraction.
The "Process" is another red herring, if by "process" we mean the method or medium of the making, rather than the more inclusive process of the artist that includes concept, medium, audience or public, and other contextual elements. If we mean that larger process, that is a red tuna. That, too, is a distraction. An even better distraction! Not big enough? Not distracting enough? Hey, let's deconstruct it!
It could be marks made on an animal skin with a burnt stick, or a chalice by Benvenuto Cellini. The question is, "can I take my eyes off of that image [article]"? How long can I look at an image, how present can I be with it, what is the depth of that experience?
A professor sent us to the art museum to look at a wooden horse sculpture from the Warring States era in ancient China. We had to write a paper about it. Freshmen all, at a smart college, everyone tried to snow him with our vast critical vocabularies. The old man didn't snow. He stormed into the room. "These papers are TERRIBLE!" he bellowed. "You have to do it over. Go back and JUST LOOK AT IT!"
It could be marks made on an animal skin with a burnt stick, or a chalice by Benvenuto Cellini. The question is, "can I take my eyes off of that image [article]"? How long can I look at an image, how present can I be with it, what is the depth of that experience?
Of course, in the above, I reveal my biases, no doubt my age and my origins. The postmodern crowd (few of whom, if any, are ever seen in these forums), and the post-postmodern crowd, and the post-post-postmodern crowd have other points of view that don't agree with mine.
Also, I think we have to recognize that there are lots of reasons that people make photographs. Ego is a big one. Fascination with toys is another. And there are others, including the will to look and experience. Which, if any of these, is real? And is any one more valid than the others? Some people are into it for a particular investment in process. There's probably nothing wrong with any of it.
It just seems to me that life can be far richer and more rewarding if one actually inhabits the world directly, without the screens and filters whenever possible. It isn't easy to do.
Part of the problem for me is that I am aware of the process.
When was the last time that you looked at a print with a dust mark or two, and weren't at least slightly distracted by the mark?
I need to have an appreciation for the process in order to create a print that is expressive as possible, but I'm always in danger of being too cognizant of the process and not enough aware of the image depicted.
I'll always remember going to movies with my parents when I was young. If the print was scratched, or the distributors had been sloppy and sent reels where the colour balance shifted from reel to reel, my (Kodak employee) father would find it very frustrating, and his enjoyment of the film would definitely be affected. Naturally, I picked up on that, so that even when young, those problems would bother me too. For almost everyone else in the theatre, unless the problems were really bad, they would barely notice.
I think that this explains part of the attraction of Holgas and other toy cameras. If you go into the viewing process with an expectation that there will be technical flaws, you are more likely to be able to ignore them, and get the benefit of that which is positive in the photo.
Because I am a craftsperson making hand-made silver gelatin prints, I am always interested in the process, always comparing materials & results. I like to see what others are doing in that regard.
However, in the end, I try to let the image wash over me and appreciate it irrespective of the process used...
)
Linear Mode
