Subscribe by email
Subscribe by RSS feed
On Something Like Objectivity.
May 9th, 2008
I’m constantly telling people to shoot what they love. I stand by that advice and I will go down on that ship if I have to. But there’s a danger in only shooting what you love. It feels easy. And it’s easy to mistake a bad photo of something we love for a good photo. Much harder - and therefore a solid photographic exercise - to create good images of something we are neutral about, even dislike.
In high school law classes we were made to debate current issues and if we held a certain position pro or con we were forced to argue for the side of the debate with which we did not agree. It pushed us to consider other perspectives, to appreciate the other side, and I hated it.
I’m not even close to being an objective person and I’m keenly aware of many of my biases. With a camera in hand it becomes harder to hide. I shoot what I like, avoid what I don’t. This results in (1) some great images, (2) some images I think are great but aren’t, and (3) images that might have been great but never had a chance because I just didn’t take them.
I’ve written before about the tendency of photographers to read into their own images things that are not there. Nothing exists beyond the edges of the frame and that includes your emotions or memories. Nostalgia is powerful, and if you put it IN the frame, the image is imbued with that power. But if it is not placed as a visual element within the frame - nada. zilch. nothin’.
All that to say two things (with apologies to the good Dr. Seuss.):
Thing1
Our photography will improve if, beyond just shooting what we love, we occasionally shoot things we are less passionate about. It’ll force us to be more creative and more intentional. Try it. Go shoot great images of crappy stuff. Look at it from a different angle. Try the “If I loved this crappy thing, how would I shoot it?” approach.Thing2
Our editing will improve dramatically if we get closer to objective about it. That in itself is nearly impossible. But there’s a back door to this that makes it easier. Be analytical. Ask WHY you like this image. Be aware of your emotions, your memories, and then put yourself in your viewers’ shoes. If I look at that image of Fiji and I wasn’t there, will it be a powerful image to me? If you ask “why?” and don’t get a response that includes references to composition (and by that I mean all visible elements within the frame and how they relate to each other and the viewer) - that’s a clue that you might have a snapshot, and not a great photograph, on your hands.
Can a snapshot be great? Well yes, it can be a great snapshot. But generally the relevance of a snapshot is limited to a small audience, an audience that has the information from “without the frame” to colour the information “within the frame.” A great photograph is much more universal.
I like what you have to say. I agree, I think we need to stretch and shoot things we don’t normally shoot. I shoot environmental portraits and I get in the rut of shooting them the same way far too often. We have to push ourselves to shoot the things we love differently. We also need to start shooting different subjects. I love culture, and love shooting in exotic places, but I think I need to push myself to shoot a landscape every so often in those same places. But I still believe, if you are good at something, focus on that. Be the best at what you are good at and spend the bulk of your time making yourself the best at it.
Exactly. I think part of the point I was making is that one way to get better at shooting the stuff we’re good at is to engage in the exercise of shooting the stuff we’re less passionate about. I think it focuses us, forces us to shoot with a more intentional eye. Shooting what we love is often carried along by our passion, but shooting the boring stuff forces us to think about composition and that improves our craft.
I like how you expressed yourself, Matt - you should teach people this kind of thing - perhaps we could do a workshop in India or something
Another process I find useful is to use techniques to abstract my images. Look at the image in B&W, instead of color. Apply a Gaussian blur, and look at the overall shapes and composition.
And study older photos, after some time has passed; don’t just look at the favorites– check out the runners-up. Time can help us to be more objective.
Bruce - Mike Johnston over at The Online Photographer recently advocated a similar process here:
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/05/color-junkies.html
I found the comments on this post illuminating and enjoyed the discourse. Amazing how divergent opinions on this stuff can be.
You’re right about time aiding us in objectivity. As we get farther away from the moment we shot the image we also get farther away from interpreting the image through the memories of what lay outside the frame.