Do you cry?

Really just curious – do photographers here shed tears?

I don’t mean from all the “pain” we associate w/ LF photography – like stumbling w/ a heavy tripod in the field, trying to focus old eyes on the GG, losing an expensive lens, or breathing fixer fumes in the darkroom.

We already know you cry plenty over that. :(

I mean the spontaneous, involuntary tears when seeing (experiencing) an exceptional print – portrait, still life, landscape, architecture. You know, that welling-up in the eyes, in response to depth, balance, harmony, mystery, reverence, etc. Perhaps it was one of your own prints fresh from the tray or printer, or a particular print by a Master in a book or museum.

What caused it to happen? Should it happen? Was it due to the subject matter, the lighting, the presentation, your state of mind at the time, a combination?

No need to be embarrassed – we’re grown-ups around here – please tell us more...

;^)

No, no tears over photos. But other things do move me to tears...usually stuff relating to kids -- being a father seemed to have started that. And sometimes thing that I am reading can be so beautiful and moving that it moves me to tears. But strangely, not photos (yet).

I've cried watching a movie, reading a book and listening to music but never over a photograph. Not sure why.

Jonathan

Makes me curious if only “high” arts induce this aesthetic reaction, but not still photography.

For me I think it has to do with the development of emotion over time. Each of the media I mentioned (movies, books, music) is experienced over the course of minutes, hours, or days. If I become emotionally vested in a character I can be moved to tears when that character dies, mourns or loves. But a still photograph is just that: still. There is not enough time in the viewing of a still image for me to be moved to tears. Any emotions evoked by a photograph are evoked very quickly and then remain static.

Jonathan

I have had tears triggered by still photos, but not really the photos themselves. Example: an online friend from a pilot forum I also participate in has a small daughter, just over three years old now, who had a malignant brain tumor removed in 2010, found when she was just 18 months. Just a few years back this would have been 100% terminal but now her prognosis for full recovery and a normal life was good, and they thought it was in remission. It just came back. She had surgery today. She did very well with the surgery but no word yet on results, prognosis, etc. except that whatever the surgeon found she will probably need more radiation; they knew that going in. Seeing her photo on Facebook today definitely got me misty eyed, but it was all to do with what I knew of the story, not the photo itself so much.

I think that's probably it. A still photo can be beautiful, ugly, moving, but in and of itself rarely tells enough of the story to move to tears. W. Eugene Smith's Minamata series could do it, but again not a single image in isolation without knowing the story.

A very good photograph dosent make you cry like a book or film because it is the cry. Like the scream painting that has just sold for so much, it may have a scream on the canvas but the painting itself is the real scream.

Could I ever cry over a photograph? Maybe if it did a painfully honest and realistic job of portraying a real-life horrific event against humanity... or maybe if I sold a photo for a million dollars... yeah the latter would surely make me cry.

I want to, but can't. I agree with what jcoldslabs/Jonathan wrote.

Irving Penn has gotten to me a couple of times this way. Otherwise...no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dakotah Jackson

Every time I have to fill up the 36 gallon fuel tank on the pickup. O'for the days of 33.9 cents a gallon gas again.

---

You'd be crying alot here then. We are almost at 9$/gallon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dakotah Jackson

Every time I have to fill up the 36 gallon fuel tank on the pickup. O'for the days of 33.9 cents a gallon gas again.

---

& 110 octane

I teach photography at the university level. One of my favorite classes to teach is the introductory course in either film or digital photography. On the first day of class, when we go over the syllabus and I explain the arc of progress they will experience during the course, I tell them that about 20% of the class will do final projects that will move us to tears. They all laugh when I tell them that, but I reassure them that it will indeed happen and I make them a bet that it will.

During their final presentations, which are a 10 image essay that revolves around a single subject or theme. I push them to address ideas that tell us about them as a person, to explore what they really think and what they deeply care about.

Every term...and seriously I mean EVERY term, there are at least 4-5 students that move the entire class, myself included, to tears.

It is a wonderful thing to see these students grow and explore photography in a way that they were totally unprepared for. The first class to me represents the opportunity for them to set the stage for the type of photographer they want to be. I am very satisfied when they push themselves to the emotional edge and bring to the class images that are able to express their feelings and emotions.

I encourage this for those who have not cried when looking at photographs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dakotah Jackson

Every time I have to fill up the 36 gallon fuel tank on the pickup. O'for the days of 33.9 cents a gallon gas again.

---

On an unbelievably good day here, a liter of gas costs $2. Realistically, it's about $0.2-0.4 more. Even more on the high ways.

I think photographs have both an disadvantage/advantage when it comes to illiciting emotions.

Photographs physically reduce everything to a 2 dimensional piece of paper, so one's mind has to get around that impediment. A portrait of a deceased loved one can illicit emotions, but it isn't the photograph but rather the memory and sense of loss which the photograph triggers, and some photographs are better at triggering than others---it has nothing to do with craft---a faded and creased drugstore developed snapshot can be as powerful as a museum exhibition print.

Photographs are also (usually)trusted realistic representations and appreciation of genuine beauty is something that cuts across all cultures and will cause emotions to flow, although photography is often employed to the contrary creating illusions which cater to the animal, rather than intellictual appetite (advertising porn) which can stir strong enough emotions to buy a product, but isn't likely to draw any tears.

Photographs are perceived as honest, or not. I think this is has become a generational divide of sorts. Old tiers who come from a world where photographic proof was evidence of reality (so called "trick photograhy" being a curiousity and not taken seriously) versus the Photoshop generation where the "reality" is defined exclusively by someone else's imagination. Not wanting to start a controversy, but I don't think creatively Photoshopped compositions are likely to bring anyone to tears.

I think the last photographs which brought a tear to my eye was the one of the soldier's coffin with his dog beside it, and this-
http://www.priestsforlife.org/resour...on12weeks.html
My 2 cents anyway.

Only when I saw a photo of my grandfather taken on a British battle ship in WWII. I could have sworn I was looking in a mirror. I never got to meet him as he died of TB a year after the war.
A women cried when she saw one of my prints in a show in Japan. When she was a little girl, she used to stand by the stairs waiting for her dad to come out from his shift in the coal mine. He died in a massage explosion there in the 60's. So, photographs definately have the power to move one to tears. It was this image...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew O'Neill

... He died in a massage explosion there in the 60's.

---

I'll bet he had a smile on his face though ;)

Peter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Mounier

I'll bet he had a smile on his face though ;)

Peter

---

:D

Often, I even cry at super market openings.
Lynn

Never. But then I'm one cold SOB, not some freakin' girl.

All seriousness aside, all this ruminating about people crying at the sight of their work is just so much hyperbolic BS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew O'Neill

<snip>He died in a massage explosion...<snip>

---

Damned spell-check!! Or was that a Freudian slip? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heroique

Really just curious – do photographers here shed tears?
.
.
.
I mean the spontaneous, involuntary tears when seeing (experiencing) an exceptional print – portrait, still life, landscape, architecture.

---

Absolutely. That experience at my first Ansel Adams exhibition is what got me into this LF mess in the first place!

I guess I'm pretty easy -- it only takes three things to make me well up. A beautiful vision, well captured, and well printed. Doesn't happen often. OK, so maybe I'm not that easy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew O'Neill

...A women cried when she saw one of my prints in a show in Japan. When she was a little girl, she used to stand by the stairs waiting for her dad to come out from his shift in the coal mine. He died in a [massive] explosion there in the 60's. So, photographs definitely have the power to move one to tears. It was this image.

---

I thought this raised an interesting issue. Namely, when it comes to excellent photography or other arts, when is it important to distinguish between sentimental tears and aesthetic tears? It’s a kind of critical consideration. In the case above, maybe this Japanese woman was experiencing both. On one hand, the photo reminds her of her personal life (sentimental); on the other hand, the dramatic shaft of light climbing the steps may have produced in her a more impersonal reaction (aesthetic). It’s the difference between, say, a Thomas Kinkade and Ansel Adams. As for paintings such as MDM’s comment about Munch’s Scream, I’d say many expressionist paintings perform the same sort of double-duty. Think of Van Gogh’s moving expressionistic portrayals. They’re “about” the painter’s tormented, personal life – maybe even about yours – but we can also experience them (feel tears) in a more impersonal, detached way.

Oops! That should have read "massive" explosion!!! Freudian slip!! Where was my mind...

Heroique, it was more sentimental than anything else for this woman. She visited the gallery everyday just to look at that one print. At the end of the show, I gave the print to her.

Quote:

---

Never. But then I'm one cold SOB, not some freakin' girl.

All seriousness aside, all this ruminating about people crying at the sight of their work is just so much hyperbolic BS.

---

???

Do tears of boredom on this forum count?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heroique

Makes me curious if only “high” arts induce this aesthetic reaction, but not still photography.

---

I have witnessed people crying when viewing an exhibit of mine that was basically a documentary project. This was totally unexpected from my perspective, but the subject matter elicited very strong emotional memories for some viewers.

But there are many emotions besides crying. I thnk we have all witnessed people going "whoah" when viewing a photograph. That is evidence of eliciting a fairly strong emotional response.

For most of my work, I believe that I have failed if I do not elicit some emotional response in some viewers. I have created a list of guiding principles that I follow when photographing. #1 on the list: You must feel something when you take a photo; otherwise the persons viewing your photo will feel nothing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heroique

Makes me curious if only “high” arts induce this aesthetic reaction, but not still photography.

---

I also think that there are many commonalities between photography and music. For one, there are many examples of musicians who are technically brilliant, but fail to connect emotionally (musically) with the music. There are many examples on the reality TV shows like The Voice, and American Idol. Those musicians tend to get voted off pretty early and never win because they just sound sterile.

There are also many examples of photographers who are technically brilliant but the prints lack any emotion, so the viewers have nothing to connect to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Galli

Do tears of boredom on this forum count?

---

No...

My late father's best friend, a huge and hulking athletic man who was also a psychology prof....and a very avid fisherman and outdoorsman......told us once about an experience hiking into a distant arm of one of the Minnesota lakes. He arrived at his destination and broke through the trees near the edge of the water just as the sun rose and turned the dew drops on the leaves and grasses into glittering gems and the light barely danced across the ripples on the water. His next statement was, "The are some things that are so beautiful that all you can do is cry.".

Fortunately, I've experienced a few moments like that and even one or two that were inspired by images that I've seen.

Emotion can be a wonderful thing. Thank you God for my eyes!

Interesting question, and one I hadn't thought much on before. Like a few others said above, I can get teary over a movie or a song or a news story (yesterday's about the homeless schizophrenic man calling out for his father as he was being beaten to death by police comes to mind), but I can't recall ever crying over a photograph, at least not over one not of a loved one. Of course I have found some photographs to be very moving, and many of them are seared into my mind. For instance, I find Weston's last pictures to be powerful and poignant, but I wonder if I'd feel the same way if I didn't know so much about his life and about his sickness toward the end.

On a related note, if I could ever get anyone to weep over my photos it would make me very happy. :)

Here's a pretty melancholy set (put on some sad music and view it as a slide show):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/austing...7629261779075/

Images of pets/animals that have been horribly abused by their owners will make me cry. It really upsets me to see such things. I almost cried when I saw "War Horse" even though I knew it was just a movie.

My eyes become teary when I see typical HDR images

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by genotypewriter

My eyes become teary when I see typical HDR images

---

+1

I've put together a couple of slide shows for the funeral events / celebrations of life of deceased family members. (No shortages of photos going way back in this family)

Highly effective at getting everyone to shed some tears. The tears are in ya, and times like this you gotta let some out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by genotypewriter

my eyes become teary when i see typical hdr images

---

:D

Maybe what happens in michael slade's classes - by explaining that crying is an appropriate response, the students may have "given themselves permission" to cry - so they set themselves up for it. Next year don't say a thing and see if the same happens.

Had this thread started two days earlier, I would have made a point to get myself into the frame of mind to cry at the sight of the beautiful prints from the print exchange. I can cry. My wife caught me the other day, I was listening to Cat Stevens's Father and Son and I was struck with the realization that last time I really listened to that song I was in the other role...

Heroique hints it might be sentimental. Did Andrew O'Neill previsualize that his photograph would evoke the memory of a loved one when taking the picture of the doorway? If you sometimes think everyone is connected as I do, Andrew's mind could have drawn a connection between a soon to be opened door and expected joy of a homecoming intertwined with the realization it can never occur.

I suspect a number of us have cried after ebay auctions...

Not often enough.

Vietnam: the Unseen War documentary has a couple of photographs that got me. Although most of the images by themselves I don't know would have done it. I know one of them would have gotten me anyway just knowing it was a wartime photo, the others I need to know the context somehow.

I have cried each time my beloved Montreal Canadiens won the Stanley Cup, and I will cry when they win it again, one day.
I laughed hysterically, then cried, when my daughter was born, and I've been moved to have a lump in my throat at certain pieces of music and some artwork.

Only when my wife returns from a shopping trip. :)

More seriously, I don't remember ever crying over a photograph but I certainly have over books and movies.

Yesterday, I saw my first Karsh. I mean in person, as in his prints. 20 x 24 inches of beautiful portraits. Helen Keller, Muhammed Ali, Einstein, Picasso, Casals, O'Keefe, Shaw, Robert Frost, of course Winston Churchill and more. Yes, I cried. No one could notice, not bawling but I have known these photos for years in books and never seen the originals. They were INCREDIBLE. There were two prints of Churchill. One was 8x10 and I assume a contact print and there was also a 20x24inch enlargement. Fantastic to see the difference. The George Bernard Shaw portrait was I think the greatest composition to my eye, what do I know, but the most moving was Pablo Casals playing cello in an abbey. Einstein was there before you, you could look into his eyes. Hemingway had this sadness. Frost had this wit. Helen Keller had this expression of curiosity and adventure as she was reading brail, if I remember correctly. And then Churchill in 1941 before Pearl Harbor, defiant.

The exhibit is in Nashville, TN and runs for a month.

Art has moved me to tears on a number of occasions. Every time I listen to Gorecki's third symphony, for example. Photography, too. For example, Araki put out two books about his cat, Chiro. The first came out when the cat was young and healthy, the second centering on the late life, declining health, and death of the cat. I have trouble getting through the whole of the book. Lots of very moving documentary photography out there, too.

Today I cried, nearly anyway, when my new chinese bellows arrived and they were the wrong size. I sent pictures and the exact measurements they asked but they took the inside dimension of a square frame and used that as the as the outside dimension of one side of the bellows.You dont even need english to understand 392mm X 392mm. Beautifully made. Its the same in printing, sometimes you put so much work into making a beautiful print of a junk picture, and when you look back from a years perspective? But none of that has anything to do with art making you cry.

Well it happens every now and then. Not very often, but it does happen to me. I never had this happen on any of my own images though. I got close out of frustration, but that is hardly what you mean. Sometimes, an image just talks to me and it would remind me of something in my own life and become a symbol for some darker patches along the path. Strangely enough if it happens it is mostly something sad, with books on the contrary it can be something positive or negative, as long as it is a very strong feeling of a character who is believable to me and I bonded over the course of the book.

I've seen some mid-1800s postmortems of grieving mothers holding their dead child that are so heartbreaking to move me to tears. I also tear up when I see Eugene Smith's "Tomoko Uemura in Her Bath." I think it is probably the most moving photograph ever taken.

Commonality in subject...

I teared up when my dog died, didn't quite cry though, that was 12 years ago. I don't think I've cried since I was a kid. I don't know why, I'm not trying to be tough or macho but for some reason I just don't. I do get choked up though every once in a while. I don't think I'm a cold person, but when bad things happen I tend to get very focused on what needs to be done.

As for crying over a print or image, never.

No, don't cry over my own prints. Sometimes I see a movie and shed a tear.