Personal bias makes most prints wonderful despite flaws because you were there at the taking and have an emotional connection to that moment in time. But show the print to a few different people , some will love it and some will not like it and find the faults. Who are you editing for?
The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
http://www.searing.photography
I believe (at least with analog prints) editing refers to selecting which negatives to print and how to crop them.Originally Posted by esearing
I seem to have the opposite problem with my personal bias. By the time I get to the contact sheet stage nothing seems acceptable anymore. How many prints do you actually get from the number of your negatives that you look through?
The Viewfinder is the Soul of the Camera
If you don't believe it, look into an 8x10 viewfinder!
Dan
((No strikethrough formatting here.)) So: after making your contacts, put everything away for... weeks? months? and then dig out your images, seen as images, free from your memories of the picture-taking context, or what you fantasized about the image when releasing the shutter.
Once you find alternative ways to print that photo you dislike printed straight you may find you like it more . Some images are enhanced with a bit of color change or strategic blurs or layered with other images. A boring tree image can come to life as a salt print. But if your bias is against your own work then you need a different hobby or at least a different subject.
The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
http://www.searing.photography
I print then pin on wall
The one to the left, my Avatar, I suddenly inverted after a year
Much better
Tin Can
nah not lazy I think that's what most people do, that's why they have contact sheet set up for an 8x10 print
Garry Winograd used to wait a long time before he developed any of his film, 6?months from what I remember ...
he said something similar to what Bernard_L said .. about removing the emotional state of making the photograph gives a clearer view.
I think when he died there were 10,000 rolls of film left to develop.
Henry Wessel would wait, too. Not sure if he proofed and printed everything he shot right away, but would wait maybe a year before going back and choosing the selects. I'd have to go back to his SFMoMA interview where he talks about it to be accurate.nah not lazy I think that's what most people do, that's why they have contact sheet set up for an 8x10 print
Garry Winograd used to wait a long time before he developed any of his film, 6?months from what I remember ...
he said something similar to what Bernard_L said .. about removing the emotional state of making the photograph gives a clearer view.
I think when he died there were 10,000 rolls of film left to develop.
I'm not advocating this for all, but I no longer print anything unless I have some final intention for the print. Sometimes I print small prints to put in a folio box (empty paper box) that I like to look through every once in a while, sometimes larger to put on the walls in our house. I am scheduled for a "one-man show" at our small local art gallery in March, so I will print for that.
To ride the coattails of what some others here are saying, I had a professor in grad school and we once asked him how he did research (math, so proofs of new results). He said that he'd work on something until he thought he had a result. He then demoed by grabbing some papers on his desk, stacking them, opening the bottom drawer of his desk, and throwing them in there. "I put it in here, and take it out in a month or so to see if it still makes sense. If so, I might have something!"
If I print, not scan
i am excited to make a good print
asap
then study it for years
Tin Can
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks