Speaking only of my own work, I've found as I've gotten older that when I'm dissatisfied with an image the root cause, when you dig down deep, has nothing to do with technique.
--Darin
Speaking only of my own work, I've found as I've gotten older that when I'm dissatisfied with an image the root cause, when you dig down deep, has nothing to do with technique.
--Darin
Sure field work is a never ending learning experience. There is a vast range of subjects and light situations. After reviewing film one ought to learn something each time so that one gradually improves. Try shooting in dim sub EV10 lighting conditions and one is likely to have mediocre exposures some of the time because deciding where to set exposure is simply very difficult if one does not bracket like this person. So yeah I get a transparency back and its dark or blown out then try to recall why I decided to set an aperture where I did so I don't repeat poor calculations and guesses.
Framing upsidedown images is never ideal. Until I get a color transparency back on my light table, I really don't have great confidence of the expected value of an image. Having done a lot of field work over many years allows me to hone in on where to place my tripod and how to set it up so I tend to get it right without being surprised after my film returns from development. But there is only so much a ground glass is good for and that becomes more the case when trying to evaluate exceptional subjects.
What I rarely tend to do as an old guy now is if location conditions and light is good, is waste my time taking mediocre images that I'll later decide I need to return again for. I've been there long ago and learned what I need to do when I'm up to bat and the pressure is on.
Are you ever completely satisfied with an image?
No.
Yes. I've made a number of photographs that I'm completely satisfied with. Really. They do what I intended. Really.Originally Posted by Leigh
I've gone back to work on a couple, thinking that I should want to do that because so many other people seem to, only to find that I can't do any better even given all I've learned in the mean time. I can do different, but not really better.
That said, I've got far more photographs that I think I could do better with. This largely comes down to a single issue -- I can't solve a problem I can't define. If I don't know what I really want from a photograph at capture time, it's likely that the resulting photograph won't really do what I want. Ansel's fabled "sharp photograph of a fuzzy concept" and all that.
And this more than any other issue defines my "hit rate". The ones that I made without a solid vision of what I wanted are the ones that usually end up in the trash in the end. Sad but true.
Bruce Watson
Some turn out better than expected, because sometimes, we are in just the right place at the right time, and get a rare "gift". We can never predict these lucky accidents, but our previous training and practice makes them possible. Were it not for this element of uncertainty, it wouldn't be much fun and we'd find something else to do.
Last edited by Ken Lee; 6-Sep-2011 at 14:35.
Yes, I think I can safely say that I am completely satisfied with any of the images that I have printed in editions and sold. There are others that I know there is an amazing image to be had but I just can't seem to be at the spot at the right time to get the negative required.
I have been contemplating this for sometime now - why I am seldom satisfied with my finished prints. Well, let me rephrase - seldom ecstatic with my finished prints.
I have wondered if it is mostly the lack of emotional impact associated with the final print, compared to the moments surrounding the; finding of the scene, setting up the camera, composing on the ground-glass, and tripping the shutter.
There is a certain feeling of elation I get during those moments of actually photographing a subject that is never felt as I process and print.
But, I have noticed that, when I come back to those prints weeks, or months later, I find them far more pleasing to my eyes than I did when I first printed them.
I think it must have something to do with the lingering emotional impact that the original scene/subject had on me, that the print just can't live up to, until the lingering emotional impact has dissipated.
I think many of us will agree that we are often more emotionally moved by the photographs of others than we are of our own. And I can't help but think that the reason is - our prints just can't live up to what we felt as we photographed the actual scene/subject. But to the people looking at our images, well, they were not there as we were tripping the shutter, so they don't know the "magic" we felt at that moment.
But...I barely graduated high school and never went to college, so I wouldn't advise anyone to put to much stock in what I just said
There's a reason I have what must be thousands of negatives (incl. other formats) and only a little over 50 items up on the web. And of those, about half are 'finished'.
Am I satisfied with the 'finished' ones? At times.
But that's entirely me. I'm a perfectionist and a harsh self-critic. In a more magnanimous sense, I feel like I'm constantly on the journey.
I often find myself in that situation.
I think if there were an MFA or someone with better artistic sense than I behind the lens, perhaps the images would appear.
Unfortunately I'm an engineer, not an artist, so they remain hidden.
- Leigh
If you believe you can, or you believe you can't... you're right.
I took a set of photos of my teenage daughter the other day, and showed her the contact sheets. I thought they looked pretty good, but she said of the closeup, "I HATE that shot!"
Oh, well, if at first you don't succeed...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks