Boring Photographs

[John Kasaian]

Boring though some photographs may be, they are nothing when compared to boring photographers.

Or boring or bored Art critics.
Perhaps this gets down to the nitty gritty?

[Corran]

Boring photographs hopefully are made while experimenting, learning, and practicing both craft and vision. I said this in another thread just recently, but my experience as a musician ingrained in me the need for constant practice. If you practice enough, you are ready for the performance - just like if you practice making photographs, you should be ready to photograph in varying light, won't have to figure out your equipment, and overall should have a greater chance of success.

Also, on the subject of this forum, I wish that constructive criticism would be offered more often. Personally I think the image sharing subfora should instead have the warning that "if you don't want to receive critique, please note that or don't post." Or something to that effect, that's not great wording obviously.

There's of course the issue of individual opinion. The discussion of group consensus earlier is interesting.

To bring in an example - I made this photograph a few days ago. Not sure what to think of it...I was attracted to the light shining through the grass and the sinuous tree limbs connecting two sides of an empty creek bed - perhaps an analogy to the tenuous connection between two people or viewpoints over the chasm of change (this creek constantly flows in and out as Buford Dam releases water down the Chattahoochee). This is actually highly relevant to a personal situation in my life right now and while it might sound like Artist Statement BS, I actually was thinking about it while shooting this:



Is it a boring photograph? Maybe. Does that change with my description? I have no idea.

[Tin Can]

Bryan especially

people thinking boring everything

some never Bored

full stop

[John Kasaian]

Is calling a photograph boring really legit criticism?
I don't think so.
A critic may have a valuable comment on something relevant to the process, or perhaps the subject (there never seems to be a dramatic cloud in the sky when I'm shooting!) and the seriously presented cliche. If a critic comments on something that she finds personally boring, she should state it that way.
Or at least that's what I think.
Right now, any way
I could change my mind.

Of course, when I look at a photograph my impressions tend to be colored by the back story (He carried a 5x7 way up to the top of that ridge? He's lucky he didn't get swept over the falls! That city park is a meth dealer's shooting gallery, especially at night.) That's not boring, but then it isn't relevant to what makes a good photograph either.

[h2oman]

OK, Bryan, I'll bite!

Boring photographs hopefully are made while experimenting, learning, and practicing both craft and vision. I said this in another thread just recently, but my experience as a musician ingrained in me the need for constant practice. If you practice enough, you are ready for the performance - just like if you practice making photographs, you should be ready to photograph in varying light, won't have to figure out your equipment, and overall should have a greater chance of success.

Agreed. Now the question is, does one want their audience present for all the practices, as well as the performance?

Also, on the subject of this forum, I wish that constructive criticism would be offered more often. Personally I think the image sharing subfora should instead have the warning that "if you don't want to receive critique, please note that or don't post." Or something to that effect, that's not great wording obviously.

I believe I started a thread once for images with critique explicitly requested. Maybe we need a specific critique forum? The default on the current image fora (is that the plural of forum?) is no critique unless asked for. However, I would suggest that one needs to be prepared for criticism, even of what we think is our best work.

To bring in an example - I made this photograph a few days ago. Not sure what to think of it...

If we, as the photographer, don't find our own image compelling, others likely won't either, especially non-photographers!

Is it a boring photograph? Maybe. Does that change with my description? I have no idea.

I would say that a description of something about a photograph (including technical details) might be interesting, but adds nothing to the value of the photograph itself. On the other hand, a written description of a body of work can add value to the photographs in that body, in some cases.

I state nothing above as fact, merely my opinion.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I just drove through Boring Oregon today. I should have taken my camera!

[Corran]

Thanks for responding, and getting me to think more about some things, h2oman.

Agreed. Now the question is, does one want their audience present for all the practices, as well as the performance?

Well, I had combined throughout my time as a music student over 10 years of private study with various teachers - 4 in flute, 4 in composition, and various other mentors in general music. I messed up plenty during private study, and would show compositions that definitely never made it past the draft stage. Photographically, I would put forth that the "performance" in question is a gallery show or other public display. On the forum I think it can be helpful to hear what others think, just as one would get opinions and thoughts while trying things by showing work to others, like class critiques. Now obviously here, with relative anonymity for many and most not being "degree'd," it might be of limited use, but I have seen many students make thoughtful comments on others' work in critiques, so even random anonymous folks here might make interesting observations. There is also a nice mix of professionals and teachers here, which is great!

I believe I started a thread once for images with critique explicitly requested. Maybe we need a specific critique forum?

Agreed! Though it would dilute the already split "Image Sharing" area. That's why I think that should be the default, personally. Or just a thread, which it seems like you've done. I'll have to look for that.

If we, as the photographer, don't find our own image compelling, others likely won't either, especially non-photographers!

With new photos I personally take some time to decide if it's something worth the time. Sometimes I go all the way to printing it and then I decide, maybe not. For me anyway, my posting of images here are usually done soon after developing and scanning, while I consider the results. For the image in question, the very topic of this thread was in my mind when I saw the scan, before I even saw the thread, because at face-value it's just a fairly innocuous scene. But I did have some "deeper thoughts" on it as I described, which got my gears turning thinking about all of this, and then prompted me to reply here.

On the other hand, a written description of a body of work can add value to the photographs in that body, in some cases.

Yes! Though a body of work, at least in my case, usually evolves and focuses over time. Sharing one or two images at a time from a large body of work made over time can then make things not very cohesive, and perhaps drastically inhibit what the whole would show the viewer. Or you shoot for months/years and show no one anything until it's finished! A lot of images work fine by themselves but sometimes one-off images just don't work without the whole.

BTW, the above is not meant to be adversarial, just writing down some more thoughts on this topic...thanks for the thought-provoking responses here.

Also, regarding the whole topic of "boring," I do know many people think certain genres of photography are never, ever interesting. 0%. I know some folks think no one should ever take another f/64-style landscape again. I'm not in agreement there (obviously)! On the flip side, I find most portraiture to be fairly boring. I have a friend who shoots nothing but, and it just doesn't do anything for me...usually. But they're getting recognition and a serious following, and they have a very identifiable style and such. It's just not interesting to me.

[AuditorOne]

If you want to see boring, look at Rhein II.

It ticks all the boxes.

It is absolutely put-you-to-sleep boring.

It is so boring it made a ton of money.

I feel sorry for Andreas Gursky.

[jnantz]

Is calling a photograph boring really legit criticism?

it is to some ...
but to others maybe not

maybe it depends on what is said after " this is so boring" ...

[Serge S]

Wow boring is an interesting topic for many of us
How about what is not boring to me...someone with something to say in his or her work.., someone who can communicate their vision.

Some can do this and some cannot