The problem with previsualization...

[Mark Sawyer]

Not so much a question as an observation, which feedback (and related insults!) are of course welcome on...

I've noticed to myself that I often have some great idea for a wonderful photograph, but because I can do the Weston "previsualization" thing in my mind, I generally don't get around to ever actually shooting the negative. When I find the time to go photographing, I would rather go wander around in a forest or desert, looking for the undiscovered that will tell me something new instead of going through the technical exercise of making something I've already seen finished in my mind.

This may be the danger of working without an audience; why make a picture you've already for most practical purposes seen? Then again, the unmade images are a very different type of image from what I find myself making spontaneously- the unmade tend to be more "clever," or at least more of an attempt at being clever, with a defined and finite statement, (as often as not some inside joke), so maybe they're best left in my mind. Those made without the preconception seem more stream-of-conciousness and open-ended, and I can go back to them more often and find new things in them. But a few of the unmade have been bouncing around in the back of my brain for years now, and I'm building up quite a portfolio.

Probably not a unique experience among photographers...

[paulr]

Among the people who would agree with you are Ansel Adams and Edward Weston, who late in their lives admitted that they hardly ever pre-visualized anything, at least in the textbook sense.

For what it's worth, I agree too. I'm much more interested in making photographs that I don't already know how to make.

[tim atherton]

if you "pre-visualize" the photograph, then at what point do you actually visualize it?

[Steve Sherman]

Great observation Mark, for me the pursuit and mystery of the unknown is always greater than the known.

[paulr]

"if you "pre-visualize" the photograph, then at what point do you actually visualize it?"

immediately before post-visualization.

[Daniel Morgan]

If I remember correctly from reading the Ansel Adams books, when he talked about pre-visualization he wasn't talking about a composition which he would then go and hunt for, but rather he was thinking about the way the final image he saw on the ground glass would look when it was finally printed. In other words, pre-visualization was about what he wanted the final image to convey and the technical mastery that it took to take that image in his mind, release the shutter, develop, and print.

But talking about pre-visualization in the other sense...

At my highschool seniors have the option to drop some classes their second term to do an independant project. For my project I did a series of 4 30x40 prints of teachers that were somehow technically modified to incorporate their passions. I had been pre-visualizing the final images for over a year when it came time to actually doing it, and when I was finally done it was one of the most satisfying things I had ever completed. Often as artists we all visualize what we want our art to look like, but do to lack of technical skill are unable to achieve the same image that we see in our heads. I think that the whole value of pre-visualization is that it forces us to strive for a certain technical mastery that we don't quite get if we are always satisfied with what we simply "discover." I know that personally, I want to strive to create any image that I pre-visualize so that I am in no way limited.

But thats just me. :)

[Jim Reed]

A previsualized photo or image is much like an artistic itch that just has not been scratched yet. There is no rush. Often, over the years, the concept will change somewhat, and even when you set out to make the image you will improve, improvise and actually end up with a result that will give you a life-time of satisfaction far beyond your original previsualization. But there is no risk of failure to put it off for a while, even though that may trouble you if you think that may be what you are avoiding. To put it in another way, previsualizing a lovely evening with a beautiful woman can not begin to compare with an actual evening with a lovely woman, even if it does not turn out the way you previsualized.

[Daniel Morgan]

Wayyyyy off topic but I just have to know....

Jim Reed, are you Jim Reed the printer?
If so I helped you move into your new apartment with Cal... just thought it would be funny if you were the same person.

Sorry for posting a personal question like that.

[Alan Davenport]

IMO, "previsualization" is something that usually happens when a photographer sees his/her negatives and asks, "How the heck am I going to get this onto paper?"

[Mark Sawyer]

"if you "pre-visualize" the photograph, then at what point do you actually visualize it?"
immediately before post-visualization. --paulr

I suspect the approach to photography could argueably be divided into "pre-visualization" and "post-rationalization." And I suspect we all do a bit of both, making the arguement rhetorical...

It strikes me as one of my own little odd eccentricities that while I'm happy never making some of these previsualized images, a couple of time I've gone out and found a spontaneous image that spoke to me, shot it, and when it didn't turn out for some reason, (wind motion in the trees, missed a corner with lens coverage), I was fairly frustrated until I went back and did it right. That's the itch I had to scratch, I suppose... (Light and weather aside, one of the joys of photography is that we sometimes get "do-overs.")

"...for me the pursuit and mystery of the unknown is always greater than the known." --Steve Sherman

I think (not quite sure) for me it's as though personal photography needs an element of exploration. It seems more satisfying to search for meanings and answers rather than go out with the answers already in mind. Now if I could just figure out what the questions are...

[Steve J Murray]

I agree with Daniel. For me pre visualization is simply looking into the ground glass and in my head seeing that image as a print on the wall, mounted, matted and framed. If it still looks good, I take the picture.

Otherwise, I'm like you, wandering around waiting for interesting things to "pop out" at me. To do that I recognize I have to be in a totally receptive state: meditative or trance-like to be really open and receptive to the visual.

[Paul Fitzgerald]

Hi there,

Jim,

"But there is no risk of failure to put it off for a while,"

Unless they tear the building down, move the light-house, forest fires, the ship sinks. Strike while the iron is hot and whenever the muse decends. Woulda, coulda, shoulda and usta are words I don't like, hate using them. I also hate it when life just gets in the way, oh well.

Smile.

[Eric Biggerstaff]

I think as humans we pretty much "pre-visualize" or "visualize" everything we do.

Business people mentally prepare for meetings by trying to guess what questions may be asked and preparing for them. Before a race, runners will visualize the start and sprint, race care drivers visualize the track before they drive, rockclimbers look ahead on the route and visualize moves they believe will need to be made in order to be successful. And as artist, we have some idea of what we want to try and capture in an image.

Have you ever day dreamed - then you have done visualization.

As artist we just try to put some formal theroy around what we do naturally. To be sure, Adams beleived that he would see the final print as he composed on the ground glass, but his idea of how an image should be printed changed over time (look at early and late prints of Moonrise). The practice of the visualization provided him a starting point for his creative response, then he could take that basic idea and work it anyway he wanted.

I think visualization doesn't have to mean that a picture should be made. For me, it is a way to get myself into the rytham of making images. It prepares me to go and be creative. It opens my mind up to the creative possibilities around me. I often visualize images that I don't make, but this is just a way to prep my mind for future work.

The most important thing is to respond, to take the time to set the camera up and make an image. I try hard not to walk past things that catch my eye without at least using my little composing card to play with the possibilites that may exist. I may not take it, but I want to respond to it.

OK, this is wandering a bit so I will stop.

Have a great day.

[Brian Ellis]

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your message but I don't think you (and several of the people who responded) understand "previsualization" as Adams practiced it (for all of his life, I don't ever remember reading anything in which he said he hardly ever previsualized anything and I don't remember reading anything in which Weston used the term "previsualization" to describe his method of working though my memory could be wrong on both points). But regardless of what either of them said, "previsualization" has nothing to do with how you go about finding your subject matter, it has everything to do with what happens after you find the subject matter.

The idea of previsualizing is simply to do what you can at the exposure and development stages to obtain a negative that will allow you to make the print that you want to make. That might involve the use of filters to separate tones or darken a sky, it might involve overexposure to make a high key image, it might involve use of a slow shutter speed to give a flowing effect to moving water, it might involve reducing exposure to make dark areas print black or overdevelopment to help make gray areas print white, it might be something as simple as seeing a scene with little contrast that you want to print with higher contrast and taking the steps necessary to make a negative that will allow you to do that. "Previsualization" as Adams practiced and taught it is just a matter of having some idea of what you want the print to look like at the time you're making the photograph and then taking whatever steps you can at the time of exposure and development to help you make that print.

The only alternatives I can think of to practicing some form of "previsualization" are to either pay no attention at all to exposure and development or to expose and develop everything exactly the same way every time so that you always obtain a "normal" negative regardless of the characteristics of the particular subject. Neither of these methods sounds very appealing.

[paulr]

"I suspect the approach to photography could argueably be divided into "pre-visualization" and "post-rationalization.""

I'd like to see "post-rationalization" added to the official lexicon.

[paulr]

"The idea of previsualizing is simply to do what you can at the exposure and development stages to obtain a negative that will allow you to make the print that you want to make."

Early on, Ansel talked about visualization almost religiously, and in very specific terms. He laid out an ethic of precisely visualizing every nuance of the final print before he made any exposure. This idea sounded so good to other photographers that the idea became an accepted one. Weston did buy into it ... in fact, I think we can thank him for coining "pre-visualization" ... plain old visualization was good enough for Ansel.

Anyway, later in life, both photogaphers admitted that they hardly ever stuck to the visualization ethos, at least not to the degree that they used to talk about. They admitted to using a more stream of consciousness approach, and being much more open to happy accident, and to changing their ideas about what a print should look like over time. Which isn't to say that they didn't visualize anything ... just that they were hardly ever as strict and precise as they used to say they were.

I'm looking for the sources of this ... I think weston wrote it in one of his essays, and Ansel in a letter to someone.

[Paddy Quinn]

""Previsualization" as Adams practiced and taught it is just a matter of
having some idea of what you want the print to look like at the time
you're making the photograph and then taking whatever steps you can at
the time of exposure and development to help you make that print."

Or as any sensible person would call it, without all the waffle: visualising... what you want the printing to look like.

As a certain English photographer once said about Adams and his marketing of the pseudo-mystical/pseudo-scientific concept of "previsualisation" - I like to pre-spread my marmalade on my toast before I actually go ahead and spread it on.

You either visualise something ("to see or form a mental image of; to envisage") or you don't. Adding the "pre" and trying to make it into something especially artistic or creative is pure humbug.

[Mark Sawyer]

"Previsualization" was definitely a Weston thing; according to Newhall: "The most important part of Edward Weston's approach was that the photographer should previsualize the final print before making the exposure." (pg.124, "The History of Photography.") It's a pretty basic concept,though; I'd be surprised if Adams and the rest of us hadn't also taken it up. I'm sure painters have been "previsualizing" their works for thousands of years, and as Eric pointed out, it's hardly limited to the art world. I think Weston just recognized it and coined a nice term for it.

I think we all do it as we set up a camera; by then we're fairly committed to the process. And perhaps Weston confined it to just putting the tones where he wanted. But I think most of us do in a more general way just recognizing potential images and finishing them in our minds as we walk around, or having ideas come to us as we lie in bed at night or see something completely unrelated that sparks a thought. And if the image is strong enough or somehow amuses us enough, we keep thinking about it til we've previsualized a print. (Maybe the term "preconception" would fit better here.)

My original point was just an observation that I sometimes do that, but the images I come up with that way generally don't fit my approach to photography and I don't ever (so far) actually go out and make those images. Not an important issue, but one I think about. And allowing for little twists, one many of us probably share. Maybe we never make our best photographs except in our minds.

[Mark Sawyer]

"I'm looking for the sources of this ... I think Weston wrote it in one of his essays, and Ansel in a letter to someone." --paulr

This from Weston's 1922 essay "Random Notes on Photography," printed in Newhall's "Photography: Essays and Images"

"I see my finished platinum print on the ground glass in all its desired qualities, before my exposure..."

"As a certain English photographer once said about Adams and his marketing of the pseudo-mystical/pseudo-scientific concept of "previsualisation" - I like to pre-spread my marmalade on my toast before I actually go ahead and spread it on. " --Paddy Quinn,

For me, developing the 8x10 negatives is always a critical part of the process, and I tend them very carefully through the chemicals. As I'm pouring the chemicals into the trays, getting ready to tend my negatives, I like to think they'll be great works of art. But in my heart, I know I'm only pre-tending...

Sorry...

[paulr]

"This from Weston's 1922 essay "Random Notes on Photography,""

i'm looking for the later essay where he takes it all back!

[dan nguyen]

very good read and funny...
errr... is this could be previsualisation...?

"...tripod, camera on tripod, dark cloth, light meter, tilt, shift..etc"

and then..

".. oh nice... this way better... wait wait.. this is even better... to the right...a bit lower... that's right.. but now where the nice light?..... ouch... film holder... click it anyway..."

3 days later...

GRRRRRR... forgot to pull out the dark slide..

:-)

[Brian Ellis]

I surrender, my mistake. It was in fact Weston, not Adams, who came up with the term "previsualization" (and Weston obviously did use that term to describe his working method). But by damn everything else I said was 100% right. : - )

[Kirk Gittings]

The real problem, in my humble opinion, is "devisualization" (short for desensitized visualization) or the lack of creative visualization brought on by the over production of low quality images and lack of critical visual thinking. One might think, when confronted with a powerful view, why bring another image into the world-there are too many now.

[Mark Sawyer]

Geez, Kirk, now you've got me started...

Previsualization: Seeing the finished print in you're mind before making the exposure.

Devisualization: The lack of creative visualization brought on by the over production of low quality images and lack of critical visual thinking.

Revisualization: Hunting for Ansel's tripod holes.

Oui-visualization: Hunting for Atget's tripod holes. (Also known as "Gay Paree-visualization.)

Geevisualization: Mindlessly making an image of something because "gee, it sure looks pretty..."

Hee-hee-hee-visualization: Making visual jokes or puns in a photograph.

Then there's Seevisualization, but that's getting redundant...

This is just going to ruin my thought process for the next hour...

[Mark Sawyer]

ABC-visualization: Following a formula in your composition and technique

A-P-U-G-visualization: Seeing the finished image as a web-site image rather than a fine print.

Mevisualization: Creating a photograph for ego-driven purposes.

Bevisualization: The zen approach to photography.

Sorry, I'll stop now.

Last month I kinda rushed the making of one exposure because, well, you know... Peevisualization...

[Kirk Gittings]

and in the end we hold a mirror up to a mirror and we have a reflection of a reflection of a reflection of a .....

Images and visualization are like that. we visualize an image and that image is reflected consciously or not in our visualization of the next image and so on and so on. If I had not done so much acid in the 60's I could probably trace back an evolving visualization>image>visualization>image etc . etc. like a creative river through my life. In the end the dude abides.

[paulr]

"Revisualization: Hunting for Ansel's tripod holes."

of course, this is already being supplanted by "re-revisualization" ... doing a rephotographic survey wasn't enough for Mark Klett, he's gone back again to re-rephotograph it.

[Mark Sawyer]

"Of course, this is already being supplanted by "re-revisualization" ... doing a rephotographic survey wasn't enough for Mark Klett, he's gone back again to re-rephotograph it."

Hmmm. Maybe I should go photograph the places he re-rephotographed. Nah... If I got a good image, you guys would just go copy me.

[paulr]

i'm already planning on copying you. it's called pre-re-re-re-visualisation.