Boring Photographs

[John Kasaian]

What makes a photograph boring?
I've heard the term used in critiquing photographs so I was wondering what is that makes photograph boring? Are there rules to follow to make boring photographs and by therefore should be avoided so as not to make boring photographs?

[ic-racer]

What makes a photograph boring?
I've heard the term used in critiquing photographs so I was wondering what is that makes photograph boring? Are there rules to follow to make boring photographs and by therefore should be avoided so as not to make boring photographs?

I clicked on this thread right away because I make boring photographs. I try to avoid making images of people smiling and dancing around, or images that look like "stock photography" or anything that a layperson might want.

[Alan Gales]

My definition is that a boring photograph is just there. It's not really bad but it's not good either. You take a look at it and it just doesn't grab you. We all make them.

I'd rather make bad photographs. At least when you make bad photographs it was either a mistake or you tried something different that just didn't work. Boring is the kiss of death! ;)

[Toyo]

Boredom - like beauty - is in the eye of the beholder.
One man's meat is another man's poison.
It is easy to avoid being bored by an image if we ask ourselves what do we think the author intended.
Trying to understand the author's point of view is a good start
T

[Michael E]

It is easy to avoid being bored by an image if we ask ourselves what do we think the author intended.


I, for example, get easily bored if I come to the understanding that the author was just trying to make a pretty picture.

[Robert Brazile]

I guess I think of "boring", as a negative attribute rather than as a positive one; that is, boring represents a lack of something. So just as "cold" is simply a relative lack of heat, "boring" is simply a lack of interesting elements.

If you wish to make a boring photograph, ensure that there is nothing interesting in it. And that surely lies in the eye of the beholder, as Toyo said a couple different ways. While you could attempt to have a boring composition, boring light, or boring tones or colo[u]rs, somebody else may find that as somehow restful. :-)

For myself, I often find the photos of foliage that people take in the woods boring. I like being in the woods. I like foliage. And yet, without some kind of structure, order, or organizing principle to the subject, I just find myself looking at a mass of branches and limbs and wondering what the point was. But that probably says more about me than it does about the photographer! And every now and then, rarely, one of these photos grabs me and I quite like it. Probably some kind of resonant frequency between a particular set of entwined branches and my brain, who knows?

Robert

[Jim Galli]

Since photography is totally subjective, it is impossible to make a photograph that is not boring. I just made a photograph of a technical problem, a cable that has improper clearance between 2 housings in order to show the folks who made the article, why it does not work. Totally and irrevocably boring, except to the 2 people to whom it's better than a thousand words.

[Ted R]

It depends, the picture is at least two things, the subject and the way it is photographed. These produce a response in the viewer.

Perhaps there are boring subjects?

Perhaps there are photographic approaches which might create a boring image when the subject itself is not?

Perhaps there are no boring pictures but only bored viewers?

[faberryman]

Since photography is totally subjective, it is impossible to make a photograph that is not boring.
Although all art (including photography) is subjective, nevertheless there is very often a consensus about a work's value, acknowledging that there will always be outliers, who think the work in question is either terrible or great. The same can be said with respect to the quality of boring. The outliers generally carry the burden of proof as to why the consensus is wrong.

[JeffBradford]

A viewer may be bored by a photo, but a photo is not intrinsically boring.

A photo of an unremarkable subject from a normal or common point of view may not excite many viewers. However, there are still technical aspects such as focus, exposure, and composition, as well as the existential construct of context. Why was the photo taken? How or why was this subject chosen? What is the interaction or juxtaposition? What isn't in the photo? What is this photo the antithesis of?

On the other hand, I find most "snapshots" to be utterly boring.

[Steve Williams_812]

A viewer may be bored by a photo, but a photo is not intrinsically boring.

A photo of an unremarkable subject from a normal or common point of view may not excite many viewers. However, there are still technical aspects such as focus, exposure, and composition, as well as the existential construct of context. Why was the photo taken? How or why was this subject chosen? What is the interaction or juxtaposition? What isn't in the photo? What is this photo the antithesis of?

On the other hand, I find most "snapshots" to be utterly boring.

I agree that photos aren't intrinsically boring. Much depends on the viewer's experience, willingness and perception that makes an image boring or not. I remember looking at the work of Robert Adams and thinking, "Man this stuff is boring." But after I read more about his intention and thinking about what he was doing they were no longer boring. I know a lot of people, especially those focused solely on beauty, don't always feel they should have to work to understand an image. Or that it needs explanation. Just different bodies of work I guess.

I remember the first time I saw the work of the Starn Twins and how angry some of my traditional photography friends were at the "poor quality" of their printing or the fact that the prints had stains, creases, fingerprints, etc. But that was part of the work -- a rejection of all the rules and expectations we grew up with.

[h2oman]

Are there rules to follow to make boring photographs and by therefore should be avoided so as not to make boring photographs?

A boring photograph is easily made through a lack of intentionality in any aspect from subject, to composition and technical aspects, and ending with processing.

[jnantz]

hi john
it all has to do with audience
sometimes one can make something that
is extremely exciting, so exciting that
its hard to contain oneself but you show it to someone
who couldn't care less about foot arches, or silverware still lives or flowers
or a fauvist sunset or ... and he/she/they think it is the most boring thing they
have ever seen. they show you an inspired, extremely exciting photograph they made
showing a goeduck bivalve they have as a pet, that has its own instagram feed and you feel the same way ...

i like boring.

[esearing]

My taste in boring have changed over the years. I now find over saturated digital color images boring no matter how beautiful the subject I see, I forget. But show me a nice B&W slightly toned forest/creek/rocks scene with a bit of blur(bokeh) and I'll scan every inch of it. Long grand vistas of traditional Western USA parks are generally boring to me now - with a few exceptions by certain photographers or those rare moments when clouds form perfectly in the distance.

As far as taking boring images, take them mentally and analyze why they are boring, Then shift your position 3 feet and see if the juxtaposition becomes more interesting.

[Alan Gales]

Cat pictures? ;)

[Tin Can]

Great examples on BBC today.

http://www.bbc.com/news/in-pictures-42227931

[Bruce Barlow]

Cat pictures? ;)

+1

[Peter Lewin]

From our friend Google: "boring: synonyms: tedious, dull, monotonous, repetitive, unrelieved, unvaried, unimaginative, uneventful;"

So while boring photographs are definitely "in the eye of the beholder," those which are repetitive, unimaginative, or uneventful are probably the ones most people will call boring. For me, that tends to circle back to discussions we have had about images which we have seen many times before, or those where I say to myself, "Why did he or she even bother to post that?"

[faberryman]

"Why did he or she even bother to post that?"
I ask myself that a lot.

[DrTang]

From our friend Google: "boring: synonyms: tedious, dull, monotonous, repetitive, unrelieved, unvaried, unimaginative, uneventful;"

So while boring photographs are definitely "in the eye of the beholder," those which are repetitive, unimaginative, or uneventful are probably the ones most people will call boring.


and...google has it right... my eyes glaze over when I see yet another of the same thing... I can page thru Flickr's latest pix day by day and maybe.. maybe every third day I stop and see something interesting.. the rest are 'same ol - same ol' - ie boring

I think to only way to know great photography..is to spend a heck of a lot of time looking at not-great photography... then it becomes self evident even if you cannot explain why

[Jac@stafford.net]

Boring posts are those that claim everything is relative or in the eye of the beholder which only serve to neuter conversation.

[Peter Lewin]

Boring posts are those that claim everything is relative or in the eye of the beholder which only serve to neuter conversation.
But it isn't a case of neutering the conversation. I will be intentionally vague, and I think you will see why: I was looking at a recent post in one of our threads, and saw an image that I think fits the definition of boring very well: it was of a subject done a thousand times, I didn't see that it brought anything new to the "conversation" in that the lighting, tones, etc. were absolutely ordinary, and thought to myself "what a perfect example for our 'boring photographs' thread." But then I noticed another post praising the image I had just dismissed. So it really is in the eye of the beholder.

[faberryman]

But then I noticed another post praising the image I had just dismissed. So it really is in the eye of the beholder.
Sometimes the beholder is mistaken. The image may not have been praiseworthy.

[Jac@stafford.net]

[...] But then I noticed another post praising the image I had just dismissed. So it really is in the eye of the beholder.

My sympathy to both parties.

[jnantz]

not everyone is in the same place, so what one person thinks
isn't boring , another person thinks is boring ..
someone who just learned the sheeimphloog and hinge mechanisms or hyperfocal photography
or what a metaphor might be might make and post or display photoraphs of their newfound interests
while someone who has been doing photograph or lf photography for a long time
might display their newfound interests, PTPD portraits of 18yearsolds wearing stilletto heals ..
personally id rather see a metaphor or a visual pun i rarely thing they are boring
and if they are good, it leaves some people scratching their heads and others ROTFLTAO

BTW john
this thread is really boring.

[John Kasaian]

BTW john
this thread is really boring.

Sorry 'bout that!
OTOH, if a boring picture can be worth a thousand words, cannot a thousand words be boring as well? Hilaire Belloc seems to think so...or maybe he can make boring words rotflmao funny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdyL33jyc1o

[h2oman]

But it isn't a case of neutering the conversation. I will be intentionally vague, and I think you will see why: I was looking at a recent post in one of our threads, and saw an image that I think fits the definition of boring very well: it was of a subject done a thousand times, I didn't see that it brought anything new to the "conversation" in that the lighting, tones, etc. were absolutely ordinary, and thought to myself "what a perfect example for our 'boring photographs' thread." But then I noticed another post praising the image I had just dismissed. So it really is in the eye of the beholder.

There's a bit of a mutual admiration society around here that can explain some of that. That said, we all have the freedom to pass quickly by the images we find boring. :cool:

And, as someone else has implied, perhaps the mundane images make the special ones that much more so!

[jnantz]

Sorry 'bout that!
OTOH, if a boring picture can be worth a thousand words, cannot a thousand words be boring as well? Hilaire Belloc seems to think so...or maybe he can make boring words rotflmao funny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdyL33jyc1o

LOL what a bore :)

[Jim Jones]

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

[John Layton]

What Makes a Boring Photograph?
A photograph (or an image on my ground glass) which not only invites/compels my exploration within that image - but which also leaves me with a sense that this exploration would never be complete…would instead be forever evolving, and inviting/compelling me to explore further - is a photograph/image which I would not find boring.

All other photographs/images I find boring.

[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:

http://www.garrisaudiovisual.com/photosharing/bowmansisland-8854ss.jpg

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 :(

[Peter Lewin]

Several thoughts, largely triggered by Coran's post (which I thought raised excellent points) and H2oman's equally thoughtful response:
- Rather than critique a photo as "boring," one should ask the photographer why they made/posted the image. That implies that the viewer does in fact find the image boring, but gives the photographer the chance to explain why he/she feels it is not.
- I attend a monthly critique session where the basic rule is "show only what you feel is your best work." I think that is also a good rule for posting on the web, unless one specifically has questions about the way they handled an image and wants feedback on those questions.
- Related to my second comment, editing is a skill we need to develop. That suggests that we edit our own work, rather than post it all to get comments, in effect asking others to edit our work.

Again, just my personal take on things.

[Merg Ross]

Several thoughts, largely triggered by Coran's post (which I thought raised excellent points) and H2oman's equally thoughtful response:
- Rather than critique a photo as "boring," one should ask the photographer why they made/posted the image. That implies that the viewer does in fact find the image boring, but gives the photographer the chance to explain why he/she feels it is not.
- I attend a monthly critique session where the basic rule is "show only what you feel is your best work." I think that is also a good rule for posting on the web, unless one specifically has questions about the way they handled an image and wants feedback on those questions.
- Related to my second comment, editing is a skill we need to develop. That suggests that we edit our own work, rather than post it all to get comments, in effect asking others to edit our work.

Again, just my personal take on things.

Excellent!

[h2oman]

Wow boring is an interesting topic for many of us:)

That's because what really IS boring for many of us is lens choice, developer, trying out my new this or that, etc.

[Corran]

Rhein II.

I used to be in the camp that disliked Gursky and the rest of the Düsseldorf school. But now I am a fan. I realized images such as Rhein II are closer to color field paintings, at least in my opinion. Seeing that image at massive scale was also a very different experience. Attending an exhibit of Rothko paintings is what made the whole stylistic comparison click for me.

Is it a boring photograph? Well I guess it depends on one's criteria. It certainly does not follow convention with regard to subject/foreground/background. I would make an argument about the use of space and 4ths as a compositional tool. Whether or not it is/was "worth" $4 million is another question altogether! :)

[AuditorOne]

I used to be in the camp that disliked Gursky and the rest of the Düsseldorf school. But now I am a fan. I realized images such as Rhein II are closer to color field paintings, at least in my opinion. Seeing that image at massive scale was also a very different experience. Attending an exhibit of Rothko paintings is what made the whole stylistic comparison click for me...

I studied that photograph for months after that auction. I was sure at the time that I had to be missing something, but I never did see the worth in it. But, as you say, I have not seen the print in person and that can often make a difference. I have had the same happen with some of Ansel Adam's work. Moonrise Over Hernandez never clicked for me until I was able to view the actual print.

I do feel that some compositions I see here in the gallery are that way for me. Viewed on this computer screen they just do not seem very interesting. But if I could actually see the print itself I may feel different. This is why I don't feel critique threads are worthwhile. Unless you can actually base your critique on the print itself you will almost always be missing things.

I have some equally boring compositions made in the desert where I live. I obviously thought that there was something there worth photographing when I snapped the shutter, but I have never been able to find it in the prints. Maybe they just have not been large enough.

[Jac@stafford.net]

I studied that photograph for months after that auction. I was sure at the time that I had to be missing something, but I never did see the worth in it. [...]

I have some equally boring compositions made in the desert where I live.

What ya need to do is go into the hills over Hollywood, take a picture, then erase all signs of humankind from it.

[AuditorOne]

What ya need to do is go into the hills over Hollywood, take a picture, then erase all signs of humankind from it.

:D :D

So that's the secret to the Dusseldorf School! I wondered how that worked.

[neil poulsen]

Boring is a close relative of mundane, lacking interest or excitement. What will trigger this for me is a photograph that has obviously been done before. (Talk about boring.)

For example, AA did a photograph of a wood fence with grass/weeds at the base. At the time, this was probably quite original. But, it's been done so many times since, that such a photograph instantly strikes me as boring.

At the same time, I can get excited about this or that scene that may have been done before. I like to think that, if it's exciting to me, it can be exciting to someone else. But perhaps, boring is relative.

Another photographic characteristic that can strike me as boring is poor execution. A really excellent image can be ruined by poor contrast control. Good craftsmanship is important to photography.

With that said, let's talk about photographing sunsets . . .

[stefan dinu]

I could not resist:
welcome to boring M. Parr (https://viscultblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/parr-photo.jpg)

[Willie]

Camera club and check box scoring system photography.

[Leszek Vogt]

OMG, John. If I was jabbering on stage as this guy on the video, I believe there would have been full expectation of a shoe flying towards me....at any time.

Les

[Alan Gales]

Camera club and check box scoring system photography.

Is this what you are talking about? :)

https://psa-photo.org

[faberryman]

Maybe they just have not been large enough.
Yes. Go big or go home. I recently saw a call for entries where the minimum size was 20x24.

[AuditorOne]

Yes. Go big or go home. I recently saw a call for entries where the minimum size was 20x24.

I think the biggest I have lying around is 16x20. I'll wind the old Beseler up and give it a try though I may have to find some trays.

I'm pretty sure it will still be boring though. :D

[Gary Tarbert]

Camera club and check box scoring system photography. Yes and no , I judge at some of these clubs and have done for many years , I have found since digital the creativity has increased , Still a lot of cliches , I do not use check box scoring ,And clubs in Australia do not encourage it , i assume by check box you mean so many points for tech quality , so many for composition , so many for originality , So many for presentation type scoring The only comp i judged that had check box scoring was a pro one

[Drew Wiley]

Every piece of art that makes a self-conscious effort to be "different" and not boring, is boring.

[AuditorOne]

I hate to say this Drew but that sounds like one of those pat little statements that people like to throw around, but I'm not too certain how you can say that unless you have a premonition of every form of art that someone may try to create; different or otherwise. There is no universal rule that I am aware of that requires all new and different forms of art to be boring.

But I am open to being enlightened. (Of course that is probably another one of those pat little statements as well.)

[Jac@stafford.net]

Every piece of art that makes a self-conscious effort to be "different" and not boring, is boring.

An interesting statement for literature but it has nothing to do with visual art unless you will post any of your images.
.

[scheinfluger_77]

Great examples on BBC today.

http://www.bbc.com/news/in-pictures-42227931

Actually, the first one that looks like an eye and eyebrow is quite inventive i think. Not boring in my view, but most of the others... yeah probably.

[scheinfluger_77]

and...google has it right... my eyes glaze over when I see yet another of the same thing... I can page thru Flickr's latest pix day by day and maybe.. maybe every third day I stop and see something interesting.. the rest are 'same ol - same ol' - ie boring

I think to only way to know great photography..is to spend a heck of a lot of time looking at not-great photography... then it becomes self evident even if you cannot explain why

+1

[scheinfluger_77]

I just Googled “Rhine II”. My instant gut reaction is “You’ve got to be kidding!” But... Warhol was right. “Art IS what you can get away with.”

[Tin Can]

I was joking. The first one is pretty darn good and others.


Actually, the first one that looks like an eye and eyebrow is quite inventive i think. Not boring in my view, but most of the others... yeah probably.

[Drew Wiley]

You missed the modifier: "self-conscious". But I don't even like the generic term "art" applied to photographs because it carries pretentious connotations. Am I trying to start a meaningless semantic debate. Obviously. Tortured terms deserve to be tortured more.

[Tin Can]

In the beginning, photography was Not Art.


You missed the modifier: "self-conscious". But I don't even like the generic term "art" applied to photographs because it carries pretentious connotations. Am I trying to start a meaningless semantic debate. Obviously. Tortured terms deserve to be tortured more.

[Jac@stafford.net]

There is art, and there is photography. I hope the two never intersect.

[Tin Can]

Not Boring, save a life or 2 imaging.

Beyond art. "Terahertz Window Offers Untapped Potential"

I see what you are hiding. https://www.photonics.com/Article.aspx?AID=62608&refer=IPV&utm_source=IPV_2017_12_26&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=IPV&PID=20

[Drew Wiley]

In this era of mandatory instant everything, an awful lot of artsy photography had adopted the "gotcha" strategy of advertising imagery. It's designed to immediately catch your attention with something novel and loud, quite possibly exploiting the latest whatever visual app, but contains no deeper later. It's momentarily exciting due to its flashy packaging; but once you take the time to open it up, it gets boring just as fast.

[Tin Can]

Drew, I am never bored.

I might bore other people, but I'm too old to care.

Times up.

[Drew Wiley]

Well, I imagine that soon after I pass away, some bums will be rummaging through the dumpster where all my drymounted prints end up, find some smeared with ketchup from a drippy bottle, and comment on how much better these taste than the crusts in the dumpster behind the pizza parlor. Recognition at last !

[rdenney]

I’m a bit late to this party, but I haven’t seen blood flow yet, so, despite moderator tendencies (we don’t want TRVTH, we want quiet!), I’ll bring it back. Mostly because it’s been on my mind for several years now.

Having spent years mastering certain techniques (and attaining mere competence in others), I have come to the conclusion that if there is anything inventive in my photos, it’s sheer accident. It’s one reason I don’t post much—I feel like I’ve run out of steam.

I look at the photos I made years ago, and barring the occasional accident, there’s just nothing there for me. My photos that excited me so much at the time look like all the other wannabe photos out there.

It’s hard to sustain diligence in (difficult) technique when my portrayal of subjects is so uninteresting. I still love the technique, and love having developed it, but it’s no longer enough.

And so most of my prints are stacked in a closet. Facing a wall.

In music, it’s different. The invention is more in the composer’s hands, and my job is mostly not to screw it up, and partly to let it play on my emotions in a public way. I have been working on two movements from the Bach ‘Cello Suites for a couple of years, and I’m still not ready to be happy with the result. But the work remains compelling because of what Bach did. I don’t want to perform it—there’s still too much of my screwing up and not enough Bach.

Musicians can listen in rapt attention to a great artist playing practice-room scales, but their enjoyment may be based on technical appreciation as much as emotional response. To most, it would be boring, I suppose. Most musicians want to rise above that.

For most people, photographs live or die on the subject. Those boring snapshots will excite historians someday, or family members right now. There’s a reason that sunset photos are called “yet another sunset” on many forums, but they still excite those who are not jaded by having seen thousands of them. Like me.

When I see a compelling subject, and I do frequently, I’m pretty sure at this point that it will not remain compelling in a photograph I would make, and I seem to lose what’s compelling about it in the exercise of technique. I keep screwing it up. There’s still too much me and not enough subject. But much technique is devoted to adding the photographer to the subject as much as it is to avoid screwing up, though often in trite ways, as with canned software enhancements.

I have so little understanding of what makes an emotional connection without depending on the subject that I wonder why I ever got into photography, despite the enjoyment of the technical exercise and the cool toys.

I’m turning 60 this year. It’s not having a good effect. :)

Rick “maybe a little too much TRVTH” Denney

[cowanw]

" Having spent years mastering certain techniques (and attaining mere competence in others), I have come to the conclusion that if there is anything inventive in my photos, it’s sheer accident. It’s one reason I don’t post much—I feel like I’ve run out of steam.

I look at the photos I made years ago, and barring the occasional accident, there’s just nothing there for me. My photos that excited me so much at the time look like all the other wannabe photos out there."

I think Peter Henry Emerson said the same sort of things in the 1890's. I expect we are realizing that immortality is not gonna happen and we have yet to achieve peace of mind about it.

[EdWorkman]

Rick
Don't look now, but you got old
When the end of film was announced I got out my 2D that I had for years but only sporadicaly used. I figured I'd ride out the last 5? 10? years until no film was available.
I shot a lot of 6x17- the format attracted me account an early 8x10 neg I made
Back then I wasn't so old. I loaded the film under a jacket in the backseat, schlepped the camera & tripod a short way into the desert and made a successful shot.
Years later I found myself making the same old shots on 6x17, so see above.
I just can't face making the same oldsameold, and or with fuzzy vision etc, screwing up
It's Eclessiastes all over again
A few years ago my older bro and I discussed our life's accomplishments in our chosen fields.
We both had done a few at the time significant things. BUt he asked me if I thought I had done anything good in my career. I thought, and think not, nor did he in his.
I have no cure to offer, just condolences
Regards
Ed

[Mark Sampson]

Photographs are inevitably tied to subject matter. If you're bored, or stuck, don't just take pictures that you've seen other people do, find a subject that interests you. Make a project about that subject. Set some parameters and stick to them... one film, one process, one camera size, one lens, one print size? but choose. Decide to work within those parameters. Shoot for a year and see what you get... then edit, put up a show, make a Blurb book, but finish that project.
This business/artform/hobby is about pictures... not about gear and process. Put your hard-earned skills to work. You've learned the scales, now play some music.
"The Subject Matters", to borrow from the late Bill Jay.

[Tin Can]

I come to poetry lately as we all live in deep fear...

Do not go gentle into that good night
Dylan Thomas, 1914 - 1953

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

[Drew Wiley]

Is everyone suffering from cabin fever?

[h2oman]

I have so little understanding of what makes an emotional connection without depending on the subject that I wonder why I ever got into photography, despite the enjoyment of the technical exercise and the cool toys.

I’m turning 60 this year. It’s not having a good effect. :)

Rick “maybe a little too much TRVTH” Denney

For some time I was a member of a local camera club, with the results some of you might guess. Someone shows up with a black and white photo for critique and an unimaginative old guy with arms crossed says "I just don't like black and white." Period, end of thoughtful critique. Through the club I met a woman who is a serious photographer. Not in the sense that most of you might think of, given that her photos are (a) digital, (b) color, and often what many of us might think are pretty but (c) boring. But she's serious in that photography is a large and important part of her life. She's competent in composition and working her camera, and she seems to derive great enjoyment from photography.

I ran across this woman a couple days ago, for the first time in several years. She was volunteering at the local art gallery, and killing time by putting together gift cards with her photographs. We conversed pleasantly for a bit, and the one thing I particularly remember her saying when she was telling me about sales of her work is "You just can't predict what people will like." I'd say her work is pretty "subject dependent" and SHE has no "understanding of what makes an emotional connection." So there you go.

I'll be 60 on Super Bowl Sunday, so I'll be in your club! :cool:

[mdarnton]

My personal nomination for boring is where the photographer thinks that he has a good subject for a photograph, and thinking that this is enough, makes no effort to alert the viewer as to what that subject is, by framing, lighting, etc. This is common with both beginners who don't know better and advanced photographers who think they are being clever.

[Alan Gales]

Is everyone suffering from cabin fever?

Very astute observation, Drew!

I know I am.

[AuditorOne]

Is everyone suffering from cabin fever?

It has to be. You would think they were in the Yukon in the middle of winter by the sounds of the moaning.

[Vaughn]

It has been kinda nice developing 120 film at my kitchen sink while watching the rain and the wind outside. We have gotten a couple inches the last day or two...more on the way. Tomorrow might be nice photographically (cloudy, low wind, but no rain), so that might be a nice day to take the 8x10 and/or 11x14 out into the redwoods.

But today, maybe I'll wander with the Veriwide100 down along the river as there is a break in the rain. This evening when my bathroom is light-tight, I'll load up the last 3 rolls of 120 film I have backlogged (plus any from today) -- and might as well load up a 3005 drum with a few 8x10 sheets of exposed film that I have around. Develop tonight or on the next boring rainy day.

Bored? -- try something new that will feed into the work one usually does. I have been making contact prints (platinum/palladium) from 120 negatives, mostly 2.25" square, but have been working with 2.25"x3.5" negs lately, too. Working small takes a different way of seeing than larger formats. A challenge.

Maybe that is the difference between a hobbiest and an artist. When an artist gets bored s/he picks up the tools and gets busy. When a hobbiest gets bored s/he complains about it.;)

[Mark Sampson]

+2 Vaughn!
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
-Hunter S. Thompson

[Vaughn]

On the other side of the dime is the adage: An artist will create when the pain of not creating gets too big. So I am not a lazy artist, I just have a high tolerance for pain...

[Michael Kadillak]

The personal delineation of boring is as critical to the evolvement of a photographer as the mastery of ones materials. Both take considerable time, effort and dedication to the nth degree. Anyone that has picked up a camera and used it has gone down this road. The differentiation of those that have evolved past "boring" is remarkable simple. The insatiable desire to learn from what one knows is in fact boring and continue to pursue image making will eventually hone the skill set of the photographer to continue to look past what they know does not interest them and refine their skill set to a high level of visual interest. Malcolm Gladwell very eloquently expresses the rational for success and failure in his book "Outliers". We cannot control when we were born or the last name given to us at birth. But we are completely in control of the deployment of our passion in the form of effort. I contend that if you want something bad enough, there is nothing preventing you from attaining it.

[Jac@stafford.net]

The measure of 'boring' is tightly coupled to the number of words defending the same.
.

[Vaughn]

The measure of 'boring' is tightly coupled to the number of words defending the same.
.
But that begs the question -- Would a boring photograph ever need to be defended?

[snommisbor]

This is quoted from Bruce Barnbaum The Art of Photography: “Choose any great photographer—let’s say Ansel Adams, for he was great and his work is so well known—and ask yourself how many truly great photographs he produced in his lifetime (50+ years of photography). 50? 100? 200? Maybe more. But that is about four per year at best!”

Excerpt From: Bruce Barnbaum. “The Art of Photography.” iBooks. https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/the-art-of-photography/id1231327432?mt=11

Something to think about when you feel you shoot boring photos. Most of them are, but hopefully we will capture that magic at least 4 times a year.

[A Almulla]

Bored at work and though all 9 pages would add some spice. How wrong with all the philosophical opinions.



Much depends on the viewer's experience, willingness and perception that makes an image boring or not.


My taste in boring have changed over the years. I now find over saturated digital color images boring no matter how beautiful the subject I see, I forget.


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


I used to be in the camp that disliked Gursky and the rest of the Düsseldorf school. But now I am a fan.


Maybe that is the difference between a hobbiest and an artist. When an artist gets bored s/he picks up the tools and gets busy. When a hobbiest gets bored s/he complains about it.;)


Something to think about when you feel you shoot boring photos. Most of them are, but hopefully we will capture that magic at least 4 times a year.


Tastes change.
Sometimes a gourmet burger hits the spot, other times junk food burger. Sometimes you may snicker at someone for eating junk. Sometimes I want a salad and other times a steak.

The layperson may complain about the quality of food yet when confronted to cook he'd burn water if it was possible.

Clips of my lids are fascinating but pics of other's kids may bore me.

BTW I loved the parts which I quoted above.

[pepeguitarra]

What is boring? The tiredness of seeing the same thing over and over again? I am an expert in making boring photographs and the reason I am doing LF photography now is to fix that. It was very easy to shoot a picture with an DSLR and AF lenses. In fact, I have shot about 20,000 in the last 6 years. How many of those I consider Not Boring? A small amount of those. The rest are there in my computer where no one sees it. What am I learning now to make non-boring photos? Composing them well, taking the time to apply those rules of composition, those advices of composition, etc. I take the time now, I measure the light, I estimate the exposure, I develop my film, I scan (for now), and I will print in the dark room. I have the sense now that my photos start to look a bit less boring. Anyway, thanks for the opportunity to express my thoughts here. Here is an example of a boring photo:


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7277/8162532127_a7b49368ae_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/dri7qx)AutoTamronAdaptamatic200-3.5-calizrojo1-1 (https://flic.kr/p/dri7qx) by Palenquero Photography (https://www.flickr.com/photos/palenquero/), on Flickr

[dodphotography]

I think people are on to something with the differences in approaches between a hobbyist and an aspiring artist. However, we are plagued by academics and the human desire to over-intellectualize things.

Imagine if Robert Adams were 25 years old in 2018, people would deem his work boring. Even in interviews he gives, he is incredibly modest. He says he creates images out of the pure interest in their visuals and when poked to give some grandeous intellectual reasoning behind the picture, he states he can't make stuff up.

We are presentlyt in a state where pictures really don't matter anymore, it's the message that comes behind it.

Our heros and their work couldn't be made today, it isn't en vogue and is neither celebrated or more importantly, supported. We all have to make money, pay the mortgage and can't run off to Mexico like Weston.

[Tin Can]

Quit

Move

Cry

Love