on reading photography books

[jp]

How do you read/process photo/art books?

Do you read it cover to cover?
Do you skim the pages and see what catches your eye?
Is it a coffee table book for a while?
Do you shelf it and refer to it once in a while if you are curious about a photographer or style (a pre-google reference library)
Do you chop it up and hang photos on the wall?

I notice many photographers have amassed quite a serious collection of books. I patiently pick up a book when the used price is right on amazon. I'm a slow reader and have about a half dozen books ahead of me. No need to get another for quite a while. Some of the writing can be a bit dry, but I read them cover to cover anyways since I am very interested in photo history. Beats fiction any day of the week.

[Vaughn]

I just look at the pictures...hee, hee...

Actually, many different ways. I like starting from the back and working forward. Sometimes I randomly open pages.

My book shelf is 8 foot long -- I like seeing the books out and easy to grab.

[Darin Boville]

Are you talking about text-based books rather than monographs?

To tell the truth, most writing about photography is fairly worthless, unless you are fascinated by academic philosophy, etc. So the answer would be "I read it cover to cover when I was younger" but don't even bother much anymore. Just look at the art magazines--Art News, Art in America, ArtForum. Not much serious going on.

If you are talking about monographs I usually skip the into texts and go through the photos one by one, fairly quickly but not flipping. I have to wait until I'm in the right mood for this. Then, if warranted, I'll go back in more deeply, maybe visiting the book multiple times. I'll glance at the intro to see if it is worth reading--if it is artspeak or not. Might skim it. Once in a great while I'll read it.

--Darin

[Ken Lee]

When creating this series about others' work I studied only enough text to gather a few lines of biography. A year later I remember all the photographs, but only a few of the names.

I myself have written several essays, but the longest one is only 10 words in length

Basically, I look at the photos and ignore the writing as much as possible.

[h2oman]

I recently read through Ansel's "Examples" and "The Negative." I'd been through the first probably several times before, in bits and pieces. It is nice because you can read just a couple pages at a sitting. (Wherever you happen to sit. )

I find that much of "Examples" is enjoyable, but useless, and much of "The Negative" is useful but not all that enjoyable. What really struck me, though, is the few scattered statements or thoughts (in both books) that are incredibly insightful.

Otherwise, I own a bunch of books of photographs that I look at a lot. I just randomly pick one out when I have a few minutes, and look. I like to spend a few minutes looking at photographs before I go to bed, in an effort to take my mind of the minutiae of job, house, etc. that seems to creep into my head when I'm trying to sleep.

[Vaughn]

The written word is an art form as well as a medium for providing information. Some visual artists have trouble with both, some are wonderful (such as the Ted Orland). One has to be as ready to take in the written word as one is ready to take in the visual images. There is not much "universal" about it.

[Bill Burk]

Right now I'm reading Ishmael Reed's Mumbo Jumbo.

As for photography books...

They all go in the library, a euphemism for a place where I spend time going over the same pages over and over until my wife says "haven't you memorized it by now?"

[jcoldslabs]

Do you shelf it and refer to it once in a while if you are curious about a photographer or style?

After an initial slow and thorough read through, then this.

J.

[paulr]

What Vaughn said.

If it's a truly great book, it will work like a machine: all the parts it needs in all the right places, and no unnecessary anything. In these cases you're denying yourself the potential pleasures by skipping anything.

Some books are just containers for pictures, with obligatory text thrown at the beginning or end. Others are works of book art that are greater than the sum of their parts.

I wouldn't put text in a book if I didn't think it was important. Text doesn't have to be academic (although unlike Darin, I don't see anything wrong with that if it suits). It can be autobiographical, journalistic, personal essay, meditation, poetry, history, whimsy. It can be fictional, political, polemical, or epistolary. It can be nonsensical, graphical, or absurdist. Whatever works!

That said, a lot it is terrible. There are plenty of second paragraphs on my photo bookshelf that I never made it to.

[Kodachrome25]

I definitely vary in how I approach them. For example, I am getting to the point in a year long edit of photographs in that I will be putting out my own book soon, so I have been exploring the books I own deeper than usual. Some are reference, some are monographs, some have great writing and some do not, some are partly to half filled with my photos. And then some are pure magic in the history of photography like the amazing tactility of "The Decisive Moment".

I look forward to bringing some interesting tactile qualities to my own book in a few months...