Equivalence: The Perennial Trend

[Pieter]

The term "Equivalents" is what Stieglitz actually used. I've seen his master set, and these indeed represent striking emotional "equivalents of what he saw and felt" at the time of the shot. It was a major theme in early to mid 20th C photography, and was preached by Minor White as if it were a religion; but he too did it exceptionally well. It differs from Surrealism, which was also popular around the same time, but try to simulate perhaps weirder or more deliberate responses of the subconscious, often unfortunately with a bit of pre-hippie non-darkroom chemical help.

Interestingly, I am more interested in people seeing not just what I may have seen and felt, but what the viewer can bring to the photo. Not that I am always happy or agree with their reaction, but it is better than indifference.

[JMO]

As discussed above, the concept or process of "equivalence" as articulated by Stieglitz and Minor White may be fairly obtuse. But I have experienced equivalence reactions, and sometimes rather strong and surprising ones, as I have viewed certain prints made by other LF user friends. I think one of the more important aspects of this consideration for photographers is to be aware that people who view your images can sometimes react very strangely, strongly and emotionally to a print, and in ways that make clear the viewer replaced his/her perception and experience of the print with something that may not be very close to the physical subject matter of the photograph. So don't be surprised or taken aback when this might happen in relation to one of your photographs, and consider that the equivalence reaction is probably a good thing, and may be a mark of success.

[Tin Can]

I fully agree and wish we stopped writing, talking, pontificating, and communicated solely by images to and for images.

As if images could speak their own language without words to each other, but images are inanimate and we need to 'see' in our ever morphing minds.

Symbol for symbol, semaphores...are not the correct analogy.

Do images exist or is it just our imagination?

...Equivalence is "a thing", but it is better to do it, rather than talk about it.

After all, that is what cameras are for.

[Miguel Coquis]

Lets put some light on...
What can be the connection between us while giving a look at this visual ?
It is just a moment of attention. Energy is there, manifesting presence.
Presence of seeing, no matter what associative intellectual moves will take place.
To see, directly, straight, one seeing oneself seeing..., and making a photographe at the same time !

[Miguel Coquis]

Equivalence is an "experience" that enveloppes one's visual impressions, that nourishes a visual project with several intuitive levels...
Connecting with higher energies...
Pinhole, 4x5"
Creative Process series

[Miguel Coquis]

Vue over the Bay
Seeing intuitively
Pinhole 4x5"
Creative Process series

[Miguel Coquis]

Keeping "alive" the perennial trend.
Developing ones own craft opens new paths...
While maintaining open minds, continuous experimenting and letting one self being caught by surprise by unattended discoveries.
Pic:Pin-hole selfies "en mouvement"
4x5" Kodak B&W negative film
Dev N-3
Sunlight

[Tin Can]

Like all 4 posts Miguel!

[austin granger]

Scarecrow, Sauvie Island, Oregon by Austin Granger, on Flickr

[tuco]

Do scarecrows really scare away crows? I hear they are very smart. Smart enough to know if something is alive or not I suspect.