Pain vs. Pleasure - Making a Great Photograph

[Ed K.]

How do you place your priorities when it comes to making a great photograph?

Subject / content is all that matters? The way you did it, the technique? Does it matter to you whether the technique was arduous or easy? Do you care more about making the photograph than looking at it or showing it? I'm suspect that there is a spectrum in the answers around here.

Recently, I've been looking a lot to my own work. Some of my favorite images to look at were the most simple and often easy to do. And for all the pains of techniques, as in printing techniques, the simple AZO contact print just has something about it that gets my juices going if it's the right shot. Sure, the salt prints, pt trials, and lightjets have their qualities, but the lowly contact print just works so well. I look at the prints from my R2400 and even like some of them a lot, other than worry about their longevity. The contact is just plain simple and modest, and it takes less time and costs less than just about anything else to do if all goes well. In the time it takes to curve and print a decent 8.5x11 inkjet, a dozen 8x10 contacts could be in the wash sometimes - and no scanning! ( sigh, but dust is a problem ).

It seems that the "holy grail" of photography is so often wrapped up in endless puttering around with very arduous techniques, from carbon prints through some masochistic gum over platinum and of course, real photogravure. Beautiful stuff, especially when done by masters of it - no argument there, yet so often the master's photographs are just plain boring to anyone other than a photography buff who gasps at their marvelous technique.

How do you place your priorities in this? What's your favorite approach to it lately? The hard way, or the simple way?

[Brian Vuillemenot]

Most of my favorite photographs, and the ones I feel best define my vision, were made very spontaneously with little or no planning. I was just in one of my favorite environments, at the right time, and noticed a photographic opportunity. After making these "found" photographs, I continue with my photographing, and usually don't think about them again until I'm examining film back from the lab. Almost always, the photographs I carefully plan ahead of time fall far short of my aspirations. There have been several times I've returned to the same location again and again, only to return without a decent photograph.

For me, the most productive way to photograph is just to get into this spontaneous mindframe where I'm seeing and reacting, to become one with the landscape. Like most other things in life, trying too hard will only mess things up. A lot of photographers have this idea that if they put a lot more energy into producing a photograph that it's somehow better. Viewers of the photograph only see the end result, so the energy required to produce the negative or transparency is totally irrelevant.

[John Kasaian]

Content, content, and content ;-)

[Eric James]

Serendipity has been defined as searching for a needle in a haystack and coming up with the farmer's daughter.

I'm pretty new to LFP and I find that I idealize it - I hope to capture the “farmer's daughter” of images when I pull out the big rig; so if the light isn't ideal, or if I don't have a particular project in mind, I tend to leave the heavy pack behind and head out with a Nikon body and two or three or my favorite lenses. Now, a year into LFP, my favorite new images still come from a 35mm cartridge - thanks mostly to searching for “needles” with the Nikon much more frequently. I want to make the transition but I always have an excuse: too many dogs to exercise; chance of rain; too much altitude gain; LF tripod too heavy - out comes the FM3a and off we go. “Arduous technique” be damned - lady luck is my guide, but the damn Nikon slut is still too easy.

[Jay DeFehr]

My short answer is; I'll let you know when I make a great photograph. Closer to home, I'll say that working with people is the part that excites me most, and I consider that aspect the most important part of my technique. When I connect with my subject in a meaningful way that is evident in the photograph, I feel very fulfilled and inspired. The tech stuff is meaningless to me, beyond my ability to work without allowing it to distract me. A successful image made with a large camera and contact printed on Azo is no more or less precious to me than one made with a 35mm P&S and printed on VC enlarging paper. Each requires mastery of technique and a unique approach, and each has its place in my heart.

Jay

[Patrik Roseen]

I started out doing LF photography because I was amazed of the photographs made with these type of cameras...based on the flexibility of swing, tilt, shift etc. I was attracted to the analog technology, looking for a few quality shots instead of multiple shots of varying quality.
When I acquired my first gear and set out to take pictures I learned that the weight and size slowed me down...So these days I put very high demands on myself and my pictures...I only want to make really good pictures so content/quality becomes even more important as the logistics increase, looking for the right perspective, scenery and light.
I have a 35mm gear and also a very nice Mamiya MF gear which I could use more often, but the thrill is not simply there! I guess many people also choose to do lots of advanced things in their darkrooms because it excites them...and knowing that you can if you must is rewarding.

For those who feel that they would like to do more LF-photography, but have problems lugging the equipment outside I can recommend still photography indoors.
If you feel guilty not using your large and sometimes expensive equipment this could make you feel better ;-) Another way is to shoot 4x5" handheld if you have the gear for it.
So to conclude: I don't want to produce pictures...I enjoy LF photography.

[poco]

I used to bracket a lot more the first couple years of shooting LF, but noticed that the few keepers were usually of shots I'd only exposed a single sheet on. It became an obvious pattern and a true mystery until I thought about it and realized I tended to bracket in direct proportion to the difficulty of the shot. If the shot took a lot of thought and effort to set up, I tended to bracket more, just to make sure I nailed it. But those were also the more forced and contrived shots and usually turned out to be garbage.

These days I see difficulty of set-up as a warning sign.

[Matt Miller]

What's your favorite approach to it lately? The hard way, or the simple way?

My time for photography is very limited. Because of this, I try to keep it as simple as possible. In 8x10, I use one film, one developer, one lens, and contact print only on azo or ziatype 95% of the time. The simplicity of technique enables me to spend much more time concentrating on my subject and exploring my vision. It's the act of photographing that I love the most, it's the seeing that thrills me. I don't want the darkroom work to feel tedious, so I have simplified it as much as possible.

[otzi]

I often find that a spontainious find? when captured can often exceed the hoped for image from a view once seen but revisited time and again with equipment in the hope that the perfect? conditions will repeat themselves. They never do. So in desperation the shot is taken but it's never the same or as captivating as that magic moment that cought you by surprise. Very often empty handed.

[Mike H.]

I'm with Jay De Fehr. When we make a great photograph, you all will be the first to know. For right now, give me pain if that is the sign of the "great photograph" path. I've already had too much pleasure without making one.