The relevance of “How will my photo make others feel?”

[Richard M. Coda]

VERY rarely do I make a photograph for someone else, but if I do, I do take their feelings into consideration, but still stamp it with MY style. That said, other than that, I really don't care what others think... can't get caught up with trying to please everyone else. I belong to a LF group here in the Valley... they are all, for the most part, students/disciples of one or two local photographers/teachers. I joined the group only a few years ago, but I had 25 years LF experience before I moved here. Whenever one of the original members shows prints everyone goes ga-ga, even when several of us newer members think that they aren't up to the group's standards. When we (newer members, and me in particular) show work we get a lot of stone faces, like they don't get it. And I do try to simplify my compositions as much as possible... maybe I overdo it? Who knows... OK, I've already wasted enough time on this

[Mark Sawyer]

Even leaving out commercial photography, etc, and confining it to Fine Art Photography (uh-oh, he used the F-A-word...), the question still has to be confined to a certain kind of work. Some of the best and most provocative work I've seen was intellectual rather than emotional. (And I use both those terms in their best sense.)

Working for yourself, everything becomes decadently autobiographical, ("It's all about me! My thoughts, my feelings! Look at my pictures! LOOK AT ME!!!"). But why should anyone else care about it?

Maybe because some dottering old one-armed man in Czechoslovakia can putter around his house and make the most humble and humbling images. We respond to them powerfully. We want to express ourselves with that same eloquent power. There's something universal in the human condition, and if you put your own humanity, your worries and frailties, your strengths and thoughts and humor into it, maybe someone will recognize something it. And part of the human condition is that we seem to need those connections.

Or maybe, as Woody Allen summed it up at the end of Annie Hall, "we need the eggs..."

[paulr]

Some of the best and most provocative work I've seen was intellectual rather than emotional. (And I use both those terms in their best sense.)

I'll go along with that, even if on reflection it's hard for me to make the distinction. I respond with stronger emotions to things that can engage me intellectually rather than just esthetically. And I'll be more likely to be intellectually curious about things that can draw me in with some kind of esthetic or emotional hook. So really, the old head vs. heart binary breaks down for me.

But I definitely agree that I'm looking for more than an emotional response. When work elicits powerful emotions but nothing else, I'm often suspicious. This can be a symptom of sentimentality, or manipulation ... think hollywood tear-jerkers, John Williams scores, Norman Rockwell ... that kind of pure emotion makes me feel dirty.

[Mark Sawyer]

Agreed, Paul, and I put that either/or in there just to draw a distinction of the two. You were exactly right to call me on it! The best will be the best of both worlds. I'll say "no, thank you" to the Hollywood tear-jerkers too, but then there's Harold and Maude, Annie Hall, Manhatten, and Casa Blanca off the top of my head...

Bringing intelligence, humor, and original thought to emotion makes it for me, in movies, music, photography, or life...

[Brian K]

Emotion and intellectual merit are not exclusive of each other in photography.To me the best work has both.

[Greg Miller]

Was it the great cellist Pablo Casals who said that he practiced for hours every day so that he didn't have to think about his technique while performing?

Instrumental music and photography have a lot in common, including having strong requirements of both technical skill and artistic skill. Since the technical component draws mostly on the left side of the brain, and the artistic component draws mostly on the right side of the brain, I have always felt (coming at this with experience as both a musician and a photographer) that getting enough control of your technique (making it mostly second nature) allows the creative side of the brain to operate unimpeded and yield optimal results.

But that sort of drags another thread (the dreaded Cindy Sherman thread) into this as there was debate about whether or not her technical skills were strong, or if she even cared about technical skills and only her concept mattered.

[Emil Schildt]

Was it the great cellist Pablo Casals who said that he practiced for hours every day so that he didn't have to think about his technique while performing?

No musician that ever lived can/could think about their technique while playing!

(no time for it..)

While practicing yes...as you can decide the tempo your self.

In the danish language we actually have it in the way we say it: translated directly we say: "I practice me" (jeg øver mig).

the I (the conscious part) thinks/practices - the Me (the unconscious part) is the one playing...

And this is true in photography also I think.
If you think "Now I have to make the image" it will be too late...

If your technique is good, the finger will do the trick, and you'll think "wow - I just made an image" (?)

[paulr]

On the other hand, if you're a little shaky on technical stuff in photography, and have to stop and think from time to time, you'll be slower and you'll miss some oportunities. It's not the same disaster as being a musician who has to stop in the middle of a solo to remember where to put your fingers.

[Mark Sawyer]

Yes, a musician must hit every one of a thousand notes in time and timbre. A photographer picks and chooses his timing and pace image by image, and often edits out most of them later...

Photography would make a very dull live performance...

[Richard M. Coda]

Yes, a musician must hit every one of a thousand notes in time and timbre. A photographer picks and chooses his timing and pace image by image, and often edits out most of them later...

Photography would make a very dull live performance...

I guess Antonio Carlos Jobim was lucky... he only had to hit one in "One Note Samba"