Hello ,
I remember judging a photography show and competition in which I got booed for my decision for best in the show.
A photography club hosted the show, but from what I recall, the show was open to anyone who wanted to enter their work.
One of the photographs was a beautifully printed B&W photograph of a wooden, weathered, split rail fence and its shadow winding its way across a snow-covered bucolic scene.
The photograph demonstrated excellent printing skills and application of the "rules" of photography while being beautifully matted and framed for display.
And as far as being
a technically excellent photograph, it was.
The problem was it lacked feeling in comparison to the other photograph.
I've seen pictures like that before.
I'd bet you have too.
And while pictures like these are pleasing to look at and critique in terms of the elements of
composition, creatively, they amount to what I see as visual muzak or a photographic cliché.
In other words, pleasant to look at, but it does nothing in terms of a uniquely creative visual expression.
A teacher I worked with called this approach to producing work photographic regurgitation.
And while this approach is usually a valuable part of learning photography, at some point, if we want to produce creative, unique work, we've got to stop making photographic clichés because they amount to nothing more than technically excellent creative failures.
It looks good but lacks visual uniqueness and emotional connection.
And now, back to the photograph I picked as the winner.
It was a color picture that was tonally dark and seemed to be made while sitting in a small boat.
The picture included a part of the front interior of the boat and the bow jutting
into the water.
The picture was made while looking down, so it only showed a small part of the choppy water the boat was in, giving no sense of place or expanse.
A slow shutter speed was also used to give a sense of movement.
This picture, in terms of photography club standards, broke every rule in the book.
But It was a visually unique picture.
And, on top of that, it had what the other picture didn't.
It had a feeling.
Specifically, the photograph felt disturbing to me.
That feeling compelled me to vote for the picture that, based on the
rules of composition that the club adhered to, should have lost.
That's why I got booed.
My teachers taught me that the rules of photography produce homogenized photographic clichés.
And when I asked one of my teachers about their thoughts about "photography clubs," they responded, "Remember that a club can be used to beat you over the head."
In other words, the rules of composition can beat us over the head and make us senseless about our unique ways of making pictures.
It's funny, after the mob that booed me put down their pitchforks and torches and calmed down, I congratulated the not-so-happy runner-up and the thrilled winner.
I announced that if anyone wanted
to speak about my choices, I'd happily talk with them.
The runner-up, or any club members, had no interest in speaking with me.
The winner, on the other hand, was a different story.
He was relatively new to photography and was not a member of the club that sponsored the show or any club for that matter (Maybe that's why the crowd booed?).
He asked if I had any advice for him.
I said, keep doing what you're doing, steer clear of clubs that bind your work with rules, and if
you need to learn more, find yourself a good teacher that doesn't teach rules of composition.
I extend the same guidance to you.
And remember, many technically excellent photographs fail on a creative level.
Because a photograph that exhibits technical mastery but doesn't show creativity is empty.
But don't discount technical skills.
Because the more technical skill that we have, the more creative we can be.
And always remember that technical mastery serves creativity.
Classes are below.
These emails come with the intent of helping you be a better photographer. Here's an archive of them at the "Newsletter Hub."
Ways To Learn Photography With Sam
