Labels

Posted on 2 Sep ’10 by Earl

Nature Swirls
Nature Swirls
The photographer was thought to be an acute but non-interfering observer – a scribe, not a poet. But as people quickly discovered that nobody takes the same picture of the same thing, the supposition that cameras furnish an impersonal, objective image yielded to the fact that photographs are evidence not only of what’s there but of what an individual sees, not just a record but an evaluation of the world. It became clear that there was not just a simple activity called seeing (recorded by, aided by cameras) but ‘photographic seeing’, which was both a new way for people to see and a new activity for them to perform.” – Susan Sontag

What I like about photography in general, and digital photography specifically, is it encompasses technology, technique, vision and emotion. How to mix these ingredients, and their portions, are up to you the photographer. You are the artist and technician.

I may like or dislike an image created by someone else, as they may also my work, but I never question their right or motive in following their vision. I try to open myself to new ways of thinking, new ways of seeing — perhaps they are seeing something I could benefit from. Even if in general our “styles” are worlds apart.

The one thing I sometimes rebel against is when someone pre-labels their work as if to force an interpretation they wish. For instance, the “Fine Art” label comes to mind. But that could be a whole topic in itself.

This post image is no more then the result of playful experimenting in Photoshop — something I liked, something which seemed to fit the image. :-)

What Others Are Saying

  1. Paul 2 Sep ’10 at 2:23 pm

    Damn, Earl! I really like this. Very nice. Very nice, indeed! Is this Fine Art? ;-)

    • Earl 2 Sep ’10 at 2:31 pm

      Paul, thanks, glad you like it! Grrrrrr…I’d prefer to think of it as “Find Art”…being art is pretty much wherever you ‘find’ it. :-)

  2. mariana 3 Sep ’10 at 8:31 am

    sweet , subtle tones ;)

  3. Eric Leslie 3 Sep ’10 at 9:49 am

    It definitely needs to been seen large. There are so many details you cannot see otherwise. I think the the PP works well here as well. I’ve always wanted a clear definition of ‘fine art’ as well. In my mind it’s any shot worth of getting printed really big, but what is worth varies a lot! One of my mentors likes very non-traditional comps of abstract things and I have never really cared for his work.

  4. Monte Stevens 3 Sep ’10 at 9:34 pm

    Excellent playfulness in this image, Earl! And, I suppose in a month you could play with this image and come up with another excellent image. You are so right there is some great work that is not my “cup of tea.” I have a friend who has some awesome wildlife images but his post processing is not my style, while others rave about his work. I think you said it quite well, ” we are the artist and technician.”

  5. Pingback: Artist and Technician

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>