Earl Moore Photography
A mild winter walk


I’ve used walking, especially in the forest, as a sort of self therapy since I was a young lad — the only difference now is I always carry a camera to capture what happens to capture my attention. During my walks I’m often multi-processing, working on inner issues while observing the outer world through a camera frame. Perhaps during these moments there’s an exchange of thought or impressions — inner to outer and outer to inner.

This possible link intrigues me and is considered when reviewing photos to see if I can decipher clues to deeper meanings. But then photography is such an imprecise language and I seldom have success interpreting it.


21 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Eric Jeschke
12 years ago

Hi Earl,
It’s interesting that you should say that photography is an imprecise language. After I read that, the first thing that popped into my head was: “no it’s not, a picture is worth a thousand words”! I think in some ways photography is SO much more precise than words. All depends on the photo, I suppose.

Eric Jeschke
12 years ago
Reply to  Earl

A very good reply, Earl. I see your point. I suppose it’s all summed up by your last sentence. It makes me think of the issue of taking vs. constructing a photograph: in the first case we come across a subject and if we do a good job taking the photograph then we have in essence “chosen the thousand words”. On the other hand, if we are trying to construct a photograph (your analogy to the police narrative), we have to work a lot harder and the language may be imprecise. If someone had taken a photo of John Smith standing over Sam Right’s prone form, with a pistol dangling from his hand, and behind him we see John’s wife standing with an anguished look on her face…we’ll, that just might sum things up rather nicely. :-)

Sorry if I hijacked your post!

yz
yz
12 years ago

classic beautiful forest shot

NR | ExPlanet
12 years ago

I agree that photography is imprecise, but it’s also universal, yes? A photo taken in Japan is interpreted with ease by someone that does not speak Japanese from the other side of the world. Even with a well framed photo, it’s entirely subjective and can mean something else to another person from the intended reason by the photographer. Therein lies the beauty of photography..

Cheers mate!

Don
Don
12 years ago

A fine shot in the woods. This is a great place to contemplate some of the issues in life including our photography.

Ove
Ove
12 years ago

I fully agree. Sometimes, you don’t even need to use words, just a facial expression, to get through what you mean. Words and gestures are so much stronger when you want to express yourself. In photographs, to really get through what you want to say, you would have to simplify and clarify to such an extent that the image easily gets a cliché, like advertisement. (In my world, those thousand words are not the photographer’s but mine, the viewer’s).

Ken Bello
12 years ago

The leaning tree in this photo amplifies the impact in this scene.
I don’t think photography is alone in being “an imprecise language”. I think all forms of artistic expression, including the written word, can be misinterpreted or confusing to others, especially if there are cultural differences. Some artists works are intentionally ambiguous as a way of attracting attention or interest. That can work to your advantage, but first you must have full understanding yourself.

Anita Jesse
12 years ago

I am particularly drawn to the imprecision of our chosen second language. Perhaps we can say a photograph is worth many thousands of words, with each viewer supplying the words (or not) for their particular story. As already mentioned, a photograph can tell many different stories. That is exactly what draws me to visual works.

When a photograph holds my attention long enough for a story or feeling to emerge within me, I have become a participant and made an active connection with that image. That is a satisfying experience. I spent some lovely moments lost in this picture. This must have been a nice walk. And, what a terrific discussion you set off.

Paul Maxim
Paul Maxim
12 years ago

I’ve been thinking about this one, Earl. Always a little scary when my brain starts churning away on something, but your use of the term “imprecise language” really caught my attention. My first reaction (like Eric’s) was, “that’s not so”. Heck, what form of communication can possibly be more “precise” than a photograph? Well, except maybe for a mathematical equation. Those things don’t allow for much in the way of interpretation. But photographs can also be pretty darned specific. What you see is what you get. When I make an image, what’s in the frame is a known quantity. There’s nothing “imprecise” about it.

The problem, of course, is when somebody else looks at it. As Anita suggests, the other person’s interpretation could be – probably will be – something else entirely. And then only if they connect to it at all. If they do, then there’s a story there. If they don’t, it’s just another blank page.

If good photography is visual metaphor, and I believe that it is, then the power of that metaphor, its ability to communicate effectively, depends on both the photographer and the viewer. For the photographer, it’s all wrapped up in that old idea of “fuzzy concepts”. If it ain’t clear to you, the photographer, it will never be clear to anyone else. Sort of like listening to Sarah Palin talk. All you can say afterward is “Huh”? “What did she say”? The same applies to “fuzzy” photographs, I think. Looking for “meaning” is a pointless exercise.

On the other hand, the non-fuzzy image will generate multiple interpretations – some that are consistent with the photographer’s intentions and some that are not. In my opinion, one measure of the “goodness” of a photograph is how much the view of the audience aligns with that of the photographer. If the agreement is high, then the photographer’s use of visual language is fairly “precise”. They’ve “communicated”. If everybody’s interpretation is different – and wanders all over the metaphorical map – then he or she (the photographer) didn’t get it quite right.

My thoughts, anyway.

Martina Egli
12 years ago

That is a very graceful and elegant image. The contrast between the bare branches and that wonderful pastel blue of the sky is amazing. And I feel like I can even smell the fresh and crisp air!

Monte Stevens
12 years ago

In response to Eric’s comment it looks like you’re going to become a murder/mystery writer now? LOL

I agree and can relate with the statement you made in your comments to Ken, “my understanding of photography as a language has “matured” beyond what it was originally.” As a photographer, and a viewer, my language has changed a lot. Hopefully more of my images speak to a wider audience than in the past.

Your image reminds me of those walks I made in Blendon Woods in Columbus!