Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Even someone standing next to you looking at the same scene will not feel like you do about the scene. Maybe similar, maybe not even close, maybe not as intense. They simply will not have the feelings that you do. The best you might be able to do in some instances is have them understand your feelings.
That's what makes us unique.

Stephan G

Memories are evoked by more than what is viewed. They require the inclusion of many of the senses such as smell, skin sensations, environ noises, etc. When we see photographs, we do rely a lot on our memories to fill in for the other sensations. This explains the divergent interpretations by others for the visual cues. When was the last time your were able to describe fully a scenario to someone else, without having to continually add more information?

As photographers, we limit our works to very small windows with the hopes to bring out a small aspect others will recognize.

Welcome to the world of Communication.

Dannj

👍👍

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

If the scene is special enough, a picture will bring back the memory, regardless of the quality of the image.

BlueMorel Loc: Southwest Michigan

I'll use food photos as an example. While browsing some sharing sites I see LOTS of food photos. Most nowhere near convey the savoriness, the deliciousness, the texture, the taste. They just seem flat, maybe interesting to a foodie maybe, but conveying no emotions to me. Once in awhile, though, there is an an outstanding one that is shot well and processed well, that maybe has a tendril of steam rising, or a glistening coat to the food to convey texture and taste. Those are the ones that make my mouth water. That is the effect I want to have in my photos - as if the viewer were there and could participate fully. Most of my own photos don't rise to that level, but I try, and once in awhile succeed. The enjoyment is in the trying.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

Capturing the emotion is what I consider to be the "art" part of photography and there are two parts to that: the emotion a scene imparts in me and the emotion it imparts in another viewer. The second part is the elusive part.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Upon reading many of the replies to this post. As much as I love looking at photographs and other graphic art, I actually get more of an emotional reaction to music. Music seems to be my first love and biggest! Sad I don't play, but I listen a lot.

Stephan G

Koan: What sound does a violin make if there is no audience?

Country Boy Loc: Beckley, WV

your post brings out my concern over the amount of post processing everyone does. You take a photo then you decide the background needs changing and then there is an old post that would look better removed or some flaw in a person needs touched and when you finish you sit back and say it is beautiful even though it is nothing like the human view of the site. Go figure!

anotherview Loc: California

You write: "More often than not I get the feeling that photography will not render correctly what I see." Yes, because photography cannot do so.

The function of photography can only capture and project a visual simulacrum of actuality, limited to two dimensions.

This fact introduces a requirement, a discipline, of depicting what our perception detects using the age-old techniques of imagery.

Further, only our visual sense, at bottom, acts as the prime mover in doing photography. So let your eye guide you.

As well, in response to it, a given subject may induce a gut sensation, a physical reaction, when we apprehend this subject. Pay attention to this mysterious connection to the subject.

Follow both of these indicators, your eye and your gut.

Finally, submit yourself to the constraints of this expressive medium of photography for best results.

I speak from experience.

Have a good day.

fuminous Loc: Luling, LA... for now...

My... that's a big one, Rongnongno... Everything we see, smell, etc. is informed, tinted and tainted by our personal experience. Thus my vision, associations, and interpretation will differ from anyone else's. In a broader sense, there are "universal" experiences which evoke similar, individual, emotional responses and produce similar interpretations- but here the term "experiences" is a bit wobbly. Memories, dreams and imagination all exist in the same portion of our brain and sometimes get confused; that is, we may fully experience something that did not happen in reality. Thus, a photo may evoke, in all viewers, an experience, and all viewers have the same experience... but individual interpretation may vary- and none be the experience desired by the photographer. Perhaps that is why, it seems to me, that the more simple the photographic composition, the more successful is the image... the fewer elements to be interpreted, the nearer the viewer is to the photographer's intent. Like writing lines of code: 25 lines of code to perform a function is waaay better than 250 lines of code for the same function- faster run time and less opportunity for error....

In fact, as I write this, I'm looking at a yellow, 3X3, Post-it pad. I can pick-up the pad, experience its tactile quality, flip through the leaves, hear them rustle and feel a slight breeze... but also, I note the straight edges and perfect corners and imagine sharp, industrial cutters performing that task. That's my physical experience. If it were an image on UHH, I'd think, "Why this?" then imagine some guy in white overalls pouring yellow dye into a vat of paper pulp, and wonder how much glue it takes to hold the pad together - that's the thing- the glue- that makes Post-it notes possible; a substance agreeably adhesive to most surfaces yet, not so tenacious it can't easily be removed... So, the physical experience- the photographer's experience- is about the subject, the visual experience is about the viewer...
Or, maybe I'm full of crap...

BlueMorel Loc: Southwest Michigan

All a photo is to begin with is a bunch of pixels or a chemical reaction on film. "Everyone" doesn't do the same amount or kind of post processing, and with me the amount and kind varies depending on my creative spark that day and the purpose of the photo. Besides, your brain processes the same image differently than mine. It is colored by our brain overlaying our experiences, our visual acuity, our perception of color, until the image is given meaning. So even at that level there are differences. Different strokes for different folks.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

You will only find out if you click the shutter, to find out if the picture accurately renders what you see. You have been here long enough to tell. What do you have to lose?

Dennis

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

I am not sure I agree with your statement, especially in the literal sense. Very often, here on the forum there are photographs submitted where viewers write things like I can feel the crisp cold morning, the smell of a wood fire, and so on. We see a photograph and it brings back memories of our past, similar situations we have been in.

I grew up in upstate NY. I have also lived in many other cold states. I have also lived in hot climes such as Palm Springs, CA. when I see photos of Death Valley or an ice crusted lake I know exactly what the photographer is feeling. Of course if someone was born in Miami and never left, they would have no idea of extreme cold.

Dennis

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I understand. The older I get, the more I want to be “in the moment” than behind the camera, recording it.