Photographic Creativity
Dec 2, 2023 21:59:45 #
Jamie C wrote:
At what point does a photograph, a captured image, become not an artistic capture of a memorable moment but instead an abstract impression that has no bearing on anythinhg actually real?
There is nothing "real" about a two-dimensional, static, captured image that is — at best — a commemorative likeness of a real subject. When further enhanced (in an ethical context!) with the aid of software (or darkroom techniques in the case of film imagery), a photograph can be a pleasant diversion. Whether it's art or abstract or anything else is up to the viewer.
Taste is a funny thing. Some people have it. Some do not. Tasteful and honest applications of techniques can enhance photographic images. Unfortunately, we have all come to fear and characterize AI and other software techniques as deceptive and deceitful. Sometimes they are, but to dismiss anything other than straight captures as blasphemous or worse tells me more about the hang-ups of the critic than it does about the creativity of the creator.
Dec 2, 2023 22:15:21 #
Jamie C wrote:
I have pursued my creative muse with photography f... (show quote)
You said: "For the record, a decline in photographic creativity is, sadly, just a symptom of a general decline in creativity."
That's a pretty strong statement; what are you basing that on?
Dec 2, 2023 22:40:26 #
burkphoto wrote:
There is nothing "real" about a two-dime... (show quote)
Blasphemous is the wrong term.
All people ask is to be honest when the image can be deceitful.
Dec 2, 2023 22:58:30 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Blasphemous is the wrong term.
All people ask is to be honest when the image can be deceitful.
All people ask is to be honest when the image can be deceitful.
In a non-religious context, blasphemous means disrespectful. That is the intended meaning as I used it.
Dec 3, 2023 02:41:58 #
burkphoto wrote:
....to dismiss anything other than straight captures as blasphemous or worse tells me more about the hang-ups of the critic than it does about the creativity of the creator.
As you say, photographs aren't real. They're a 2D representation of a 3D reality. Was post processing used with film? Yes. If people like Ansel Adams were around today, would they embrace and use digital post processing? I'm pretty sure the answer is "Yes".
It seems to me that the people who have a problem with post processing must have some sort of glorified idea in their head that photography is some sort of pure art form and any kind of image manipulation is a corruption of that purity. In reality, image manipulation is an integral part of any kind of photography so I don't know how people like that can rationalise their idealised perception of what photography is. The fact that such thinking still exists points to the inflexible and self-justifying mentality that those people must have.
Dec 3, 2023 03:00:32 #
SonyA580 wrote:
In a discussion with 2 photographers yesterday all 3 of us believed "composition" to be the most lacking quality in photos lately, i.e., the subject dead center.
Sounds like the blind leading the blind.
Emphasis on "composition" is so "camera clubby". Camera clubs (etc) are where creativity goes to die.
Dec 3, 2023 03:21:20 #
Longshadow wrote:
...not this, not that, too much this, too much that, too slow, too wide, ......
...Not how I would have done it.
Well, you didn't take the picture.
When you go there you can take them how you want....
If I took it the way you think it should have been done, I'd be you.
Amen. ...not this, not that, too much this, too much that, too slow, too wide, ......
...Not how I would have done it.
Well, you didn't take the picture.
When you go there you can take them how you want....
If I took it the way you think it should have been done, I'd be you.
Over in the Critique section some clueless denizens there seem to think that rather anal descriptions of changes that they would make is actually some legitimate form of critique. I wonder if they ever realize how ridiculously foolish they appear ?
Dec 3, 2023 03:31:03 #
Mac wrote:
Isn’t showing snow as bright white and/or showing detail in the snow part of composition?
Nope. Anywho, composition is passe.
Dec 3, 2023 03:33:14 #
Mac wrote:
That is one of the reasons I no longer post pictures here. Most of my pictures are street/documentary, environmental/ecological. I want people to think and feel. “Nice shot” doesn’t do it for me.
Amen. Serious problem.
Dec 3, 2023 03:34:51 #
User ID wrote:
...is actually some legitimate form of critique...
In the Critique section, suggestions are considered to be a legitimate form of contribution.
Dec 3, 2023 05:24:44 #
chrisg-optical wrote:
Creativity is always there, only how we express it and manifest it has changed. If you want to challenge yourself, pretend your digital camera has 36 exposures of fixed ISO film, and shoot M mode (no auto ISO!). Oh, and it's the last roll of film you have for 200 miles.
what you describe as a challenge is unbdoubtedly challenging. But the idea that it encourages creativity is long proven false. It stifles creativity. Freedom encourages creativity. Arbitrary highly restrictive so-called creative challenges are the exact opposite of creative freedom.
The original Kodak provided new levels of freedom. I verrrrrrry seriously doubt that most Hawgsters know how many frames were on that early rollfilm. Yes, a few of you really know but the majority who are just guessing are guessing waaaaaaaaay off !
There were compact cameras with fast lenses before the Leica. The major creative innovation of the Leica was its incredibly long roll of film. It broke almost no other new ground. The one other innovation was the self capping shutter combined with the film advance gears, which in itself greatly increases the rate of film consumption. More freedom, less restriction !
Dec 3, 2023 07:36:54 #
Remember what Ansel said that the most important part of the photographic process was the 12" behind the viewfinder. There are many people who think the camera creates "creativity" when it really is the photographer!
Dec 3, 2023 08:02:46 #
burkphoto wrote:
The right way is the way that works for you. If you serve your purpose, it's right.
Dec 3, 2023 09:31:41 #
StanMac
Loc: Tennessee
Jerry G wrote:
The perception that creativity is in decline may be because the of the ease of being able to share photos on the internet, where as in the past we only saw photos that were deemed worthy of publishing. We are not seeing fewer creative photographs we are now seeing a lower percentage of creative photographs.
I think you are correct, Jerry.
Stan
Dec 3, 2023 09:49:39 #
Wyantry
Loc: SW Colorado
Longshadow wrote:
...not this, not that, too much this, too much that, too slow, too wide, ......
...Not how I would have done it.
Well, you didn't take the picture.
When you go there you can take them how you want....
If I took it the way you think it should have been done, I'd be you.
...not this, not that, too much this, too much that, too slow, too wide, ......
...Not how I would have done it.
Well, you didn't take the picture.
When you go there you can take them how you want....
If I took it the way you think it should have been done, I'd be you.
EXACTLY! I am not you! Conversely, you are not me.
We each “see” things differently. We each determine what is important or what we wish to capture in an image.
It would be a shame if there were only one way to see.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.