Contemplative Photography (Page 3): Although it seems like the opposite of contemplative I think it comes from having developed your “seeing skills”. It sounds kind of like Ansel Adams...

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Linda From Maine wrote:

Thank you! I braked and hurriedly turned around (my favorite way to photograph is stumbling upon quickly changing weather and light conditions - guess that's the opposite of "Contemplative"

), in order to get that pink cloud just before the sun came over the horizon. The fog and isolated barn were lagniappe.

Although it seems like the opposite of contemplative I think it comes from having developed your “seeing skills”. It sounds kind of like Ansel Adams describing how he took Moonrise Over Hernandez, New Mexico. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen a scene with perfect light while driving and I didn’t have a safe place to stop.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Although it seems like the opposite of contemplative I think it comes from having developed your “seeing skills”. It sounds kind of like Ansel Adams describing how he took Moonrise Over Hernandez, New Mexico. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen a scene with perfect light while driving and I didn’t have a safe place to stop.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

goldenyears wrote:

Looking for a copy, but before I receive it, can you describe the concept briefly?

The book looks at photography from a somewhat zen point of view. Yet it also teaches how to see significant and beautiful/important portions of the whole within a scene. Example: a singular small object (leaf, flower petal, word) within a larger scene (stream, garden, building) which makes a statement or touches a person's mind or eye. Another way it is described is when looking at a scene one sees the scene in a perceptual and a conceptual way. Or when looking at a scene, some part(s) may be be briefly noticed yet at the same time they could also be really seen.

The book is 207 pages plus two short appendices and some notes.

The concept is not easily summed up in a short paragraph. There is a workshop and web site noted in tha back of the book which may help shed more light on it for you. Check: www.miksang.com for more information.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Linda From Maine wrote:

My response was to bkwaters, who wrote in part,"Not everything that's beautiful, meaningful or provocative fits a predetermined framework." I think that's the key point to this side discussion about competition within the Contemplative Photography thread. How do you "please the judges" if the judges are incapable of seeing outside their small box and they don't reward originality?

I think it’s wrong to assume that because a judge picked something different it means they were constraining their choice to “the box”. One thing I’ve learned is it’s very subjective. My clubs monthly competitions don’t have winners, we just get assigned from 2 to 9 points. I had an image that was given a 7, which is a pretty good score. At year end we have a judge look at all images that got seven or above and pick their top 20 plus one, with that one being image of the year. That judge picked my 7 over many images that got 8’s and 9’s. A good judge is going to look for technical aspects but ultimately look for impact. And impact will be different for different people. Many competitions will have a “People’s Choice”. I don’t think I’ve ever seen it match the judge’s choice.

User ID

Wallen wrote:

Competition, especially those concerning artistic endeavors is all about pleasing the judges. I remember getting forced into a competition and did very well for the audience that everybody was asking why I did not win any place. Everyone who approached me was asking, "What happened? We were expecting you for first place?".
It's all about pleasing the judges.

Once and never again was I cornered into being a judge at a coworkers club, which took itself waaaaaay too seriously, calling themselves a "Photographic Society" rather than just a "club".

I was provided with bad coffee and stale donuts, plus a printed Guide for Judges. After reading the Guide I clearly had two choices: Leave now or upset everyone by plowing ahead while violating the guide.

Not wanting to surrender my bad coffee and stale donuts I chose to plow ahead. Grossly upsetting everyone more than compensated for the coffee and donuts.

To this day, every time I encounter bad coffee and stale donuts I yet again relive that glorious night !

NikonGal Loc: Central Oregon

Linda From Maine wrote:

Attempting to define "photographer," and... (show quote)

Linda, you are right on. I was primarily left-brained due to my career/training. When I became interested in photography it was difficult for me to be "creative" for the photography I enjoyed viewing: macro and creative. (I know, that's unexpected due to my career, it must have been my mind's relief.)

Thank goodness I was directed to Freeman Patterson early on, have a number of his books, and even took a week long workshop from him at his home at Shampers Bluff, New Brunswick, which I loved. I still have to constantly work hard to be creative, but like you, I'm often turned off by tack sharp images. I really enjoyed the image you posted here, your minimalist approach is wonderful as are your different hues of blue. Bev

bkwaters

User ID wrote:

Once and never again was I cornered into being a j... (show quote)

I never meant to criticize the hard work and expertise displayed by judges. Possibly if it was the standard to give 3 scores - technical, subject (beauty, story telling, event documentation, etc.) and creativity - it would be easier for the judges and less frustrating for the participants.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

Detouring slightly from my original post on "Contempative Photography" but connecting it with the judging of competitions, perhaps contempative judging would be a method of determining a photo's worth or quality.

Along that line, my local club recently had a professional critique/judge 50 plus photos, taken by a variety of members and covering a large variety of subjects. At the end a few said they agreed with all he had said. I said, I did not agree with him on every photo. Some of his comments related to the "rules" of technicalities. Others were simply his personal thoughts. I explained that his comments were one person's opinions of the photos on that particular day and in that particular setting. I equated his judgement with that of a play critic after seeing a play and judging one performance on a particular day with the audience of that day.

Like the old saying, "Different strokes for different folks." One could also insert here the old saying about opinions and human anatomy.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

One thing I learned from spending lots of time and $$ showing horses: When you enter a contest, you're paying for one person's opinion. Sometimes you agree. Sometimes you don't.

goldenyears Loc: Lake Osewgo

Linda From Maine wrote:

http://seeingfresh.com

The examples on that site do communicate the idea of "contemplative photography". But I still don't know how I would describe the idea to someone in words. I guess that's what is meant by the saying 'a picture is worth a thousand words.'

Here is a photo of mine similar to one of the examples on the website. Reflections in an Amsterdam canal. The original photograph included the buildings on the bank above the canal. But I couldn't help analyzing how the reflections were produced when I looked at the buildings. So, I cropped the buildings out of the picture. I thought the reflections by themselves to be more 'contemplative' because it left one imagining what the buildings on the bank looked like.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

NikonGal wrote:

Linda, you are right on. I was primarily left-brai... (show quote)

Thank you Bev! UHH member MinnieV visited Patterson in Maine last month, after she contacted him and he graciously agreed to meet. How great to know you had a whole week!

Here is MinnieV's (Paula Van Every) website - she is a huge talent who I keep hoping will drop her other interests and return to us on the Hog

https://pvanevery.myportfolio.com/

.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

goldenyears wrote:

The examples on that site do communicate the idea ... (show quote)

Very cool. Leaving room for others to use their imagination is pretty wonderful.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

bkwaters wrote:

I never meant to criticize the hard work and expertise displayed by judges. Possibly if it was the standard to give 3 scores - technical, subject (beauty, story telling, event documentation, etc.) and creativity - it would be easier for the judges and less frustrating for the participants.

I like this idea!

.

NikonGal Loc: Central Oregon

Linda From Maine wrote:

Thank you Bev! UHH member MinnieV visited Patterson in Maine last month, after she contacted him and he graciously agreed to meet. How great to know you had a whole week!

Here is MinnieV's (Paula Van Every) website - a huge talent!! https://pvanevery.myportfolio.com/

.

Thank you for Minnie's website. I'll check with her. Bev

Wallen Loc: Middle Earth

Linda From Maine wrote:

My response was to bkwaters, who wrote in part,"Not everything that's beautiful, meaningful or provocative fits a predetermined framework." I think that's the key point to this side discussion about competition within the Contemplative Photography thread. How do you "please the judges" if the judges are incapable of seeing outside their small box and they don't reward originality?

You don't. That's why those who dare to go outside the box in a competition seldom wins.
We do provocative or beautiful things only for ourselves. Many may like it but those are never meant to be compared to anything else. Never meant to be judged.