Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Photography does not rely upon processes such as PP but rather ideas. Photography being free from much of the material, technical and labor demands of other media focuses solely on concept. Contemporary photography is about concept and information more than aesthetic concerns.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Were that only to be true, Kris ... that Photography relies solely on Concept ...

As another has pointed out, here ... Photojournalism doesn't have much to do with concept ... it has more to do with timing than anything else ....

I would like to think, Kris ... GOOD photography - is ALL ABOUT aesthetics ....

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Because we were talking about Adams and Eggleston, my comments are meant about art photography not photography in general and certainly not photojournalism. Sorry for the lack of clarity.

DTran

Sorry Chris I don't want to have Ansel Adams earthquake nose.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Real subjects would be people. .... Fake subjects? .... Is there such a thing?

I guess what I meant is that people sometimes shoot anything ... w/o consideration for its value, intending to use it, afterwards, as a base for a surreal piece of art ...

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Your comment was that "at least Eggleston shoots real subjects." This implies that there are fake subjects. Are talking about his work as being documentary rather than constructed such as Gregory Crewdson's work?

Shooting without consideration, not necessarily, many shoot thousands or pictures like Eggleston, Garry Winogrand and Martin Parr and then edit down later. I presume that their connections for the work are made throughout this editing down process rather than when they set out. However, it could be that they have a lose idea when they set out and then refine it through this process. I'm not really sure one way or the either.

My understanding is that, Jerry Uelsmann collects images for later use in his composite images. The point being that it may appear mindless at the beginning but becomes less so in the end. The haphazard image may gain significance later down the road.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Kris ... I'm in the dark, here ... as I've not made myself familiar with the work of all those you've cited ....

But, I do take issue with your implication, that the opposite of REAL subjects - must be interpreted to be FAKE subjects .....

The point I was making is that a lot of photographic work, these days - is stuff that's been contrived in PP - out of virtually nothing ... is that what you mean by fake

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

I don't mean fake. A lot of photographic work has been "contrived" in "post-processing" since nearly the beginning of photography. Furthermore what does it matter? Painting broke free from the bonds of reality so photography must do so as well and it did quite some time ago. Unless one is a documentary photographer or a photojournalist "reality" is moot because the photograph is its own reality as an image and an object. Similar to hwo novels are their own realities. However, I seriously hope that this discussion doesn't devolve into another get it "right in camera" vs "computer manipulated" debate. It is a tiresome debate.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Tiresome, it may be ... but, the title for this Topic Post - IS - as follows:

The Preconceived Shot (a la Ansel Adams) vs. the Point and Shoot mentality, recontrived into "Art" in PP ... which do yours fall under?

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

I think the issue I am having is your idea that the point and shoot mentality must be "recontrived" into art whereas it can be art from the beginning. The snapshot aesthetic has been part of art photography since the 1960s perhaps longer but this was time that acceptance began in museums and among art critics. However, this does not of course make a snapshot automatically art that is dependent upon the intent of the creator and the use of the image.

As far as my work, it is mostly preconceived but not really in the same way as Adams did.

Photographer Jim Loc: Rio Vista, CA

My way of shooting is decidedly intentional, although I would hesitate to say i fit into the AA school of pre-visualization. My approach may resemble point-and-shoot in the beginning, but it really isn't in that this is only a first step. I start by first "working the scene" by moving about, trying different angles, camera elevations, crops, etc, chimping all along, until i see a composition on the LED that I think is worth working further. At that time, I will set up my tripod and start fine tuning the composition. All of the images that I make into prints will come from the shots taken from the tripod.

A great many of my images are extensively and purposefully processed afterward, either to add "painterly textures" and/or color palettes where specific colors are changed as to their saturation. To some extent the final look emerges as I apply my PP techniques, and doesn't necessarily match up with a preconceived visualization, but neither are they the accidental "art" resulting from random sliding of sliders, or application of filters.

In short, I'd describe my approach as being highly intentional and purposeful, but not based entirely on the pre-visualization approach described by Adams.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Not that it MUST be, Kris ... but, that it sometimes is ....

Throwaway shots ... mistakes ... are sometimes made over into Art in PP ... just to save them .... but, then, they are often extended, after that ....

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

And this a problem or makes the work less?

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Jim ... we all have different techniques ... for me, it's making the shot the best it can be, in camera ... sometimes, I add digital filters, though - then, shoot, again ...

It is here, I sometimes veer away from what's natural ... doing things in PP ... never seems to work for me ... as it's manipulation - AFTER the fact .....

Photographer Jim Loc: Rio Vista, CA

I too try to get the best possible shot I can at the the time of capture. The difference with me is that I am often shooting with the intention of doing a great deal of manipulation afterward.