I love to talk about how Vision helps me to create an image, not documenting what I see with my eyes, but following what I am seeing inside my head. And I’ve recently been thinking about how Vision is also used when we view an image.
I first noticed this when I created Auschwitz No. 4 above. I had decided not to include any “living” persons in this series, but this image stuck with me, and I decided to include it. I remember having strong feelings as to what this image meant, this living man amongst the ghosts, but I never tell people what an image means to me. It seems to me that the image ought to speak for itself.
But over the years, as I’ve heard others express what this image means to them, I’ve been surprised to hear over a dozen different interpretations…and none of them matched mine. It seems to me that Vision not only guides in the creation of an image, but it also shapes the interpretation by the viewer.
I agree with your approach. If you give people too much information about an image you end up telling what you were thinking about why you approached the image the way you did. I am so guilty of this. In one of my photo groups, 52 Frames, most people describe their image way too much (including myself). I am going to try to change and give people maybe more technical information than what I was thinking. Thanks for getting me to starting thinking more !
Stu, one of my favorite stories of Edward Weston:
From Ansel Adam’s Biography on his first meeting Edward Weston at Albert Bender’s home:
“After dinner, Albert asked Edward to show his prints. They were the first work of such serious quality I had ever seen, but surprisingly I did not immediately understand or even like them; I thought them hard and mannered. Edward never gave the impression that he expected anyone to like his work. His prints were what they were. He gave no explanations; in creating them his obligation to the viewer was completed.”
I love Weston’s work, but I love his attitude even more; he created for himself and no explanation was needed.
Auschwitz No. 4. No Sir too bad and artificial “sense”
Uhmmm…
Manunzio, agree/disagree or still thinking?
Cole has a number of series. When any photographer creates more than one series, there will be at least one that is not one of your favorites.
Cole, I love your vision of letting us find our own when when viewing your work!
I would love to be able ‘copy’ your work. Not to copy but to learn a new technique. Anyway, thank you for continuing. I appreciate every newsletter and photograph.
Larry Beattie
There are those who advocate learning by copying, and perhaps that works for some. It would not work for me, it would send me down a path already trod by others. I need to find my own path.
Colefucious say: those to walk in another’s footsteps, never finds their own path.
Mr Thompson I believe that you are one of the greatest artists of our time,
Kind regards Brian.
Brian, you clearly are an individual with superior taste and judge of character! I would like to adopt you or perhaps leave everything to you in my will!
🤣cool my plan worked I’ll send my iban later.
This is what I teach in my classes, Cole. The course is title, “Developing a Creative Vision.” As you well know, my friend, most image-makers, when they begin, seldom think about the “other side” of the photograph. They mostly think that once they have made the image that they are done with it.
I will usually come back with, “Well, it is a nice image, but what was your intent?” This stops most of them in their tracks. Once the open their “eyes” a bit more that’s when creativity begins.
That’s great Tim, we need more classes on creativity and vision! We have plenty on equipment and processing.
Photographs do not need to tell a story. They just ARE. Like a mountain just is. Any truth you find in a Photograph or mountain is the truth you take there…..Old fool Larry
You’re a smart old fool Larry!
Hi Cole, a judge at our recent photo club competition said he is greatly influenced by the title given to an image. He said the title helps him get the maker’s point. I have avoided that approach, thinking that the image should speak for itself (your view, I think). But the seduction of scoring high marks in a competition is hard to resist, maybe by giving my images seductive titles. Comment?
What a dilemma! I certainly would not tell you what you should do, but will ask these questions:
What do you create?
Why do you submit?
What do you think you should do?
I’d love to hear your thoughts Jeff!
I create my version of the world around me, through the lens and with the help of editing software. I submit (a) to show my work, and (b) for some validation. I am torn about what I should do. At bottom, if my images are indeed art, they are irrelevant if not shared/exposed to others. If they are not art, it matters not, so why not play the game?
Jeffrey, you sum up the same dilemma that I sometimes experience. On the one hand, photography educators like Cole extoll the importance of making images for yourself and not others. But as you make the point, if our art is not to be displayed to others, then do we just keep a private album for ourselves.
I think most of us like to seek some validation from others, but it can backfire.
I find validation through social media gives a short adrenaline rush, but ultimately is empty.
I also am wary of validation through competitions. It can be a mystery as to what pleases judges, and often discouraging.
Ultimately I agree with Cole, that we should pursue our own vision, but be very selective regarding where we seek validation/ constructive criticism from. For the rest, just develop a thick skin!
(P.S. my wife hates my black and white images; yet I am passionate about them!)
I can only speak for myself, and here’s how I look at it: I separate the creating part from the exhibiting part. I create solely for myself, with no regard to how others will receive my work. And then once created, I do share it with others with the hope of finding a like-minded audience. People who love my type of work, who speak the same “language” as I do.
Where I would get into trouble is when I mixed the two activities, and I would create for the audience. It’s fun to get a lot of likes, but it’s addictive and you’re selling out when you pander to others. It may seem fun in the short term, but I found it quite unsatisfying in the long run.
Mark I think we have to find a balance between being true to our vision and accepting the hypocrisy of also submitting images to contests, or otherwise showing our images and seeking some validation. We can’t crawl into a cave with our camera and ignore that we’re part of a larger society that we should participate in.
When I create an image with intent, that I feel is honest, I usually refrain from telling others “what it means”. Instead, I ask what it evokes or means to them, if anything at all. Some people don’t have a response to the image, or are unable to express one.
However what I find is that, when I feel my image has succeeded FOR ME, then those that do have a response and can express it also have an authentic response — often quite different than mine. I find it very satisfying, though, that my image means something to them, and I learn more about their “vision” from the process.
That’s how I feel too Mark! Well expressed.
Personally I find that I am the worst judge of my own work. Images that I don’t personally rate highly but others like tend to like seem to go well for me at a show. And I often get inspiration for titles from comments that others make. Eg Writing on the Wall : Belshazzar’s feast: https://photos.app.goo.gl/W9DYcP9vnU9jdkGT7
This one got a merit award at the Richmond Art Museum show (mostly oils) in autumn last year :
https://photos.app.goo.gl/M6NbBfNFWBmuNscA6
I would not have printed or shown it had my artist friend not raved about the image when I asked for his comments.
But judges are fickle fickle fickle and I so I don’t get despondent if my images either don’t get into a show or are not ‘liked’.
Many judges don’t seem to like black&white prints, but to me it’s the apogee of photography.