I know the Small Three are waiting for me to opine something, so here goes.
Every shot I take is planned and how it comes out might not be. It really helps to be observant as then not much gets missed, but a modicum of luck helps too. I have to be in sync with nature or the shots are not going to be there.
Two of my best moderately recent (within the last decade) sunset shots happened because A: I heard a woman in a Bunessan restaurant say “Madge, look at the sunset” and B: I Was waiting for a restaurant in Arromanches. Had I been distracted neither would have been shot.
Some photographers work with software which shows where the sun will set and what kind of shadows will happen, but I just rely on my experience. I have waited for no clouds at sunset so many times only to be disappointed that I can’t begin to tell you. IF I had to guess, I would estimate 80% of the time.
How many of my best photographs have been taken by accident? None. It doesn’t work that way. I plan my shooting locations carefully and nowadays with crappier walking ability than I used to have, I spend all day driving around and looking for the right location and as sunset approaches, if there is no horizon cloud, I head for ’the spot’. Other times I work without sun as I like shooting in a light drizzle at about 40ºF. The best day like that in recent memory was on Dec 30, 1996, when I happened to be unloading my Noblex at Devils Den in Gettysburg. From 3-5pm I shot 14 rolls of 120 (84 shots), and from them came Klaus Knuth’s favorite shot, and 22 other killers. The landscape and I were in sync, and it was incredible.
Jan On Jan 7, 2014, at 10:12 AM, Randy Little wrote: Well since ever picture I take is planned so pretty much a majority. Landscapes are even planned for seasons and time of day. Sometimes waiting years for a good fall or a good snow to happen on a right day when the sun is at the right angle to hit a mountain at the right angle. Even hunter style street photography should be planned. How many hours did bresson wait and wait and wait in the hope that something would hopefully happen.
On Jan 7, 2014 9:56 AM, < photoroy6@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Give me an example. How many good photos are taken by accident vs the number of good photos taken on purpose. When I get up on a foggy morning and go out and take pictures is it an accident if I capture images that I sell? (my definition of art: if it sells it is art and if it doesn't it is art in waiting)
any
fool with a phone these days can take an award winning photo., if happily in the
right place at the right time.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Mitchell < danmdan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students < photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tue, Jan 7, 2014 3:32 am
Subject: Re: PHOTOFORUM digest 6427 - art ? no !
And here I must re-enter the lists, as I have never been convinced, despite what
some are seem to be saying, that photography is ever "ART".
Art, for me, is e.g. drawing or painting with real paint, whether oil, gouache,
egg-tempera, or whatever; or hacking out the "Three Graces" from a huge lump of
marble.
Photography is something different - as someone has, more or less, said - any
fool with a phone these days can take an award winning photo., if happily in the
right place at the right time. To the great majority out away from our
cloistered world photography is just happy snaps, records of visits, sometimes
evidence - but rarely "ART" - very few will have an Ansel Adams print on their
walls, and even fewer would ever consider photography arty enough to pay the
enormous sums demanded for an A.A. original print.
Dan Mitchell
danmdan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 7 Jan 2014, at 04:01, List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals -
Students <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>> Be grateful to have some real artists on this list. Art can be offensive at
times. Part of the job.
>>
>> Just some thoughts.
>>
>> Klaus
>>
Art Faul
The Artist Formerly Known as Prints ------ Camera Works - The Washington Post
.
|
