Luckily I am not the only one, many before me have written about photograph vs photograph. Still I like to write down a few words so it is off my chest. Sometimes you meet people who share a passion, sometimes it is my biggest passion: photography. I like then to talk, listen and when needed give my opinion. Often I am asked to give my opinion, even better, I am paid for this and then we call it teaching.
The students know my question by heart: what is your story?
This is what I want to hear. I want to hear what they think their photo communicates. When their stories match my experience we are on to something. Especially in the beginning phrases such as "I just did something" or "I just like this photo" are often heard. One does not "just do something". We are not born with a camera in our hands so we have an intent when we have a camera in our hand. The shutter is not directly connected to our brain stem to it is not a reflex when we press the shutter.
In the end we often get where we should be. We understand that there is a reason behind every photo we took. Whether it is an accidental press of the button or a deliberate out of focus, reasons we will find and that is a very good starting point. This is good as good photography is also about how you understand your own motivations and actions.
The "just did it" has changed into an understanding of what happened inside one's head at that moment. The moment you press the button can now grow into tool, a controlled method or reason. You realize that what you see at that moment is worth to capture, click. Next steps is to go back the moment before the "click" and remember what it was. Wa sit the weird light fall on a stone which created an image of a human face? Was it perhaps this once in a lifetime moment where a cat kisses a dog? You name it and I am fine with it.
We continue our journey. Photo is there, thoughts are there. But does it show? Can I see in your photo what you thought you saw there? Is the face clearly recognizable? Can I distinguish a cat from a dog, and would this matter? Should the photo be ultra sharp to communicate the message? The background sharp perhaps, or blurred?
To what extend is a blurred background important? When does a blur dominate the discussion of a good photograph? What do you think? What does a blur add to a photo? What does blur communicate? For me the first that comes to mind is voyeurism, espionage and anything that has a secretive aura. An extreme sharp voyeuristic image I would instantly distrust and reject as such. Blur, sharp, bokeh are all tools we should ideally have under control but we can also allow ourselves to be surprised.
And still, most of the discussions I have had lately were unfortunately about "sharp photographs" and not at all about what the photo would tell me, or not. And despite many attempts to communicate my ideas about photography, it did not sink in. I am up against photogalleries and forums which are populated by mainly men who have an obsession for the latest sharpener plugin for Photoshop. The latest ultrasharp lens from Nikon and anyone who thinks to receive help and support at those place are thumbed down when a good and exciting photo contains some vague (blurred) areas and thumbed up when a totally uninteresting shot is ultrasharp.
No, I am not puzzled anymore...