Sorting it All Out

Spent the last three days trying to sort out those images I wish to use in the final submission. I had about 1800 images that I had taken for the project over the past 10 months covering a wide range of 'costumes' and activities from around England. As stated in previous blogs I widened the scope of the project by including modern day wear on the grounds that we all make a statement about our perceived personality in the way that we dress. I also agreed with my Tutor, in his response to Assignment 4, on the way that the images could be presented. I moved from the original proposal to present the work in a purely linear form to a more complex, but more interesting, layout. These changes required an structured approach to resolving the various issues around which images to use and which to discard. As always there is the conflict between those images that best tell the story and those that I personally like that have a less certain relevance to what it is I want to produce.

I arrived at the decision as to how best to achieve my aim by returning to the original RAW files. I then discarded those images that 'failed' either because they were less relevant, similar images to others, because of technical issues or photographer failure ( I did take the opportunity of examining the photographer failures to learn from my mistakes). The remaining images (132) I printed  as Contact Sheets.  I cut up the contact sheets creating individual images and then placed the individual images into different groups that I felt offered the best chance to discover what I wanted. Using Lightroom I examined these and discarded those where the story I wished to tell was best served by other images. Currently I have 98 images that need further decision but I have l left the final decision to after I have mocked up a book to see the 'best fit'.

There is also the need to consider the text within the book and the best way to provide narrative and captions. To this end I have returned to a study of the book "Context and Narrative" [Short M (2011) "Context and Narrative" Lausanne AVA Publishing SA] as it offers a number of pointers and suggestions that will assist me in the provision of the text.

Shooting the Single Picture and Luck

In their book [Jay B, Hurn D. (2008) "On Being a Photographer" Third Edition Lens WorkPublishing Anacortes WA] Hurn and Jay have a section entitled "Shooting the Single Picture" (pp 63 -78). In this section we read "I do believe that very often the difference between an average photographer and a really fine photographer is this willingness to admit doubt..........The fine photographer says in effect : Well thats a pretty good effort but I am willing to admit that many little subtleties of camera position, which I cannot pre-see, might make the difference between an adequate image and a good one"" (p.64) In the same paragraph Hurn goes on to assert that the fine photographer is willing to try all sorts of subtle permutations to achieve the best result. He then goes on to deny that this process is the same as shooting a lot of pictures in the hope that one works.

At first reading the statement appears to offer a sound reason why the fine photographer is more successful in getting the best picture and yet in actual practice there is no discernible difference between the two approaches. Here I assume that the average photographer is not simply pointing the camera at a particular spot and without moving the camera presses the shutter repeatedly. In the supposed thought processes of the fine photographer offered in the above paragraph it is recognised that s/he cannot pre-see what differences subtle changes will make. It follows that much depends upon luck and Hurn acknowledges this later in the section at p.73 when he says: "Paradoxically , the more static the scene the more images I tend to shoot. When there is only one moving element, say the hand of the person you are photographing , it is very, very difficult to decide which gesture, which position of the wrist or fingers is going to be the most significant. 

It is often argued that the skilled worker makes his own luck - the harder I work the luckier I become - and yet, in a strict sense,  this cannot be true. "Luck" is necessarily unpredictable as it is a chance event that cannot be predicted either because it is truly random or the complexities of the many interacting elements is beyond the power of the human mind to predict the outcome. The one thing that can be hoped for by a photographer is being in the right place at the right time and ready to shoot the photograph. One can never be certain that, even in the relatively short time necessary to 'subtly' change the position of the camera, the best shot has been missed. Hurn himself admits that only one shot in over 3000 is of exhibition standard and that he would anticipate shooting between 700 and 1000 images for a seven picture essay (p.100). It is difficult to equate these statements with the idea that the fine photographer is in some way marked out by his/her approach to how many shots taken when compared with the average photographer.

One thing that can effect the outcome of a shoot is the experience of the photographer. Practice does not necessarily make perfect (after all, unless corrected, the average photographer can continue to repeat the mistakes evident in early work) but it does provide the right mental responses to events if the lessons are learnt from earlier mistakes. Photography is essentially about light and how it is captured and, I make the reasonable assumption that, the more the photographer is exposed to the effect of shifting light  and the subtle changes it will bring about in the image the more likely he will respond at the instinctive level where action precedes rational thought.

Yet there is also an intangible in the equation which is how the photographer sees the world and how it can be portrayed in photographs. I would argue that the fine photographer has a view of the world that can be expressed successfully in a photograph. We can all learn, almost by rote, the rules of photography and may apply them to our images yet the image is pedestrian and lacking in impact even where (and most likely because) all the rules have been applied slavishly without regard to their applicability to the single picture. I would suggest that the fine photographer instinctively knows when to break the rules to achieve the desired end.

Wonder Wall

This image is of a part of a wall in my house:-

The reason I named it as I did was because, having posted all the photographs, I wondered where to go from there!

When I decided upon my topic for the major project of this Course I chose "Peculiar Britain" in which I planned to look at the variety of costumes worn by groups such as re-enactment Societies or Morris Dancers. The more images I took and the more I thought about the whole subject I came to realise that although the aforementioned groups were 'obvious' examples of costume wearing it was true to say that we all wear costumes that reflect not only our own view of ourselves but also how we wish to be seen by the rest of the world. In part this is a natural desire within human beings to be seen as belonging to a group whether in terms of uniform such as police officers wear or a wide, possibly an amorphous, group where membership maybe ill defined and constantly changing such as 'youth of today'. My initial thoughts was to present a series of images that showed the differing costumes both obvious and less obvious.

It was in response that I re-considered this plan when my Tutor in his response to my Assignment 4 submission suggested that there would be value in juxtaposing images that would offer food for thought and invite a greater and more studied reaction by the viewer. By this time I was well into my project but the opportunities were there to present the images in a different way. I was now faced with choices about what images overall I wished to include and the combination/sequence of the chosen images within the final form of presentation that was going to be a book. Over a period of months I had taken well over 500 images and had selected the 'best' ones from each shoot but this still left me with a large number of possibles from which to make the final selection including those that I had submitted as part of earlier assignments..

I tackled this problem initially by reviewing all the images on the computer and at the same time identifying those that would be provide pairings or groupings that would meet the criteria I was now using for the final work. I decided that I would make 10 x 8 prints (or close approximations) of the chosen images as I felt that this would offer the best way of placing the images in some sort of coherent order. This initial sift highlighted some gaps either because there was a lack of relevant images or because the aspect of individual images were at odds with the others I wished to place with them. I had, therefore, to go out and take more images but this time with a specific aim in mind. By the end of this process I had some 90 to 100 prints that needed further sorting.

I had no real idea of what the best method was to best meet the challenge but I was reading Bill Jay and David Hurn's book "On being a Photographer" in which they talked of pin boards. Here is an example of where sometimes our obsession with modern technology blinds us to the tried and tested methods of the pre-digital world. The Wonder Wall was the outcome.

There are, I think, 57 images on the wall and I sorted them by starting with those I knew for certain how to use and ending up with those that, at the time of writing, did not fit naturally into the scheme of things. It was whilst I was carrying out this exercise that I discovered that I have a strong tendency to take portraits with the figure on the right hand side looking in towards the centre of the image. As I understand the consensus of opinion figures should be looking in to the centre of two pages in a book so that I had a predominance of right page figures and a dearth of left page figures. Fortunately there were sufficient images to be able to flip horizontally without obvious consequences such as lettering within the image becoming mirror writing. Lesson learnt - be aware of where you wish to end up before setting out on the road.

At this stage I now need to examine each chosen print to ensure that the final resulting print will be acceptable. I have retained all the original RAW images so that I can, where necessary, go back and eradicate any problems.

Subject Matter - On Being a Photographer

One of the sections in the book "On Being a Photographer" [Jay B, Hurn D. (2008) Third Edition Lens WorkPublishing Anacortes WA] discusses the selection of the subject for any photograph. As Hurn says"...the photographer is, primarily, a subject selector.......a photographer's first decision is what to photograph. (p 49). It is, in one respect, a statement of the obvious and yet it is largely ignored in the teaching of photography. The impression is that the technical and qualitative elements of the photograph are more important than what was photographed. Whilst there is little doubt that the photographer has to pay attention to those elements it is debatable whether they should take precedence over the choice and capture of the subject. It is true to say that the vast majority of those who view photographs have no conscious awareness of the composition or technical quality of what they see when they view an image. Their reaction is very much at the emotional level and whether the image echoes their view of the world or casts a new light on a subject they thought they knew well. It is only when we venture into the world of judges, assessors, and selection committees that we start to hear a discussion that covers everything but what is in front of our eyes.

Hurn argues that as a photographer we should immerse ourselves in the subject matter that we plan to photograph. I know this to be true from my own personal experience - not as a photographer but as a spectator of a photographer in action. I was fortunate enough to be a member, for a time, of the Norfolk Photography Group a relatively small Camera Club one of whose members was a wildlife photographer of note. I had seen a lot of his work both as part of an exhibition and projected on screen at lectures. I had the opportunity to go with him, along with other keen wildlife photographers, on a days shoot. What was obvious to me was that our expert knew almost everything about the habits and life of the birds that he was shooting. In discussion he revealed that he had been studying the subject matter - one that fascinated him - since the age of 14 so his experience covered over 35 years. He knew instinctively what was the likely behaviour of the bird he was watching so that his camera was aimed, almost without thinking, to catch the decisive moment. Acquired knowledge about his chosen subject informed his photography and this was evident in the quality of the resultant image.

It may be worth mentioning that I have no natural affinity to wildlife in the raw or in photographs. I cannot relate to the subject matter of any wildlife image at an emotional level. When I was looking at my colleague's work I responded by admiring the quality of the print and the technical skills displayed. My admiration was largely related to the skills in the presentation.

There are two caveats that occur to me when thinking about Hurn's demand for total immersion in the subject. How does the professional photographer, faced with deadlines, cope with a subject in which he has only a passing knowledge or where new situations may arise of which he has no experience?One presumes that, unless he is in the very happy position of being able to pass up the commission, he goes and gives it his/her best shot relying heavily on the instincts of the photographer acquired over years in pursuing his trade. Intimate knowledge about the subject matter must be accompanied by an understanding of what makes a good photograph irrespective of what the camera is pointing at.

My second caveat is the danger of researching the subject over a significant period of time leading either to paralysis in starting the project or of being incapable of finishing it. An example of this is W. Eugene Smith's "Pittsburgh Project". In his foreword to the book [Stephenson Sam (ed.) ((2001) Dream Street W.Eugene Smith's Pittsburgh Project. Centre for Documentary Studies at Duke University New York. Norton & Co]. We are told (p.18) that "On each assignment Smith spent several days or weeks observing the the location and mingling with people before he took his first photograph". In other words he too believed in fully researching the subject matter. However his commission was to spend three weeks in Pittsburgh and produce 100 photographs for a book commemorating the city's biennial. In the end he had taken almost 17000 images of the city during the greater part of 1955 and on return trips in 1956 and 1957. In a speech to the American Society of Magazine Photographers' Photojournalism Conference in April 1959 Smith acknowledged that Pittsburgh, to him, was a failure. He said that "The main problem, I think, is that there is no end to such a subject asPittsburgh and no way to finish it". (p 17 sidebar). Whilst it would be fair to say that Smith had many other problems that contributed to the problem I do believe that he is an extreme example of a common problem amongst photographers.

I would not consider myself an obsessive person but perhaps I am not the best one to judge! In an earlier Course with the OCA I decided to produce a photographic essay on the 95th Foot Regiment who were heavily involved in the Peninsular Wars and also fought at Waterloo. I discovered a re-enactment Society that was holding a weekend re-enactment near to where I live. I realised that I needed to research the history of the Regiment and started the process by going online to review all the material available for study. I also visited the Regimental Museum in Winchester and spoke to the staff there who were very helpful. Having read some of the history online I purchased 4 books written by Officers and Men who had served with the Regiment during the time of the Peninsular Wars. As I read I found reference to other sources - my interest had been grabbed. The weekend and the chance to talk with the very knowledgeable members offered further avenues for research and well over 300 images. I began to pursue these further lines of enquiry until one day I realised I was drowning in information and an inability to tailor the work load to the Assignment requirements. My deadline was approaching fast and I came to realise that my interest in the subject matter had blinded me to the requirements of the Assignment. Fortunately I was able to step back and see where I should be going rather than where my heart was taking me. It was a lesson well learnt but even now I have to take stock of what I am doing and that my love of reading and research does not become the be all and end all of my time with the OCA.

Quantity or Quality - "On being a Photographer"

Further to my earlier blog about the need to sort and select images from a large number ('large' in this case refers to my experience which is minute compared with what follows) I was, on the same day, reading "On being a photographer" [Hurn, D and Jay, B. (2008) 3rd ed. Anacortes WA: LensWork Publishing] In the section "The Picture Essay"  I came across the following - "As a general guide I would guess that for a seven picture essay I would shoot 20 to 30 cassettes of 36-exposure 35mm film." (p 100). Spoken by David Hurn this suggests that he anticipates taking between 720 and 1080 individual photographs to have sufficient to produce the essay. A 'hit rate' of between approximately 1/100 and 1/150.  Whilst I find this extraordinary he continues - "A single exhibition-quality image probably occurs every, say, 100 films". Doing the maths that is a hit rate of 1/3600. For a 45 image exhibition he would, based on these figures, anticipate taking 162,000 images which is a staggering amount.  We are offered some sort of clue as to the output of Hurn over a year by an anecdote told by Jay (p.99) where he tells the story of Hurn going into a local photography dealer's shop and ordering 1000 films. Jay goes onto confirm that all 1000 films (36,000 frames) had been exposed within a year.  In simple terms that means that to have sufficient images for an exhibition Hurn would take four and a half years to have sufficient material. Given this was before the advantages of the digital age where the photographer is able to shoot almost non stop at a very rapid rate without having to wind the film on or change the film after 36 shots it is an astonishing achievement.

These responses by Hurn were in answer to a comment made by Jay that "photography is a medium of quantity as well as quality" (p99). Jay offers the explanation that photography is about taking photographs and that it is learnt by taking photographs. He goes on "Like every other skill , photography is learned by continuous and dedicated practice (p.99). Hurn responds - "Thats true......You learn by concentrating on a subject, planning the actual shooting and critically evaluating the results. At face value these comments are statements of the obvious. Yet I am left wondering what 'critically evaluating' means in practice given the very large number of images produced by Hurn.

It has to be remembered that films had to be developed to produce the negatives and then these had to be developed to produce the positive image capable of being assessed. Even producing contact sheets took time if the thumbnails were to be of sufficient standard to make examination of each individual print worthwhile. The book provides us with a whole section on creating contact prints that, it is perhaps fair to say, is irrelevant in the digital age. However I am sure that some photographers will argue for a continuation of this method arguing that it provides benefit in the whole process of creating the perfect print. In the context of this blog I introduce the topic because the process described by Hurn makes the number of images he claims to use is a task that, I believe, is beyond the capability of one person. Further he argues that he would not simply discard those images he felt did not meet the criteria of the specific project but examine them to learn from his mistakes. To this end he argues that those images that are seen to be over or under exposed should be 'dodged' or 'burned' to achieve the exposure levels that allow an informed judgement of its worth.

Whilst it is possible that Hurn had an assistant(s) to do the technical work I assume that he would do the final selection himself and, because they would be his 'mistakes', study the rejects to see how he could improve his photography in the future. Frankly put he would never have time to produce the final images! Even the most practiced eye would require a finite amount of time to select the best shots and learn from the worst.

I would argue that quantity should never be the aim in the hope that somewhere in the day's shooting there is at least one image worthy of taking its place in the photographic essay or the exhibition. The student and amateur photographer is frequently exhorted to "get it right in the camera" even now when most have access to powerful software that can 'rescue' the most unpromising shot. The advice is good (although needs to be tempered with the overriding need to get the photograph) because it underlines the need to engage the mind at the same time as engaging the "inner eye". The benefits of taking an appropriate period of time in getting the image with its final place being part of the thinking far outweigh the machine gun approach to photography. Experience and practice will reduce the time to 'realise' the desired shot. It follows that we then increase the chances of an improved hit rate which if it moves from 1/100 to 1/50 doubles the time we have to improve our chances further.

In fairness to Hurn he argues that "...it is not a learning process to wander around banging off frames of film for the sheer fun of shooting pictures."(p99) Yet his bald statements about his success rate strongly implies that 'banging off frames' is what he does.

Being fairly free from other commitments, I am retired, I can and do spend a lot of time examining the output of a day's shooting. Rarely nowadays do I shoot for the fun of it concentrating instead on the requirements of a particular element of the Course I am studying. Shooting wholly in digital and using the RAW setting I am able to quickly download the images to my computer. I can then examine each individual shot (usually in Lightroom and at full size) and make a decision about what images I wish to work further on. Those that are obviously wrong e.g. a picture of the ground because I pressed the shutter release when walking or completely without detail because I took it with the lens cap still on. Others that are under or over exposed by a significant amount and are unlikely to benefit from further work in Photoshop are also discarded. I then look at groups or sets of photographs that are essentially the same shot but taken from a slightly different angle or other reason for the similarity and using Lightroom's 'Survey" facility select the best shot of that group. I work my way through the whole day's shoot in this way ending up with a selection that are worth keeping and are relevant to the project work I am doing. I will then carry out any necessary work to produce a 'final image' and save them in a separate folder keeping a safe copy elsewhere.

I will view the saved images a few days later and make a final choice. It is at this stage that I look at those which did not make the cut and try to decide why they failed to meet the criteria when compared with those that did. What I concentrate on is the framing, composition and lighting of the image as opposed to the actual subject matter. I noticed in a recent batch of images that I have a tendency to cut off people's feet because I am concentrating on the face. The lesson here is to take a fraction of time to look round the frame of the viewfinder to spot anything obvious such as cutting people off at the knees.

Over a period of time I will have accumulated a number of images greater than that required by the Assignment so that further selection is necessary. At this point I will often print the images as I personally find that having the physical photograph in my hand helps me in my decision making. This is the point I have reached in preparation for Assignment 5 of the 'Your Own Portfolio" Course. It should be pointed out that at this stage I have the benefit of my Tutor's comments on many of the images together with his suggestions. These always play a significant part in my decision making.  I also value the opinion of my wife who has shown throughout my time with the OCA that her opinion should be taken note of as it more often chimes with that of the assessors. In essence I have tested my response against that of others whose emotional commitment is less than mine so that their views are more closely aligned to objectivity.

I have printed all the images that I feel are worthy of inclusion in my final submission having excluded some at this stage that made it through earlier selection but have been replaced by later images. Now comes the process of final selection and I shall blog about this process as I proceed.

Sorting things Out

Spent the last few days getting together the material for the final assignment which is to be based on a book. As I look at what I have got now there is a quiet sense of mild panic as I realise the task that I face. The large number of photographs taken over the period of the Course which have been whittled down to about 100 need to be sorted so the final choice tells a story. Whilst I started with an outline plan this has been amended as I have widened the scope of the original project and now I find myself being drawn to a slightly different structure that, whilst remaining within the original remit, offers a better chance of achieving my final aim. I sense that on further sorting I will possibly need further images to fill some gaps but that is yet to be seen.

One wonders how the professionals work who probably work under stricter guidelines and certainly more definite deadlines. At least I have the luxury of some 3 months before I have to commit finally so I have some breathing space. I have also decided to print off actual copies of the most likely candidates so that I can physically place them in groups which at least allows me to easily make changes.

Printing Black and White

Attended a Course in Black and White printing led by Paul Gallagher yesterday (21.11.13). Paul who learnt his trade in the darkroom and references most of his lecture to this base nevertheless works in the digital world. Most of the day was devoted to getting the image ready for printing and began with the most basic of introductions to Photoshop - particularly ACR (Camera Raw) - but gradually worked through Paul's workflow to reaching the final product ready for printing. A great believer in 'doing it yourself' and dismissing presets and software such as Silver Efex Pro as being limiting and not producing the best print possible. I am nor sure that I was entirely sold on this approach. Presets make for a good starting position and, when understood, can lead to very successful outcomes. As always the trick is to use the software as an aid rather than pressing the button and feeling that is enough. Having said that one cannot deny that the work Paul produced was stunning. I have very little doubt that I will be using the lessons learnt on the Course to improve my work.

I am not quite sure why but a small part of the time available was devoted to the tilt and shift lens with Paul eulogising about its ability, used properly, to ensure that everything between the nearest and furthest objects in an image were pin sharp. Paul is an excellent landscape photographer and apparently uses this facility in his work. I was left asking the question - Why? The viewer requires clues about the relationship of elements within the photograph. One of these is that distant objects appear less sharp than those in the foreground. To remove this element seems to me to be self defeating because it introduces a feeling of uncertainty - a feeling that may not be capable of expression just a sense of unease. One of the mantras of photography is 'pin sharp' or 'tack sharp' but if one isn't careful the end result can be seen/felt as false - it does not match with our expectations. The level of sharpness across an image may be important (not necessarily in all images) and lack thereof a sign of poor performance by the photographer but it should be tempered by what our expectations are.

It was a great day and I learnt a great deal.

Sontag On Photography - Relevance Today

Much of what Sontag said in the late 70's is relevant today although the ambiguities found throughout the book means that it is possible to find support for any point of view considered today. The cultural element that leads us to interpret images in an unique way remains as true today as it was when Sontag was writing. Whilst camera technology has changed almost out of recognition in the past 40 years the photographer has not. We still make decisions at the time of taking that support our view of what should, and equally importantly, should not be in the photograph. Whether we consciously seek the 'proper moment' or the 'decisive moment' is probably not known, even to ourselves, but we will go to extraordinary lengths to get the 'righ't light, the 'right' elements and the 'right' action to ensure, as far as possible, the 'right' image. We remain the 'deciders' about our photography albeit we do not make the final judgement about its worthiness.

How we view images has also changed over the years. It is true to say that the majority of photographs are not seen as prints. The most common viewing is on a digital device that emphasises the transient nature of what we are seeing. We can flick through literally hundreds of images; only pausing now and again to look longer at a particular image. There is no direct physical contact with a tangible thing so that there is no sense other than sight involved in what we are doing. Sontag talks in her book of photographs becoming more beautiful as they become older as though the passage of time and the 'patina' they acquire through handling bestows upon them an additional element. She even praises the creasing and scratches and the fading and the shift in colour that occurs in photographs. None of these things can be experienced through the medium of the computer. A photograph will remain as it is on every showing until we can no longer view it because of its outdated technology.

There is also the impact upon our thinking of an image that offers a glimpse of a past that we have not experienced or only vaguely remember or a reminder of relatives long dead - a glimpse into our place in life's continuum. Such impact can also be created by viewing on a digital device but there is the very real risk that the sheer volume of images and the existence of moving images on DVD's or other storage will condition us to ignore the still image.

As viewers we are increasingly becoming immune to the shock value of an image whether it be beauty or horror. We are surrounded on all sides by images that initially shocked and then became commonplace. Pictures of starving children on the African continent are part of the daily fare served up in newsreels, adverts and commercial breaks. They are rapidly becoming that most dreadful fate for all that we see  - wallpaper. The horror of war impinges less and less upon our emotions as the level of horror shown on our television screens becomes ever more horrific. Sometimes I wonder if the films shot at the end of the Second World War of the victims of the concentration camps which show shocked our forebears would raise an eyebrow in the present generation. Our culture is changing and so is the way that we interpret images but it remains the case that we continue to interpret photographs through the distorting lens of this culture.

It is difficult to imagine a time in the future when all the controversies that surround photography together with the desire of photographers to glorify their work (is it art or is it not art? - a question that is unanswerable because there is no universally accepted definition) have disappeared. As long as human beings are both the producers and consumers of photographs the controversy will happily continue. Whilst it is possible to imagine photographs being created by robotic beings who apply strict logic (think of the cameras today that take much of the decision making away from the human operator) as long as human beings are the arbiters of taste then the arguments and endless books discussing the subject will continue.

On Photography - Susan Sontag

The copy of the book - On Photography written by Susan Sontag - that I have used was published by Penguin Books England in 1979. One of the first things that I noticed was that throughout the book Sontag presumes that the reader will know who the people are mentioned. There is no usual references and frequently no first names. First published in 1977 in the United States of America and Canada it was published in Great Britain in 1978. In a foreword to the book Sontag writes - "It all started with one essay - about some of the problems, aesthetic and moral, posed by the omnipresence of photographed images..." The final result was 6 essays entitled "In Plato's Cave"*;  America, Seen Through Photographs, Darkly;  Melancholy Objects;  The Heroism of Vision;  Photographic Evangels; and "The Image World". Although it was tempting to follow the same structure and consider each essay in its own right I decided to explore Sontag's views on the three main elements of Photography - the Photographer; the Photograph; and the Viewer. In part my decision was based on the overlap between the essays on these elements.


Photographers

It is a statement of the obvious to say that without photographers there would be no photographs for the photographer chooses, consciously or unconsciously, what shall be photographed. As Sontag states (p.11 note all page numbers reference the page in the edition I used) - "A photograph is not just the result of an encounter between an event and a photographer; picture taking is an event in itself, and one with ever more peremptory rights - to interfere with, to invade or to ignore whatever is going on". The act of ignoring happenings surrounding the chosen subject of the picture is to exclude context that may be important to understanding and subsequent cropping is not only used to achieve a better composition but also to exclude elements that would detract from or confuse the message that the photographer wishes to convey. Whatever the claims photographers may make that they wish only to record reality they are always conditioned by their understanding of taste and conscience and what makes a great image.

As a student I often come across the phrase "photographic seeing" and yet I have never been sure what the term means as it seems to be one of those things that defies a consensus view among photographers. There is a commonality of view among photographic writers that to ensure a good photograph you must first see it in your imagination - a first construct of your mind. Stieglitz (Alfred 1864 - 1946) "proudly reports that he stood for three hours during a blizzard on February 22 1893 "awaiting the proper moment" to take his celebrated picture "Fifth Avenue, Winter" (p.90). Sontag suggests that the "proper moment" is when one can see things (especially what everyone has already seen) in a fresh way. It is not until you think about Sontag's statement that you realise that it is actually not very helpful having substituted one phrase (fresh way) for another (proper moment). Cartier-Bresson (Henri 1908 - 2004) talks of the 'decisive moment' which is only slightly more revealing.

For Sontag photographic seeing ..."turns out to be mainly the practice of a kind of dissociative seeing, a subjective habit which is reinforced by the objective discrepancies between the way that the camera and the human eye focus and judge perspective" (p.97).

To distinguish between the professional and amateur photographer in terms of their approach to photography is no easy task. Professional photographers are more likely to defend the place of photography in the world of art or in revealing of truth. Sontag claims that virtually every important photographer has written "expounding photography's moral and aesthetic mission" (p115). Some, such as McCullin (Don 1935 - ), believe their work can reveal truth and change the world for the better only to be disillusioned by pressing reality. One wonders how many conflict areas McCullin had to photograph before he realised that the same thing was happening only the characters and the scenery changed. Perhaps even more alarming is the possibility by the public's constant exposure to his and others work we became immune to the true horror of what was being presented and no more real than such films as "Saving Private Ryan".

Professional photographers will also emphasise the non-partisan, non-involved nature of their work. Sontag makes reference to Diane Arbus (1923 - 1971) - "Arbus's photographs - with their acceptance of the appalling - suggest a naivite which is both coy and sinister, for it is based on distance, on privilege, on a feeling that what the viewer is asked to look at is really the "other". (p.34). On page 39 Sontag makes, what to me is a startling statement - "The fact of her suicide seems to guarantee that her work is sincere, not voyeuristic, that it is compassionate, not cold. Her suicide also seems to make the phtographs more devastating, as if it proved the photographs to have been dangerous to her."  It seems odd,to say the least, that suicide can in some way legitimise the work of the person killing herself. It could equally be said that her suicide followed a realisation of the nature of her intrusion into people's lives.

Professional photographers are also more likely to emphasise the level of skill needed to take a great image whilst having to acknowledge the chance element in their success. Recent developments in cameras and their inclusion in a whole range of devices increase the chances of the amateur capturing that "proper moment". As Sontag states "..there are pictures taken by anonymous amateurs which are just as interesting, as complex formally, as representative of photography's characteristics as a Stieglitz....p.132.

I would like to finish this section with two further quotes from Sontag:

"The photographer - and the consumer of photographs -  follows the footsteps of the ragpicker who was one of Beaudelaire's (Charles Pierre 1821 - 1867) favorite figures for the modern poet:

Everything that the big city threw away, everything it lost, everything it despised, everything it 
crushed underfoot, he catalogues and collects...He sorts things out and makes a wise choice; he collects like a miser guarding a treasure, the refuse which will assume the shape of useful or gratifying objects between the jaws of the goddess of industry". (p.78)

"...1928 silent film, The Cameraman,...has an inept Buster Keaton vainly struggling with his dilapidated apparatus...never managing to take one decent picture, yet finally getting some great footage...by inadvertence. It is the hero's pet monkey who loads the camera with film and operates it part of the time." (p.53)

Perhaps the greatest character asset the photographer should have is humility.

* Plato's Cave - Plato has Socrates describe a gathering of people who have lived chained to the wall of a cave all of their lives, facing a blank wall. The people watch shadows projected on the wall by things passing in front of a fire behind them, and begin to ascribe names to these shadows. According to Plato's Socrates, the shadows are as close as the prisoners get to viewing reality. He then explains how the philosopher is like a prisoner who is freed from the cave and comes to understand that the shadows on the wall do not make up reality at all, as he can perceive the true form of reality rather than the mere shadows seen by the prisoners. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_Cave)

Photographs

"...first of all a photograph is not only an image (as a painting is an image), an interpretation of the real; it is also a trace, something directly stenciled off the real, like a footprint or a death mask...a photograph is never less than the registering of an emanation (light waves reflected by objects) - a material vestige of a subject in a way that no painting can be" p.154

Sontag offers a number of statements about the photograph and here she offers an almost magical explanation - the photograph captures the uniqueness of the subject as 'seen' by the camera. We are offered an interpretation of reality not reality itself. Yet later in the book (p163) we are told that "photographs are a way of imprisoning reality, understood as recalcitrant, inaccessible of making it stand still." This ambiguity is evident throughout the book  one of the earlier statements (p.3) being that "Photographs really are experience captured."  [ Sontag argues on p.52 that surrealism is at the heart of the photographic process because photography by its creation of a duplicate world - real;ity in the second degree]

The photograph in its essential state is an image printed on some form of medium is part of the real world (I am avoiding here the philosophical arguments as to what constitutes 'real' instead taking a pragmatic approach that if I can sense an object using one of my senses then it is 'real'). What is less certain is whether what I 'see', in the wider sense of interpretation and understanding, is reality. Sontag argues (p.5) that photographs are not so much statements about the world but miniatures of reality that can be created by anyone. Most of us will accept that what we see in a photograph is proof that the subject matter was in front of the camera at the time the photograph was taken and, further than this, that it is sufficient proof of something happening. Whilst their is a healthy cynicism about the veracity of the photograph rarely do we challenge what we see unless it clashes with our fundamental understanding of the world around us. Photographs reinforce our world view.

Yet is this world view universal or are we alone in what we 'see' when we look at a photograph? Sontag gives a range of statements about what a photograph can tell us from "a photograph passes as incontrovertible proof that a given thing happened" (p.5);  "In the fairy tale of photography the magic box insures veracity and banishes error, compensates for inexperience and rewards innocence"  (p.53); and "the force of photographic images comes from their being material realities in their own right, richly informative deposits left in the wake of whatever emitted them, potent means for turning the tables on reality - for turning it into a shadow. Images are more real than anyone could have supposed." (p.150).

Can these statements be held to be true if we are also told:-

"The ultimate wisdom of the photographic image is to say: "There is the surface. Now think - or rather feel, intuit - what is beyond it, what the reality must be like if it looks this way" Photographs, which cannot themselves explain anything, are inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation and fantasy." (p.23).

Unable to speak to us the photograph relies upon our ability to interpret what we see in such a way as to have awareness of the message that the creator of the image intended. That the creator is aware that the message may not be heard or seen offers the reason why photographs are often accompanied by text designed to guide our thinking - to set our thought processes on the road to the desired conclusion . That this is a fruitless quest is evidenced by how we do not understand how to react to a particular photograph unless we can place it within our world view. It matters not what we are told if the understanding from that telling is at odds with what we believe to be true.

The Viewer

As suggested in the previous paragraph how we interpret photographs is personal and, to others, unpredictable. We need to know or, at least feel that we know, what it is that we are looking at when viewing a photograph. We have to be able to place it within a reference frame that we understand. As Sontag says (p.19) we have to have a political consciousness to be affected morally by a photograph. How we react to images of the people living in the ghettoes of Poland in 1938 depends upon our knowing what their future held. If we are aware that nearly all of those we see in the images will die in camps we will have a different reaction to that if we knew nothing of their fate. She further argues that because each photograph is only a fragment, its moral emotional weight depends upon where it is inserted. A photograph changes according to the context in which it is seen. (p 105). Not only do we see the photograph through the filters of our own world view but that world view is altered by where we see the image.

The vast majority of photographs are viewed privately or in the company of a few others. Whether it be looking through a family album or browsing through Flickr our surroundings are familiar to us and we can allow our feelings free rein. What we 'see' are snapshots - a much abused term that is more often than not used in a derogatory form. We are ready to accept the imperfections and are usually uncritical of failures to follow the rules of composition or placement of the subject. What, however, if we are viewing a photograph in a Gallery or Museum. Our perception and expectations change. What we demand of the image is something approaching perfection. The paradox is that we may well see the same photograph, albeit enlarged, as we saw in more comfortable surroundings yet demand more of it.

Where we view the image impacts directly upon our responses - in a museum or gallery our judgement of the image is constrained by the often unstated belief that because it is hanging on the wall of the Museum of Modern Art in New York or Tate Modern in London it is in some way 'better' or a work of art. We allow our own personal judgement to be suspended, to replace it by the judgement of those who chose the images that hang in front of us. We feel uncomfortable and ask questions of ourselves if in some way we do not like some of the  display. Sontag (p.135) in suggesting why we like a particular image writes "to prefer one photograph to another seldom means only that the photograph is judged to be superior formally, it almost always means - as in more casual kinds of looking - that the viewer prefers that kind of mood, or respects that intention, or is intrigued by (or feels nostalgic about) that subject".  Whilst this is true at one level I believe that it understates the power of the placement of an image to affect our feelings about it.

The photographer strives to capture the proper/decisive moment or strives to find that shot that tells the story s/he wants the image to communicate to the viewer but it is all in vain. What we see in a photograph is a combination of expectation, desire and our cultural background. To finish with a quote found on page 170: " .....in China.....Not only are there proper subjects for the camera, those which are positive, inspirational (exemplary activities, smiling people, bright weather), and orderly, but there are proper ways of photographing, which derive from notions about the moral order of space that preclude the very idea of photographic seeing". 

Clothes as an 'Identifier'

In an earlier blog ("A wider range of costume wearers - 10th October 2013) I posited the idea that apart from re-enactors there were many others that wore 'costume'. I had agreed with my Tutor that I would widen the field of my photographic study to include some of these others. At that time I had such obvious others as the more outlandish, from my point of view which may be dated, costumes as exhibited by Goths and similar groups. Two days ago I was in the City of Nottingham in the search of such members of the public. I did not have much success, possibly because I was looking in the wrong place, and came away with just 6 images that were in some way connected with the major project. As I sat in the Autumn sunshine thinking why the day had not been as fruitful as I hoped I came to the conclusion that I had not done sufficient planning but also I had made little effort to understand, from an academic point of view, the phenomenon I was attempting to photograph.

The thought that I needed greater understanding came from my responses as I viewed the passing parade of people on their way to who knows where. I found myself constructing a brief life history about anyone who particularly caught my attention. For example I saw this girl walking towards me:

In height she was close to 6 feet tall so would have been noticeable in most situations. However the clothing she was wearing demanded attention and the way that she walked strongly suggested a  'stuff you' attitude. What conclusions did I reach. It was evident from the lanyard badge she wore round her neck that she was a student so I surmised she was a student in the creative arts faculty. Another clue is the portfolio case she is carrying in her left hand. Her choice of dress suggested that she wished to be seen as different and, if belonging to a group at all, she was a member of a very small group that saw themselves at odds with the norms of the society in which they lived. The choice of hat gave pause for thought. Had we been in Moscow in the middle of winter it may not have been cause for comment but the day was pleasantly mild. The hat as a piece of protective wear made no sense so I reached the conclusion that it was part of her statement to the world about her. Here, I thought, is someone you do not mess with. Of course I could be totally wrong and that she really is a pussy cat who loves the world and all its inhabitants.

Although this young woman is dressed in a way that provokes interest and speculation there were many others who were more conservatively dressed and yet I continued to make up small life histories that were suggested by their mode of dress. Where there was time for both speculation and photography I took a photograph of those I found most interesting.

How reasonable are the conclusions we draw from how a person dresses? Experience suggests that we are often close to the truth otherwise much social interaction between relative strangers would be near impossible.  We learn to recognise and respond to the clues we are offered by the way that a person dresses. Although more difficult now than in the past how people dress themselves tells us a great deal about how they see themselves and the likely groups to which they belong. We have many facets to our 'identity' such as our gender (not always easy to decide); ethnic group and age. Less obvious indicators are profession, religion and, if known, wealth. How a person dresses can provide strong clues to the answer to all these questions at the same time.What we wear tells the world how we wish to be seen and, equally importantly, how we see ourselves.

Viewing the passing world in diverse forms of dress it would be easy to assume that we dress as we wish, and that, in part, is true but there are a number of pressures upon us to conform. There is a strong desire amongst most animals, including humans, to belong to and be accepted by a particular group. The group may be very large such as a religious group where there is a dress code that is followed by all faithful adherents - the sikh turban being a clearly visible example - or it may be of significant size such as the 'teddy boys' of the 1950's who declared their allegiance by wearing Edwardian style clothes or a small, close knit group whose numbers and whose dress code may not be obvious to the casual observer. What is common amongst virtually all groups, whatever their size, is that clothing, or lack of it, will be the way in which a member states their allegiance.

Dr Karen Pine, a psychologist at the University of Hertfordshire, says that "People feel safer when they dress alike...They are signalling their need to belong to the group. A team that chooses the same style of dress for work is indicating their cohesiveness, which may reflect a wider collaborative culture." Psychologist Oliver James Says"......attire is the way you get a cohesive team spirit: people feeling as though we are all in this together. A modern example, which appears on our TV screens regularly, is football teams and their supporters. Despite the relative high costs of wearing the 1st team colours of the team you support, which for marketing purposes are changed regularly, supporters denote their allegiance by wearing the latest strip.
 (see http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/features/dressed-the-same-as-a-colleagueits-a-twin-twin-situation-for-your-career-trajectory-8798938.html)

From the foregoing we can draw the conclusion that, for all practical purposes everyone is, in some way, wearing a 'costume' that offer clues to the make up of their identity. The people who are members of a Morris Dancing Group or Re-enactment group are exhibiting their allegiance to the group norms of the Society or Club to which they belong. They are more noticeable because their style of dress lies outside that which we usually see in everyday life plus the fact that they invite people to see them. The rest of us (and them as well when they are not Morris Dancing) offer a different set of clues that conform to the norms of the groups we belong to at any point in time. Our susceptibility to group pressures will vary as we move from one role to another in our everyday life. For all we know the sedately dressed banker we see in the City may go home and change into an unusual costume prior to joining other group members in a series of rituals that would seem strange to others.

Where does this leave my project? On the one hand I could, in theory, photograph anyone arguing that what we see is a person that is conforming to the pressures of the group he/she belongs at that moment in time. However I am not sure that would be much of a photo story. Happily their remain a significant part of the population whose dress is sufficiently different to be interesting because it lies outside the broad range that we usually call 'normal'. These will be my targets.

Other Sources:

http://www.shef.ac.uk/archaeology/research/dress-and-society
http://www.spring.org.uk/2009/06/why-group-norms-kill-creativity.php
www.spring.org.uk/2009/07/10-rules-that-govern-groups.php

Is that really me?

In reading through Camera Lucida I was left with an uneasy feeling about the Winter Garden story in which Barthes ‘sees’ all that is his mother. Leaving aside the question as to whether the photograph existed the question that remained for me was - How did he know that it was his mother?  Obviously he could not know through his own experience so it is safe to assume that either someone told him or that he saw in the image someone he wanted to be his mother. Barthes is suspected of imagining the Winter Garden photograph because of his desire to find a photograph that captured the essence of his mother so it can be argued that this overwhelming obsession could have led him to identify a photograph of two children one of whom he decided was his  mother. 

In considering this possibility I considered how I knew that photographs of myself as a young child were actually of me. The earliest photograph of me that I have in my possession is me as an 8 year old child at a wedding reception. As far as I know this is the only image there is of me until I am 20 years old. I look at the photograph and despite having been told that the young child is me I have no recollection whatsoever of the actual event. I do not deny that the event took place, indeed I recognise the bride and groom as being my Aunt and Uncle (my Mother’s brother) and also recognise about 50% of the others who are/were relatives of mine. What I do not do is recognise myself.  I cannot see the essence of myself in this image. 

The photograph of me at 20 years of age is of me holding my baby daughter and I can remember such a time and identify where it was taken. Although the photograph was taken over 50 years ago I know with certainty that the adult with the baby is me. I have many photographs that cover the time that photograph was taken to the present day sufficiently close together in time for it to be possible to see the gradual changes as I grew older. I have a sense of continuity across the 50+ years that allows me to say with some certainty that that set of photographs is of me. Yet I cannot, with any certainty, place the first photograph into the sequence. Why should this be so? For me it raises the question of the difference between how we see ourselves and how we are recorded in a photograph.

There has been a discussion recently in ‘We Are OCA’  [http://www.weareoca.com/photography/damn-it-man-im-a-photographer-not-a-model] about the reluctance of photographers to be photographed. Although the comments now seem to be concentrating on the relationship between the photographer and the sitter the key comment for me was the one posted by Peter Haveland (14 Oct  ’13   4.19p.m.) in which he suggests that ‘’.....they don’t approve of the way they look in photographs”. Being very much a reluctant sitter I can identify with this suggestion. What I see in a photograph, no matter how well it is composed and lit, is not how I imagine myself to be. The mental image I have of myself, and which I nurture, is at odds with the ‘reality’ portrayed. Is this an explanation of why I can consider the possibility of the child in the photograph not being me? Do I see in that child elements that I do not wish to acknowledge? 

In Barthes case he had a mental image of his mother that all, bar one, of the photographs he found were not a true representation of the person he remembered. In my case I seem to have a mental image of myself as a child, which I cannot put into words, that allows me to challenge the validity of a photograph. I doubt it for reasons I cannot express. I trust that I am not alone in this respect that others have a similar experience when looking at images of themselves. My contention is that without a memory of the event we cannot know with certainty that what we are told is a photograph of us is a fact. We can only rely upon our trust in those providing us with the information.

A wider range of costume wearers

As I have worked through the major project part of the Course taking many images of re-enactors wearing costumes from bygone ages I came to the realisation that there was a whole range of people who would not consider that they were wearing a 'costume' and certainly would not consider themselves re-enactors who yet wear clothing and accoutrements that identify them with a particular group. It is not all that obvious but once you start looking for it the evidence is there. As an example I took this photograph in Annecy, France of a group of students crossing a park during  their lunch break.

At first glance the evidence for a 'costume' is not immediately obvious but a closer examination provides a number of clues. The length of hair, tightness of jeans and the shoulder bag that each of them is carrying identifies them as a group. Later behaviour as they continued their walk confirmed initial impressions and a sequence of phtographs will show them lighting cigarettes and displaying other group behaviour. The other group in the image at the rear are probably from the same school but the difference here is that one of them has a boy friend thus requiring different behaviour from the members of that group although the girls are similarly attired to the group in the foreground.

Desire to belong to a group is very strong in human beings and other animals but humans show their 'solidarity' through dress and common behaviour patterns. Having been around for quite some time I have memories of teddy boys, mods, rockers and motor bike gangs each group having its own identifying style of dress and behaviour. The most obvious grouping in modern times is football supporters who display the colours of their chosen Club and many of whom wear replicas of the 1st team.

Britain, being a multi-cultural society also offers many examples of ethnic dress and this too identifies members of a specific group.

It has been agreed with my tutor that I can extend my remit to include such groups thus providing greater opportunities to capture the diversity of 'costume' where the latter term relates to the indication of group belonging.

Don McCullin - Visa Pour L'Image 2013 Perpignan

I have commented generally elsewhere on my visit to the Visa Pour L'Image 2013 (cedricsherwoodap.blogspot.co.uk) and in this blog I want to comment on the exhibition of Don McCullin's work.

Probably the most famous of war photographer's Don McCullin's work places him in virtually every conflict across the globe. In the exhibition catalogue (McCullin C (2013). Visa Pour L'Image Perpignan) we read that he chose to experience war through a spirit of adventure but that this later turned to anger and an abhorrence of war. He wished to expose the horror and thereby to bring a halt to the terror and death. The irony is, of course, that the history of his career demonstrates, more clearly than possibly in any other way, that photographs, no matter how horrific or poignant, will not stop war or indeed conflict.

The status of McCullin was underlined by the whole of the space in the Eglise Des Dominicains  being devoted to his work so we were able to see examples of the wide range of his work. Wandering around was like a journey through much of my adult life both from stories near home to remembered conflicts across the globe. To choose a couple of images from this selection was difficult but amongst many two images struck strong emotions within me. The first is an image of three American soldiers in Vietnam. Two colleagues are holding a third who has been seriously injured. They are surrounded by the detritus of war and for me the shot sums up the whole futility of war and the price paid by ordinary individuals for decisions taken by politicians of their Country. One could question the technical elements of the photograph but there is a sense of immediacy, of a shot grabbed in a difficult situation. The Vietnam War seemed constantly in our newspapers and televisions so that paradoxically it became unreal. It was as though one was watching a docudrama and that the actors in some way got up after the shot was taken and removed their make-up. For our mental health we have to compartmentalise the horror, to lessen the impact. The sheer volume of reportage helps us to do this by numbing our sensitivities to the reality.

The second photograph is of the Troubles in Northern Ireland. The use of the term 'Troubles' lessens the reality of what essentially was armed conflict fought on both sides with a bloody disregard for human life. In the image we see a squad of armed soldiers about to charge a group of youths. The youths are not in the picture and we only know of their existence through the information we are provided with in the caption. We do not know if the youths are armed, throwing stones or simply jeering the soldiers and yet the soldiers are fully kitted out and some are carrying lethal weapons. The photograph is a perfect example of the 'decisive moment' as the soldiers have just broken into a run and it is clear that they are now totally committed to their task - there is no going back and retreat is not an option.

As with the Vietnam War the constant flow of reportage numbed our senses to the reality of what was happening. No matter what the horror perpetrated it was noted and then we passed on. In part this was because of censorship either through selection by the photographer in what he chose to shoot or by picture editors deciding upon what to include or exclude. I was 'fortunate' enough to be at a conference discussing the need for measures to reduce the risks associated with car and parcel bombs and the presenters felt that we should be faced with the reality of what actually occurred when a car bomb exploded. I will never be able to remove the images from my mind and they are brought back every time I hear the words 'Northern Ireland".

I am a great admirer of McCullin's work recognising the courage that it took to get the photographs but also the skill and awareness that gave us so many striking images. However it was his choice. To imagine that his work would in some way make a difference may have been a motivation but one wonders how long it took him to come to the conclusion that it was all a waste of time.

Abir Abdullah - Visa Pour L'Image 2013 Perpignan

I comment elsewhere cedricsherwoodap.blogspot.co.uk on my general thoughts about the Visa Pour L'Image but in this blog I wish to comment on a specific exhibition, that of Abir Abdullah.

The media has carried many reports about the tragic deaths in Bangladesh either through uncontrolled fires or building collapse. Many occur in work places where the owners are under contract to produce clothing and other items for some of the World's best known brands. Abdullah's purpose in showing the photographs is to change World opinion and more specifically such well known brands as Walmart, Disney and Nike to pay fair prices so that minimum standards relating to health and safety and workers rights can bring an end to such tragedies.

The most powerful image, for me, was of four men holding at shoulder height a fire hose that is spurting water all over them. The image captures the essence of Abdullah's crusade in that we are shown four non-professional firefighters attempting to assist the professionals. There is a determination and commitment in their expressions and the straining of their bodies that cannot be faulted. Yet the whole thing suggest futility because of the inadequate connection between two parts of the hose. One wonders how much water is actually getting to the seat of the fire. In this photograph we face all those things that are wrong and lead to the deaths of so many.

Although most of the images exhibited have impact one other made me stop and dwell longer because it offers so much information in one single image. The main element is the injured (possibly dead) worker being passed, by hand, down a ladder by firefighters. At the bottom of the ladder we see two 'civilians' looking upwards one reaching out to help. We also glimpse a fireman who has descended the ladder and another civilian who is looking away from what is happening above him. We can speculate why he appears not to be concerned about what is happening or that he is overcome by the tragedy happening before his eyes. We will never know. There is another group of three people almost in the centre of the image who are walking towards something that we cannot see although we catch a glimpse of two people partially hidden by the fireman at the top of the ladder. There are other figures in the background  that add to the overall impact of the image.

We also have to consider the position of the photographer. How did he manage to place himself in a position where this image became possible? I would also ask was the composition of the images we see a matter of chance or did the photographer see the composition in his viewfinder and press the button at the right time.

Here we have a very brave and committed photographer who offers a photographic essay in the hope of changing the behaviour of international Corporations. Sadly it would seem that their decisions are solely governed by profit and the response of many has been to take their orders elsewhere in the World devastating the economy of Bangladesh that relies heavily on this type of work.

What is it about some photographers who use their skills to try and change the behaviour of others, usually powerful people or businesses. Is it possible? In my next blog I look at the work of Don McCullin a well known war journalist who came to the conclusion that the answer to this question was No!

What is a photograph 2

Referring back to the previous blog we are still left with the question  “What is a photograph?” Does the question have an answer? It is relatively easy to describe the physical properties of a photograph. Yet these are not unique and a physical description would not distinguish it from a number of other things. Barthes in “Camera Lucida” (p76) argues that it is not possible to deny that the subject of the photograph “has been there”. It is this unique property that is the essence (Barthes uses the term ‘noeme’ ) of Photography. He gives the noeme a name: “That has been”. It can be argued that a photograph is a photograph because it shows something ‘that has been’. If this is true then anything that does not have the property of ‘that has been’ is not a photograph. We seem to have answered the question.

It is a reasonable presumption that of those things that we name ‘photographs’ the vast majority would qualify to be a photograph - their subject is something that ‘has been’. Yet there is a significant minority of things that we call photographs that are of things that ‘have not been’. I am not thinking here of such images such as the infamous ‘Fairies at the bottom of the garden’. Although the fairies are not there the children’s toys that were supposed to be the fairies are there and the term ‘that has been’ can be truthfully applied to the image i.e. it is a photograph. What I am thinking of are images that ‘bend’ the truth. 

In the Autumn Review of the British Journal of Photography there is an article discussing a work by Erica McDonald titled T’he Laundry Sherpas of Brooklyn’ which mixes fact with fiction. Prompted by seeing people carrying laundry in Brooklyn McDonald was reminded of people in poorer countries who have to walk miles to find sufficient water to do their laundry. She created a story line where the laundry carriers were journeying through an urban area. What is not too obvious from the images is that those photographed are acting, pretending that they have been wandering for hours. McDonald prefers the term ‘fictive’ to ‘fiction’ arguing that what she has created does not oppose the facts. Of course we are only asking whether the images are photographs. Can it be said of what is in the photographs ‘has been’?  The answer is ‘Yes’ although what they are attempting to portray is a falsehood. Yet Barthes’ criteria does not require us to ask of the image whether what the photograph is showing is true only that what we see was there. Clearly the people were there so using Barthes’ criteria it is a photograph. We can draw the conclusion that even though what the image purports to be is untrue providing the subject matter was in front of the camera then the object is a photograph. A photograph can lie.

We can also consider montages where the image we see before us is made up of a number of images that were not necessarily taken at the same time. They may create a very realistic image such as when we remove a background and replace it with another. They may create something that cannot exist in reality but all parts were photographed and can be legitimately called ‘has been’. Is time something that negates a photograph? Barthes is silent on this aspect of a photograph but there is nothing in his model that precludes differing time elements.

There are elements that are common in all the images above and that is the use of a camera (in the broadest sense of something that records the full spectrum of light storing it on some kind of medium) and the presence of something before the camera at the time of recording. Providing these conditions are met then the resulting product is a photograph.

What is a Photograph?

In his book1 Barthes makes a whole range of statements about Photography as he searches for the essence of Photography - that which makes it ‘itself’. He was not sure that “Photography existed, that it had  a ”genius”of its own” ...........I wanted to learn at all costs what Photography was “in itself”, by what essential feature it was to be distinguished from the community of images”.2

Throughout his book he makes a number of assertions about the nature of a photograph (he distinguishes between a photograph and the Photograph, the latter term referring to all photographs as a body, which raises the question - What is a photograph?

”Whatever it grants vision and whatever its manner, a photograph is always invisible: it is not it that we see”.3

If we do not see a photograph what is it that we see?  I  interpret the word ‘see’ as being different from ‘looking’ in that ‘seeing’ requires an interpretation or understanding of the image before us i.e. some positive mental activity. Seeing requires us to carry out an analysis of what is before us and a selection process as we zone in on those elements within the image that interest us. [The corollary of this is that we zone out other elements i.e. we do not ‘see’ them]. We are products of our culture and any analysis necessarily requires some level of understanding - the need to place the subject matter within our cultural framework. Depending upon our predilections we may concentrate upon the buildings in the background or the young lady sunbathing or granddad with his handkerchief on his head. Only on those rare occasions when we are required to say something about everything within the photograph, including the technical elements such as composition, do we see the whole but even then we divide the image into its many components and talk about them individually.

A photograph is both unique and universal. It is unique in the sense that what we ‘see’ in the photograph is personal to us. Even within the same general culture e.g ‘Western’ or ‘Northern’ or ‘Geordie’ each individual is a unique being because everyone’s experiences are different and what piques our interest is different. Its universality lies in the fact that almost everyone would respond to the question What is it? with the answer “a photograph” if shown one.

Barthes moves from a quest to discover what makes Photography unique through a study of photography as a whole to the study of those few photographs that he was sure existed for him. Even this move from the general to the particular failed to provide him with the understanding that he desired and towards the end of the book he concentrates on just one photograph - that of his mother as a five year old child. It is interesting to follow his changing thoughts about the nature of Photography beginning with his awareness that some images interested him slightly whilst others interested him “powerfully”

“..a certain photograph can....interest me slightly; if another photograph interests me powerfully, I should like to know what there is in it that sets me off.5

He includes a quote from Sartre:

“Newspaper photographs can very well ‘say nothing to me’......Though the persons whose photograph I see are certainly present in the photograph they are without existential posture. Moreover, cases occur where the photograph leaves me so indifferent that I do not even bother to see it ‘as an image’. 6

After further consideration Barthes reaches the realisation, for him, that the level of interest he feels for a photograph is reliant upon two co-existing elements the studium and the punctum. He offers the following explanation:

“ The first....a consequence of my knowledge, my culture..I can take a kind of general interest......my emotion requires the rational intermediary of an ethical and political culture......[the] word  is ‘studium’..application to a thing, taste for someone, a kind of general enthusiastic commitment, of course, but without special acuity. The second element will break (or punctuate) the studium This time it is not I who seek it out.......it is this element which rises from the scene, shoots out of it like an arrow, and pierces me".7

The studium is of the order of liking something but not loving it. The term can be applied to all photographs at a universal level but as the quote from Sartre shows it cannot be applied at the individual level. Some photographs have no impact on us personally.

Although punctum is an individual response it can also be seen as a universal because we cannot exclude the possibility that someone somewhere will be ‘pierced’ by any particular photograph. Equally the punctum of any particular photograph may not be the same for everyone indeed if Barthes reporting of the effect upon him of a family portrait shown on page 44 of the book is accurate then it can change for an individual. Barthes first offers as the punctum for this picture the belt worn low by one of the women and her strapped pumps but he does not understand why this should be so. However later he claims that it was neither of these but that the real punctum “was the necklace she was wearing; for (no doubt) it was this same necklace (a slender ribbon of braided gold) which I had seen worn by someone in my own family” 8. Unfortunately the necklace is a string of pearls which brings into question the accuracy and truthfulness of Barthes writing.

In the second part of the book beginning at page 63 we find that from a few photographs he now moves to derive all Photography (its “nature”) from the only photograph that assuredly existed for me 9. This unique photograph was of his mother at the age of 5 in a Winter Garden and in which he discerned all those qualities of his mother that he remembered and which he had failed to find in all other photographs of her. The existence of this photograph has been questioned (Olin 2011) because it is not reproduced in the book. Barthes reasoning is that the photograph only exists for him and for others it would be of only passing interest (a studium).

[I ask myself whether the existence of the photograph is important. Barthes describes it in detail and for him it clearly ‘existed’. He has a mental image that is as strong as a photograph in front of him. As Barthes claims we see a photograph better when we close our eyes or when it is not there. Is this not what Barthes means when he says that we do not see a photograph? Is it that we see the mental image and that we take that mental image to represent the photograph? It would also explain Barthes mistake in identifying a string of pearls as a braided gold necklace. It is known that our memory is imperfect and that we are prone to create an image that is more in line with our expectations and desires than the ‘reality’. One has only to think of witnesses to a dramatic event such as a mugging or assault where 10 witnesses will give 10 different accounts of the same thing even to the addition of something or someone that was not there.]

In stating that the Winter Garden photograph only exists for him - presumably having both studium and punctum - Barthes allows us to draw the conclusion that not only that all photographs are unique to each individual i.e. that any photograph exists in almost an infinite number of states but also that all images have both studium and punctum. There is no universal truth that distinguishes a photograph and that there is no universal element that allows us to discuss the Photograph.

References

1. Barthes R (1980) . Camera Lucida. Translated edition (2000) London Vintage
2. ibid p3
3. ibid p6
4 ibid p6
5. ibid p9
6. Sartre P (1940) Psychology of Imagination Unknown
7. ibid p26
8. ibid p.53
9. ibid p 73

Bibliography

Barthes R (1980). Camera Lucida. Translated Edition (2000) London Vintage

Batchen G (ed) Photography Degree Zero - Reflections on Roland Barthes' Camera Lucida. (2011) MIT Cambridge Mass

Holiday Reading

Following a recommendation from my Tutor I have managed to obtain a copy of Camera Lucida [Roland Barthes (2000) Trans Richard Howard London. Vintage Press] so I can look forward to remembering the difference between the 'signifier' and the 'signified'. Glad I completed the Visual Culture Course.

I was also able to obtain a copy of Photography Degree Zero Reflections on Roland Barthes's Camera Lucida [Ed. Geoffrey Batchen  2011 MIT Cambridge USA that will offer further insight and hopefully clues to Barthes thinking as it is not always obvious.

Watch this space.

A day of joy

I went out today with no pre-conceived ideas about what I wanted to photograph, no thoughts of whether it does or does not fit into some assignment, nor any worry about whether it would pass muster when judged by someone else. I had almost forgotten what a delight this is and why I used to enjoy photography so much. The apparently unremitting pressure of trying to meet some frequently poorly stated guidelines to meet some uncertain assignment whose relevance is not always obvious can be a deadening hand on creativity at the best of times. Sometime it is necessary to kick over the traces and just photograph for the sheer pleasure it gives. To remember why I got into this game in the first place.

Must remind myself to have such days regularly.

Close Up Photographers at Work - Portraits Sky Arts 1.

Watched this programme through twice - it was well worth it. Directed by Albert Meysles the programme was described in the synopsis as "a look into the creative minds, philosophies and techniques of some of the most famous photographers working today". The chosen photographers were: Jay Maisel, Susan Meiseles, Brigitte Lacombe, Miru Kim, Steve McCurry and Bruce Davison. The great shame was that the programme lasted less than 50 minutes excluding the commercials. The content was such that I was left with the feeling that each photographer could have used the whole time for themselves.

I have been an admirer of Jay Maisel's work for some time. I also  recognised some of the other work shown without necessarily knowing the photographer. Miru Kim's I had not come across before who was unique because she was the subject of her own photographs. I found myself picking up on different points on the two occasions I watched the film and I guess it will be a little while before I will realise the impact upon my own photography. I do know that having watched Jay Maisel in action both on the streets of New York and in Paris France has had a direct impact upon the way that I work when doing street photography. With these sorts of programmes it is inevitable that we unconsciously absorb tidbits of information that we then transfer to our own style of working. They are not the 'big things such as Miru Kim photographing herself in the nude but the approach and preparation advice that is given directly or indirectly. For example one piece of advice I will take away in the piece by Steve McCurry is have your camera settings set so that you can pounce immediately you see something.

A Really Bad Day at the Office

I don't believe that I have ever felt nearer to packing the whole thing in than I do now.

 I received back my tutor's response to Assignment 3 which is the critical review which was o.k. but I had also include, as required, Parts 1 and 2 of my Major Project. Unfortunately the topic I have chosen does not fit easily into the requirement to split the project into 6 parts. I had raised this with my tutor and she had agreed but offered no real way forward. In this case I had the temerity to send my comments and questions in 4 parts because that was the easiest way to explain what was happening and what advice I wanted. Apparently this was the wrong thing to do as the Course material said that I should submit two parts (perhaps I should have been devious and sent the material in two parts and then subdivided each into two parts.)  I thought that this was petty in the extreme but felt it was a lesson learned.

As I have said before i am really struggling with what is needed and what is the required end result. My tutor did not answer this query but suggested a whole new area of study that I guessed may be of interest to her but had little reference to the core element of the Course which is photography. Her proposal in a nutshell was for me to interview a whole range of people to discover why they did what they did. Not content with this it was also suggested that I discuss with teachers the value, and what the children gained, from dressing up in historical costumes. (My project is photographing re-enactors and other relevant people.) On an average shoot I take approximately 200 photographs probably involving roughly the same number of people. In my opinion if I were to pursue this line I would need a great deal more than 600 hours.

I e-mailed my tutor expressing my concerns and that there was a need for a 'meeting of minds' meaning between the tutor (her) and the student (me). Her response was to ignore that instead suggest I read a book "Context and Narrative". I have actually read it for another Course and it sits on my bookshelf as I type. It has absolutely nothing to do with a failure of relationships between Tutor and Student. (I would recommend it to any photography student as it offers valuable insight into the psychology surrounding the photograph. Context and Narrative. Maria Short 2011 AVA Publishing Lausanne).

In the end I have decided to seek a change of Tutor in the hope that I will get help with the difficulties I am facing.

Confusion over Requirements for Assignment 3

Just received an e-mail from my tutor re what should have been sent for Assignment 3. I have re-read the Course material and as far as I can tell what I have sent is what is required. If I am correct then either the tutor has mis-read her notes or the material I have and the material that the tutor has are different. As unlikely as the latter sounds it has happened to me before and whilst the OCA sorted it out it was to say the least a nuisance. On a Course like YoP where I am struggling to get my head around what is required it is deeply depressing whatever the reason.

I await with some trepidation the outcome of my response but right at this moment I feel like kicking the whole thing into touch.

Exhibition

Visited the Norfolk Photography Group's exhibition last week. I am a former member of the Group and know that the standard is usually very high.

The mix of images was wide and whilst some were of a very high standard others left something to be desired although none were less than good. Particularly fine examples of wildlife and some very convincing composites that drew one's attention.

I always find this exhibition useful in terms of my own photography because I know most of the people concerned and have some idea of their strengths and weaknesses.

Review of Progress

I have attended approximately 10 events and taken several hundred photographs. My 'hit' rate i.e. the percentage of photographs that stood out as better than the rest was, for each individual event roughly 25% although this varied enormously from one event to the other. This 'success rate' depended very much on the nature of the event that varied from one side of Morris Dancers at Sleaford  in Lincolnshire to a major event in Loughborough, Leics where there was a great deal going on and plenty of opportunity. It also varied as I became more experienced with this type of photography and what was and what was not possible. There was also an awareness of the needs of the Course and that had an impact on what I retained and what I put to one side. I was conscious of the need to create a portfolio that was of the necessary high standard and interesting in its own right. For example I found myself always being conscious of images that I had kept from previous events and attempting to balance those with what was available from the shoot of that day.

I have found the photographing of people less fraught than I thought. In large part this is due to the willingness of re-enactors to talk about themselves and naturally assume that they will be photographed. Their willingness was both a blessing but also something of a curse. There were a number of occasions where my intent was to shoot as natural an image as possible but the enactor would spot the camera and strike a pose that was interesting on the one hand, because this hinted at how they saw themselves in costume, but something of a curse because they too often looked like mannequins in a shop window. I found the best time was either when they were involved  in staging something for the general audience or immediately after they had struck a pose for another photographer. In fairness there were also a significant proportion who ignored the camera and stayed in part.

As I looked through the photographs that I had taken I became aware that there were two types of photographs that I had to be particularly aware of when shooting - the mannequins and the onlookers.

Mannequins.

In this image the elements are all their to show the clothing and type of work this woman did in the era (Tudor) that she was representing. Whilst that is of itself interesting a portfolio of this type of shot  where the woman could be a mannequin would be boring and restrictive.

Similarly although there is a bit more interest in this photograph there is very little evidence of any action and it has a sense of having been posed.

Onlookers

You quickly learn (if it was not already obvious) that it is almost impossible to avoid including some of the spectators. I found that how much of this could be tolerated before the image is of the spectators and not the subject matter depends to a great extent on the ratio of the two - not in so much as the relative numbers but in how much space the two occupied within the photograph.

In this image the maypole dancers in their red costumes occupy the foreground and are the element that the viewer sees first. Although there is a large crowd accompanying them they are not sufficiently obtrusive as to take attention away from the main element.

In this image the two dancers represent a smaller proportion of the picture and the eye is drawn away from them to look at a quite interesting background.

These two images were taken right at the beginning of the project and I have learnt to be more patient although on occasion you just have to go with what you have got. In the case of these Maypole Dancers there were no angles at which the photographer could avoid the onlookers simply because the activity was circular so wherever the spectators stood they would get a good view.