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.

Assignment 3 - Critical Review

Spent the last week drawing together all the information I had gathered on William Eggleston, the subject of my critical review for Assignment 3 of the Course and writing the review itself. I learnt a lot about Eggleston who it is claimed was responsible for making colour photography respectable in the art world. I have found the whole process time consuming and of questionable value. Can I say with any certainty that I am a better photographer for the experience? The answer in short is 'No' but equally I cannot know with any certainty that something has stuck that will make me see photography in a different light.

Eggleston's approach to photography largely denies the value of the 'rules' that so beset the photographic world. He is not overly concerned about formal composition, verticals and horizontals, thirds and the edges of images. His 'cropping' allows for things half in and half out of the image. I was left with the impression that many of his photographs would score low in many competitions in Camera Clubs and many would not be accepted for exhibition unless they were known to be one of his works.

It is, as I have always believed, a case of not the content of the image but where it is seen (Eggleston's work was first exhibited in 1976 in the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York.) The most important things in photography, as with much of art is ,where it is shown and how much somebody has been willing to pay for it. The cynical part of my nature suggests that the best way to become 'famous' is to get a rich relative to buy one of my works for several hundreds of thousands of pounds  and sit back as the the scramble begins to own a work by Cedric Sherwood which must be good because someone paid half-a-million for one of his photographs.

Back to reality. As I have wondered in previous blogs - is there any value in getting someone who wants to be a photographer to write a 3000 word essay. It is a given in Academic circles but has anyone sat down and examined whether there is any value in such an exercise. Is it the case that photographers, and there are many, who never had the benefits of a formal education in photography produce work that is in some way worse than those who have enjoyed the benefits. It may be the case that being untrammelled by the demands of correctness and rules they are better photographers e.g Eggleston.