"Good" and "Bad" Photography

[Stephanie Brim]

A lot of people get on me for doing what they call 'test shots'. I shoot my environment. That generally means around the house or in my immediate neighborhood. I do this when I first get a new film, and also when I get restless. Sometimes it helps me to 'see' again. Most times, though, I don't come out with anything that I consider to be a great photograph.

My perceptions have been shaken lately by more than one person telling me that some of these photos are worthy of being published. None are photos I dislike, but most are photos I never thought as publishable or even meriting printing.

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

These are all from a plastic camera. The rest can be seen Dead Link Removed. I've gotten more complements on these images than any others I've taken.

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

I've been told that this should be published as a diptyc.

All these photos have flaws. The first three were taken with a Lex35 plastic 35mm camera. The last two are just technically not what I myself would really consider "good".

So I don't know. Anyone else have comments on this?

 

[rkmiec]

i like the bike shot.do they have flaws???that is the big question.the best photos are sometimes the ones you dont think of.i can really see you walking by the bike and saying what the heck and firing the shutter.it is the viewer that decides if it is good.do you like evry shot ever taken and published,i dont,i think some are just riding on the name of the photographer.just keep shooting.

 

[papagene]

When I was in grad school studying sculpture, my teachers and fellow students always said they liked the things I built to help me assemble my sculptures as much as my sculptures themselves. So I decided to incorporate some of these structures into my final pieces.
You never know where your inspiration comes from. I wouldn't stop making these types of photos, just maybe be a little more careful when you expose, process and print them. You just might end up with a few gems.

gene

 

[Travis Nunn]

I think friends and family are always eager to offer advice like "You should be published!"

 

[Stephanie Brim]

They weren't friends. Probably should've mentioned that.

 

[keithwms]

So I don't know. Anyone else have comments on this?

Well, I think you have to find a way to know for yourself. When you know, then you will have the confidence to express yourself without reservation.

 

[Gene_Laughter]

Looking back, so many years ago, when I was starting out in art photography and falling in love with too many of my images (all of which I thought were great!), I would set them aside for a year or two, and then go back and review them again. Most often, when I returned for another view, I would realize that the images really were not so good after all. I also found that my "darlings" were hardly new, but cliches that had been done many times before and done so much better! As William Faulkner advised young writers, "kill your darlings!" I agree with Keith. You must learn to judge (and edit) your own work - and this takes lots of shooting and lots of experience and lots of studying art of all kinds. I recall one of the best professors I had in college said, "buy a large garbage can and fill it often for that's how one becomes a very good photographer!"

Cheers,

Gene

 

[Markok765]

I recently looked at my old negs. I find that they were pretty good.

 

[ntenny]

A lot of people get on me for doing what they call 'test shots'. I shoot my environment.

I usually test new cameras, new processes, and so on with the exact same shot: I step out my front door in the morning and shoot northwest (where I have a rather nice view of some neighbouring properties and an undeveloped ridgeline). It's interesting to me that people sometimes express strong preferences for one or another of these (mostly) very similar images, often based on distinctions that I don't understand at all. People just seem to see differently, sometimes *really* differently, from one another.

With that in mind...

My perceptions have been shaken lately by more than one person telling me that some of these photos are worthy of being published. None are photos I dislike, but most are photos I never thought as publishable or even meriting printing.

...I don't see why this should "shake" your perceptions. It just means that some people really like some stuff that you don't, which wouldn't be an issue except that the "stuff" happens to be your work.

I really like the bike one, by the way. The others don't light me up as much.

All these photos have flaws.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I doubt if I've ever met anybody who could reasonably claim to have produced a photo without flaws, and actually, I'm not even sure what a photo without flaws would be. Most of my favourite photos, I can identify specific "flaws" in---but they wouldn't be the photos they are without them, so is "flaw" the right word? Beats me.

-NT

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

My perceptions have been shaken lately by more than one person telling me that some of these photos are worthy of being published. None are photos I dislike, but most are photos I never thought as publishable or even meriting printing.

Are your friends working in publishing? I've had a lot of grandma/uncles/brothers/cousins/friends/etc telling me that my photos are nice & all that, but they're not the ones offering me publishing contracts.

What I think your friends mean is that they can see that your pictures are not just snaps, but show an effort they would not put into their own photos for various reasons. Thus, they could be appreciable by someone else than the parties directly concerned.

The best way to know if your photos are publishable is to look various kinds of publication, see what kind of stuff they publish, and try to imagine your work therein. If yes, then call them up; if no, well, life goes on.

 

[phaedrus]

Perhaps those test photos of yours appeal to some people because they are indeterminate and leave room for interpretation. That's mentally and spiritually stimulating.
Doing these without much premeditation, you get out of the way and let the strangeness of things imprint itself on the pictures.

 

[firecracker]

You must learn to judge (and edit) your own work - and this takes lots of shooting and lots of experience and lots of studying art of all kinds.

I agree. The editing process can be fun but takes a lot of energy. And because the the images you want to show other people whether by publishing or not publishing them are 100 percent yours. That means you have to control them in every aspect.

Don't rush, but take your time and think how you want to present your images and what sort of return/reward/revenue you want to receive by doing that. It has to work more like setting up a business plan because it is real. And watch out for scam photo contests and con publishers because there are quite many of them out there:

http://www.photoethnography.com/blog/archives/2005/05/scams_avoiding.html

 

[Ed Sukach]

The greatest sin in pencil sketching - and all of art, is IMHO, overworking. One tries to create a masterpiece ... and it doesn't quite "work" - so more effort is expended ... and more, and more - until the image is a dark, muddy, more or less indistinct collection of lines and smudges. Yes, "We always HAVE to do our best" ... true, but, invariably, our best requires a sort of self discipline - "From this point, I cannot `improve' this image - it is time to move on." The same holds true in photography.

After that move we can return to our work - more often than not, I'll find that I was too close to the work - through fresh eyes my concept of what "works" changes ... and a great deal of my previous work is FAR better than I thought it to be.
"Learn to judge our own work?" We always evaluate our own work (see "works or not"), but to "judge" ... against what standard to we try to do that?

I've worked teaching raw, emerging photographers - I 've yet to meet one who was NOT overly critical of their work. So many times, they have produced *wonderful*, expressive images - and through some veil of .... I don't know - well-meant "expert" advice, relegated them to the circular file. I've spent a lot of time rescuing these images.

Beyond the idea that there is one great secret in photography - and art (there is none) the significant photographs - and this is true of all great art - ALL include a portion of the being of the artist. Once we can learn to drop our defenses.... and display something of our vision, and innards, the experiencers of our work will become more - appreciative ... the chances are far greater that our work will WORK for them, ...I think there is a - more than slightly mystical connection... and that is the measure, the ONLY true measure of external merit.

When you take yours "test shots", you have loosened the binding (and suffocating) demand for something beyond your concept of your capability. (Note 1). The effects of overworking are either eliminated - or at least minimized - and your BEING shines through. That being, spontanteous, fresh, unadorned or encumbered - free from the adulteration of others or society - is a beautiful thing in all of us.

I guess what I am trying to say, is that great... significant, GOOD work ... will only be produced by "free" photographers. Setting oneself free is not easy - freedom is a scary, insecure place ... but compared to the alternatives, the only place worthy of life.

Note 1 ... You are CAPABLE of work FAR surpassing the :best: ever done by anyone. We ALL have that capablitiy.

 

[phenix]

When people don’t like what you do, ask you questions: your photos are either excellent or a thrash – you’ll guess it. Consequently, you will have either to educate them or to learn from them.

It’s much simple when people like what you don’t: label them “jealous” and do what Sinatra said.

 

[Struan Gray]

The photos have a tremendous sense of intimacy, of being close to a real person's private life.

I took the liberty of jumping up a level from your link. Love the oldcolor series.

It's up to you what you want to present to the world as "Stephanie's Photography". You have no obligation to please the audience that likes these pictures, and you don't have to let your enjoyment of photography be diluted by working in a style that feels too informal and snapshotty. The best path would be to learn how to foster whatever it was that stimuated people to like these photos and incorporate it into work you are more ready to stand behind as your consciously-taken photos.

 

[Steve Smith]

When I was in grad school studying sculpture, my teachers and fellow students always said they liked the things I built to help me assemble my sculptures as much as my sculptures themselves.

This has just reminded me of a quote from Sir Humphry Davy (English physicist) after viewing an art exhibition: "The finest collection of frames I ever saw"

I think it is easy to dismiss your own work - especially if it was only ever intended as test shots.

But if other people like it then it is obviously better than you think it is.

I think most photographers (and artists in general) are much more critical of their work than someone else viewing it.

Have any of the people praising your work actually asked to buy/have a print? To me, someone wanting to own one of my prints would be the highest form of compliment.


Steve.

 

[Whiteymorange]

Good photography is when an image appears on the film. Bad photography is when there is no image, it's clear or black. Beyond that, it's in the eye of the viewer. There is good art and bad art, but I think that much of what is "publishable" is a matter of personal taste. Much of the current vogue for old snapshots and found images speaks to the emotional content of the images for people who "remember a time when..." They wouldn't have been considered art at the time they were made. Much the same can be said about the images that many of us make with old lenses and alternate processes. They become "art" when they are put out there for other people to appreciate and to see through there own lens of understanding.

Those people who tell you that certain images are great may be seeing them in contexts that you are not. Accept that they may have a point, but don't get too excited. Keep shooting these quick shots, put the images away for awhile and look at them with a fresh eye a few years down the road. There may be gems there, there may be only the "test" images you intended in the first place. Let the critics sort it all out when you're old and famous.

 

[arigram]

An artist has a most difficult task:
- has to know oneself
Putting yourself higher or lower than where you are is dangerous.
At the same time, considering your work to be better or worse than it is, is also dangerous.
Good work need respect and bad need to be learned from.

You asked me what I thought of them.
I gave you my honest opinion.
I did not exaggerate, I did not compliment you.
It will be insulting to me if you think I just said something to be polite or make you feel better.

The photos you dismiss, you have to know REALLY why you dismiss them.
Can you approach them differently? Should you try something else completely?
For you to press the shutter, there had to be a reason.
What was that reason?
Was it good enough for a photograph?

Photography is made on the impulse of a moment.
It is up to the photographer to "train" that impulse.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I couldn't agree more. Although I am relatively new to photography, I've only been doing it seriously for about five years, I cannot think of how much money was spent on prints tossed into the garbage can without quivering.
The other day I went through my prints, and out of a stack two feet tall I think I was able to identify twenty images that I thought were worthwhile today. They resonated within me, they are according to who I am as a person and caused an emotional reaction. It occurred to me that this is the kind of work I should be focusing on. Very sobering to me.

I wonder what I will think when I look at those prints again in twenty years.

Stephanie, I am probably not the best person here to give advice, due to being such a novice at this, but if the work you have shown us is something that gives you an emotional kick and shakes your senses - continue doing that work. If someone in the publishing business, or an art collector or a gallery wants to stand behind you in getting some of your work out there - that's a bonus and a compliment, but always be true to your own instincts about your work. And I think those instincts will be honed and refined for many years to come.

With best wishes,

- Thomas

Looking back, so many years ago, when I was starting out in art photography and falling in love with too many of my images (all of which I thought were great!), I would set them aside for a year or two, and then go back and review them again. Most often, when I returned for another view, I would realize that the images really were not so good after all. I also found that my "darlings" were hardly new, but cliches that had been done many times before and done so much better! As William Faulkner advised young writers, "kill your darlings!" I agree with Keith. You must learn to judge (and edit) your own work - and this takes lots of shooting and lots of experience and lots of studying art of all kinds. I recall one of the best professors I had in college said, "buy a large garbage can and fill it often for that's how one becomes a very good photographer!"

Cheers,

Gene

 

[John Koehrer]

Maybe the shots they think should be published are out of the ordinary for the viewer. It would be the same as seeing the bike and not realizing there's a photograph waiting to happen whereas you see it & make the image.

 

[Jose A Martinez]

Have any of the people praising your work actually asked to buy/have a print? To me, someone wanting to own one of my prints would be the highest form of compliment.


Steve.

I totally agree. I still remember the day I made my first sale. It was a family reunion and I showed some photos, just for the fun, and the husband of a niece ask her to tell me if I would sell him one that he liked. It was the best compliment I ever had about my work.

Good or Bad photography hummm... I read this somewere here in APUG quoting Cartier Bresson "you worst photos are the first 10,000", I not totally agree, but I think that it is true that the more you work the best you can be.

 

[Videbaek]

Someone already wrote "contact publishers, see what they thing". Good advice, hearsay is worthless. "You ought to be in pictures!" Uh-huh. "You should be published!" Set up a meeting please.

The publishing of photo books is a strange and difficult business. Publishers will never take on a photo book project from an unknown, no matter how much they like the pictures. Why? Because it's money down the toilet. The name is the thing. I know something about it from the inside.

Recently, a photo book was published in Finland by the country's biggest general publisher. The title and content: "Views of Helsinki" or some such. A big, big, glossy coffee table book. Tip-top production values, very expensive to produce. It was in the bookstores, strongly promoted, stacked up in pyramids everywhere. I grabbed one, flipped it open, full of anticipation. And? Page after page of banal, picture-postcard colour shots of Helsinki. There was a written running commentary of no particular interest. The book is nothing. I couldn't understand it. But then it clicked -- the family name of the photographer is an old and very well-known name associated with the business of art auctioneering. There you go. The photographer approached the publisher with this project, and the publisher took it on because of the name, which is known by the target audience.

 

[haris]

I would try with exhibition before publishing my work as book or monograph or album. Exhibition is less expencive, you can organize it without anyone (you pay all expences, here if I have photographs already printed and mounted, it cost me about 60 EUROS for good gallery and up for "posh" gallery per day of gallery space including insurance and security personell, catering is few bottles of vine, few bottles of different juices, few sandwiches, all together about 100 EUROS )

At exhibition you will MAYBE get honest opinion and realize should you publish your work.

As Sven correctly said, name is very important, and there are many books of photographs I wonder why they are published in first place...