Those who take and those who make

[ic-racer]

Take, like to take from someone or steal off the internet? In that case I'm a maker.

 

[CMoore]

Don’t take it too seriously… even some of us “takers” are elitist, egotistical, and pretentious. LOL. Happy New Year, folks!

 

[Chuck_P]

Amazing, I read the OP and did not see anything construed as even remotely judgmental or even elitest in the way of either "taking" or "making".

 

[Pieter12]

It is an old thing taught that you should make photos not just take them. Implying that making photos is creative and taking photos is not. I was taught that in photo school in the 1970s and I am pretty sure you could find lots of quotes saying you need to learn to make photos rather than take photos. So maybe this discussion was not intended to be judgmental but you can easily see how it might be interpreted that way..

Street photographers are more takers than makers, but pretty much anyone who photographs is a bit of both. And who said anything about creativity?

 

[Vaughn]

Neither (or both) -- a creator.

 

[Pieter12]

Neither (or both) -- a creator.

Kind of like AI, then.

 

[Vaughn]

Kind of like AI, then.

You can call me Al.



Or I could say that I read the light and then poetically translate it. If the word 'poetically' seems pretentious, then perhaps consider it is a subjective translation, not an objective translation.

 

[MattKing]

Take, like to take from someone or steal off the internet? In that case I'm a maker.

More like to take your medicine.
Or:

 

[Alex Benjamin]

More like to take your medicine.
Or:

Yeah, but Duke took it from Billy Strayhorn .

 

[cliveh]

Was Atget more of a Taker or a Maker? He contact printed his negatives, but then toned them gold. I therefore think he was mainly a Taker, but a bit of a Maker. Bresson was a Taker and no Maker. AA was a Taker, but perhaps more of a Maker.

 

[Daniela]

I take a photo. By doing so, I actually remove something from the original scene/object/person, and appropriate it. I then hide it away and do with it as I please, as part of the fetid, fermenting mass of images and technology that I culture up in my room in the attic, without ever giving anything back to the world. I'm a surgeon with the mentality of a thief and the dexterity of a drunk elephant.

Yeah.

This is hilarious and hits so very close! One of the things I like to repeat in my head when I'm out taking pictures is "I take, I don't bother", which is a line that I took from an episode of The Walking Dead. The people who said so are a very mean group of people with nefarious intentions, and it cracks me up to think of the phrase yet it also rings true...

 

[Milpool]

My guess is historically “make” (vs “take”) was adopted in an attempt to elevate photography a little as an artform. I also guess this will not be a popular opinion here haha.

 

[Sirius Glass]

In the studio or in pretty specific circumstances outside where I know what I'm after - it's directed/driven by me. Guess that's "making", and it's where I'm most comfortable.

Sometimes I can get in the zone mentally and take unplanned pictures successfully - this is situational, needs a stimulus like an event or some sort of foray or visit. That feels like"taking". In part it's (personal) documentary.

What I have always struggled with is "street" photography the way it is portrayed by influencers/whatever... I have no idea or understanding or why on earth people do it, even though I can (pretty rarely) appreciate what they produce either artistically or as some form of documentary. Trying to understand it by viewing thousands of street photography "examples" hasn't yielded me any tangible empathy for the pursuit.

Apologies for any digression.

After you take photographs, do you return then so others can also take photographs? Or do you just keep them?

 

[cliveh]

Taking and then Making: -

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

In my case, a maker. Never a 'taker', except if I have my phone handy and see something worth a clumsy snap!

I cannot remember off the top of my head who this quote is attributed to, but it holds true:

'Photographs are not taken, and they certainly are not snapped. They are made.'

Was it Eudora Welty? or Adams?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Both...

 

[MattKing]

Yeah, but Duke took it from Billy Strayhorn .

And took it very well indeed!

 

[MattKing]

In my case, a maker. Never a 'taker', except if I have my phone handy and see something worth a clumsy snap!

I cannot remember off the top of my head who this quote is attributed to, but it holds true:

'Photographs are not taken, and they certainly are not snapped. They are made.'

Was it Eudora Welty? or Adams?

It was Adams, but he was speaking in the first person, and he was more succinct .
I have a couple of friends who are excellent at so-called street photography - along with many other types of photography.
Much of their excellence arises because of how much work and preparation they have put into it.
While the success of any particular result might be due to their being able to "take" advantage of a fortuitous moment, their preparation is how they "make" that possible.
The same applies to sports photography.

 

[GregY]

If it's not a print....I haven't made anything....

 

[MattKing]

If it's not a print....I haven't made anything....

What if it is a projectable slide?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Some of us prefer photographic processes and approaches that have some similarities with foraging for our food.
Some of us prefer photographic processes and approaches that have some similarities with planting and cultivating our food.
Many of us mix the two.
For all of us, there is the potential of an enjoyable feast.

very wellsaid

 

[GregY]

What if it is a projectable slide?

"I"........ haven't shot transparencies in almost 30 yrs.... Just BW .....and make darkroom prints.

 

[joe bosak]

After you take photographs, do you return then so others can also take photographs? Or do you just keep them?

*edges towards the door with a feeling of having joined the wrong conversation....*

 

[koraks]

Was Atget more of a Taker or a Maker? He contact printed his negatives, but then toned them gold. I therefore think he was mainly a Taker, but a bit of a Maker. Bresson was a Taker and no Maker. AA was a Taker, but perhaps more of a Maker.

Well, then here's another one to mull over: can a photographer be a 'maker' as opposed to a 'taker', even if they do absolutely zero post-processing whatsoever? In other words: what kind of 'making' distinguishes the 'maker' from the 'taker'?

This is hilarious and hits so very close! One of the things I like to repeat in my head when I'm out taking pictures is "I take, I don't bother", which is a line that I took from an episode of The Walking Dead. The people who said so are a very mean group of people with nefarious intentions, and it cracks me up to think of the phrase yet it also rings true...

Thanks for getting it just right!

 

[Don_ih]

You make all the decisions regarding what the photo should be prior to pressing the shutter. You can even make whatever it is you're photographing.

For the most part, this take/make distinction is nonsensical - mainly because "taking" a photo makes no sense. It's recording. And when you "make" a photo, you're also recording.