Thursday, July 27, 2006

Photography: Artistic Value is Subjective

The artistic value of a photograph is subjected to every imaginable scrutiny by anyone who views it. Remember the old saying "one man's trash is another man's treasure"? That very quote is applicable to the art of photography. Follow the rules, break the rules, it doesn't matter because someone is going to complain, going to nit-pick, and going to find something wrong with anything and everything.

I want to address the trend of what happens to those who dare venture onto the photography specific messaging boards, and why I choose to avoid them as if they were the plague. For those who have been ravaged by the foul vermin that populate these forums, I offer you some resolve: You are probably not nearly as bad a photographer as they made you feel to be. For those who rose to the top in those same forums, you are probably not nearly as good a photographer as what they made you feel to be.

There are obviously exceptions to what I just stated, but remember, these are the exceptions, not the majority! In case you haven't figured it out already, on the internet you can pretty much be whom ever you wish to be. Now, let's put two and two together to make four. These photography forums are populated by an overwhelming number of self-proclaimed "professional photographers" as you may or may not have already figured out. Most of the supposedly professional photographers end up being teenagers or retirement age folks who's career (past, present, and probably future) never involved real photography. I will use fake aliases for the sake of anonymity.

Case #1: "Z. Boobledorfer" is a frequent poster on photography forum "www.photoforumforsuckerswhodon'thaveanythingelsetodo.nut" and has over 160,000 posts in the past two years. He tells everyone he has his own photography business, in fact he even advertises it in his catchy little signature line of each post. Wow, the link actually works and takes you to a real website! Now here lies the problem:

  • If Z. Boobledorfer is such a successful professional photographer, how does he find the time to post on the message boards so much?
  • If Z. Boobledorfer is such a professional photographer, how come the EXIF data on his photographs that he posts both on the forums and on his "business site" are from either a digital point and shoot camera (all of which are consumer level) or a consumer's entry level digital SLR such as a Canon Digital Rebel XT, Pentax *ist D, or Nikon D70?
  • If Z. Boobledorfer is such a professional photographer, why do all his photographs look like snapshots? (Learn about lighting, exposure, focus selectivity, depth of field, and composition techniques and you will readily be able to tell a snapshot from a well thought out professional looking photograph.)


Here is how we come to the find the truth. It takes a little investigation, though it is quite easy. You see, Z. Boobledorfer is still just a teenager, still in high school or maybe he just graduated. We know this because every once in a while he'll slip in his postings and revert to things that are a dead giveaway. Someone will call him on his pro claim eventually, you just have to watch for it, or use the forum's handy search button to research his past posts. You will probably find things such as this:

  • Z. Boobledorfer refers to his daddy's experiences a lot, instead of his own, in off topic threads.
  • Z. Boobledorfer's EXIF data on his picture posts can be quite telling.
  • Most pro's don't get a childish attitude towards everyone else's work, defending their own faults while belittling everyone else for theirs. (With the exception of those in his little clique.)
  • Z. Boobledorfer's pictures are only praised by a precious few other "pros" who just happen to be in his little aforementioned clique.

What gives Z. Boobledorfer the right to call himself a pro? Well, here are his excuses and reasoning:

  • Z. Boobledorfer thinks he's a real professional photographer because he invented his own catchy business name like "Z. Boobledorfer Photography" or "Perfect Light Photography".
  • Z. Boobledorfer is paying $10 a month out of his minimum wage salary (probably from someplace like McDonald's or Food Lion) for his own domain name with his "business" name as the URL.
  • Z. Boobledorfer uses the premise that he made a few buck off his sister or cousin for taking snapshots at their wedding. He doesn't realize they were just too cheap to hire a real wedding photographer because of an already stretched wedding budget, so they looked to a family member with an interest in photography who had a working camera, and wouldn't charge and arm and a leg. This of course, in Z. Boobledorfer's mind makes him a bona fide professional wedding photographer, mind you.


"But Z. Boobledorfer has such nice looking pictures", you say. Yes, some of them might actually look pretty good, after he spends a week in Photoshop Elements fixing all his mistakes. Put a monkey in front of a typewriter and eventually they'll type the complete literary works of William Shakespeare. In Z. Boobledorfer's case, he posts maybe 3 out of every 500 photographs he takes, because the rest are so terrible he dare not expose them to anyone. Yes, really-really-real pros take bad pictures too, and have to sort out the bad from the good, but not at a 3 out of 500 rate. A skilled photographer will have a closer to 1:5 or even 1:2 and in some cases even 4 out of every 5 images will be acceptable. But Z. Boobledorfer is a loooooooong way away from that ratio. Also bear in mind, we pesky humans are normally much more critical of our own work than other's. Other's images usually tend to look better than our own, even if they aren't. Those are words of wisdom to remember. In any event, now you know that Z. Boobledorfer is not the actual pro he proclaims to be. His so called business he just started up is nothing more than a website, and he has no clientele at all except for his imaginary friends.


Case #2: "Dr. Pina~Colada" claims he is a professional photographer and expert in the field of digital photo editing. Dr. Pina~Colada even has his own portrait in his profile to prove he's a middle aged man, not some "teenage-punk-pro-photographer-wannabe". Ask him about his qualifications, and he'll tell you that he pulls in between $60K and $80K a year doing his job. He'll also tell you that he uses a camera nearly every day on the job. What Dr. Pina~Colada is not telling you is that he is a realtor for Millennium 22 Real Estate. His use of the camera is taking quick snapshots of people's home who are looking to sell. In case you haven't noticed, any 5 year old with a $5 My Little Pony disposable point and shoot camera can take real estate photo's just as good, if not better, than Dr. Pina~Colada can. It doesn't take a pro to stand in the middle of the street and take a few handheld snapshots of Mr. & Mrs. Doe's 70 year old shack, ditto the cluttered interior. Dr. Pina~Colada then spends fifteen minutes in Photoshop CS2 cloning out the weeds and dog crap in the yard, the missing shingles on the roof, and the cracks in the walls.


In Dr. Pina~Colada's mind, this makes him a professional photographer, instead of an overpaid Real Estate agent with a camera. Dr. Pina~Colada feels that his limited and overly abused photo-editing tricks make him a real expert at digital photo editing. He feels as if he is more qualified to spout off his poorly executed tricks than the real pro's who learned the program inside and out well enough to write a highly acclaimed book on the subject. Then poor Mr. Unsuspecting posts his otherwise very good image on the forum, only to have his image stolen and edited without prior permission from him(which is a federal copyright infringement), by Dr. Pina~Colada, and reposted on the forum as "how it should look". (Of course Dr. Pina~Colada puts some subtext stating he will gladly take it down if the owner of the photograph so wishes, because he knows his ass is riding a fine line and he could be sued for copyright infringement). The question is, just how should Mr. Unsuspecting's photograph look? Mr. Unsuspecting was proud of his very good image but all of a sudden the picture police have pounced on him, pointing out all these minor (inconsequential) flaws that should have been compensated for or otherwise corrected in post-processing. Of course, Mr. Unsuspecting is now crushed that his picture didn't meet these "professionals'" high standards. But then he is also thankful that the "pros" have stepped in with their all knowing advice and trashed his beautiful image to make it look like what they think it should look like.


Here's the problem, Mr. Unsuspecting: Photography is an art. Your photography is your art. All art, no matter what medium, is subjective. What one person likes, someone else hates. What is perfect to one is flawed to another. Yes, we are back to one man's trash is another man's treasure. Did someone come along behind Leonardo da Vinci and paint over the Mona Lisa telling him that's what his painting should look like? I don't think so! A person's art is their own, and if you like it, that's all that matters. Ansel Adams didn't have someone else manipulate his photographs for him in the darkroom, telling him that's how his photographs should look. No, Mr. Adams did his own darkroom work, and when he was satisfied with his work, that was good enough.


So maybe you aren't an Ansel Adams or a Leonardo da Vinci, but you are the person whom you are. Let me rephrase that: You are the artist of your own work, your art is your own and no one else's. If your art satisfies you, then screw what all the self-proclaimed experts think. Don't take their advise, don't take their B.S. If you really want to improve, listening to them will do nothing but turn your work into their vision. Once you become the artist that they want you to be, then they will lift you up on their imaginary pedestal. But the problem is, they aren't teaching you to be creative, they are teaching you to make your vision look like their vision. That's not really what you want to do.
What should you do if want to improve your skills then? Practice, practice, practice! That's the most important thing. Read photography books by real photographers, these books teach you how to develop your own style and vision. They teach you techniques that improve your photography while letting you keep your own unique style. Take an accredited photography course, again they teach you the proper techniques that can be applied to your own style of photography. And finally, stay away from the photography forums. Most professional photographers don't use those forums for the following reasons:

  • Posting their images on these forums is yet another way to have their already valuable works stolen and used without permission.
  • Professional photographers spend their working lives doing photography. Usually the last thing they want to do regularly is extend that to their recreational time. (Ever notice that a professional landscaper has one of the crappiest lawns in the neighborhood, or that a professional singer normally doesn't frequent karaoke bars?)
  • Real professional photographers already know about the fake pro's that populate these photography forums and avoid the forums so as not to be mistaken for one them.
  • A true professional will help you learn how to develop your own artistic vision instead of pushing their own ideals on you. This requires one on one private critique, not public humiliation like that found on the forums. (This public humiliation will discourage most people from ever picking up a camera again, very few people gain any true drive to improve their artistry after having their works ripped to shreds in the public square while being flogged with a cat o' nine tails.)

My advice all boils down to a few simple things:

  • Avoid the photography forums, they are mostly populated my a bunch of hungry jackals waiting for fresh meat to sink their teeth into.
  • Develop your own style that pleases you, quit worrying what other think.
  • Learn from your own mistakes, not from the misguided critique of unqualified individuals.
  • Study books by real experts in the field and/or take accredited courses.
  • You are your own worst critic, lighten up on yourself.

If you are looking for some books to study on, there are some very good books that teach everything from basic to advance techniques that are put out by John Hedgecoe. I will provide links to some of his books for your convenience (please note that some of the information in his books is redundant from one book to the next):

I also recommend if you are interested in photography courses that you look into what is available at your local community college, as well as finding out about photographic workshops that may be coming to your area. The photographic workshops generally last anywhere from one day to a week and cover anything from basic to advanced techniques, digital and film, and specific areas of photography such as fashion, sports, or architecture.

If you are unable to take a regular course offered locally, there is the option of photographic correspondence courses. These types of courses are generally not as good as the "brick-and-mortar" schools, however there is one exception to the rule: The New York Institute of Photography (NYIP) is an excellent resource for learning photography or honing the skills you already have. I highly recommend this course if your schedule doesn't include the option of local schooling. NYIP teaches you everything from basic to advance techniques, as well as giving you excellent instruction on the business end of photography.

Posted by at