Tell me about the difference between picturetaking and photography!
I’ll be happy to.
I had to find a way of describing the transitions you have to go through when wanting to take photography seriously. The best phrase I found was that this was a transition from simply being a picturetaker to that of being a photographer. Picturetakers take pictures, obviously. Photographers literary takes picture too, but they do it with a clear purpose, high dedication and by knowing and using the alphabet and grammar of visual communication. Metaphorically speaking. The alphabet consists of the single units used to tell a story. The grammar is the way you put units together.
Being a photographer takes experience and knowledge. Being a picturetaker does not. That is the different. It is huge.
It is all too easy creating some sort of result when you use a camera. Everyone can buy one and start shooting. They don’t even have to leave the shop to start their new career. Knowing how to press the button, however, make them no photographers. Buying canvas and brushes and starting using them do not make people painters. You need to know how to use these tools before you will become a painter. You have to study and you have to practice. You need to know something about colours, brushes and canvas before you can start painting as an artist. You need to know something about perspective and composition as well. That learning takes years.
Anyone can cover a canvas with paint using a brush as anyone can cover a film/card with light using a camera. That has, however, nothing to do with painting or photography. Having the gear is only the first beginning.
Photography means “drawing with light”. I simply asked myself what do the pencils look like when you want to draw with light. I started coming up with answers and I tried deliberately and consistently to use the pencils I carried in my bag. And I looked for new ones. Most importantly I got myself a mentor. Now I have many. All these things were part of the new beginning.
Having a mentor does not mean that you copy stuff. It means that you use established experiences and results but walk down your own path. When you look at my photographs I hope that you will see that there is no copying but a lot of inspiration.
One of the most important things in messaging is the form and structure of that message. If you have that right, a message is conveyed. Do it wrong and no message will not be conveyed. I try to do very simple photographs. The lucky ones are also precise. I do simple things with the camera. That is the only way I know. I have that from advertising, actually. Other may have this very differently.
I found that is was much harder to do a simple picture than a complicated one. The last type you very easily get by just shooting away. Left and right. Up and down. That world belongs to the picturetaker. Could be so complicated that it ends in confusion. A message mess.
To do a simple shot you have to evaluate all the time. Get rid of all the access information. Make sure that things fit together. That can be quite a task. That world belongs to the photographer.
Mind you a simple picture can be complex, but never complicated. That difference is important.
I have also found that you are not 100 percent photographer, or 100 percent picturetaker. These attitude often mix, but the ambition must be to be a photographer most of the time, and picturetaker less of the time. The good thing is that the new information you acquire, for instance, by having a mentor gradually link into your spine and becomes second nature to you. Even when you are only picturetaking the results could end up as photography. That is the reward of learning. You get the investment back tenfold.
Some will say that this sounds like a strain, difficult and even academic. And photography is supposed to be fun. Maybe so. But think about in another way. It takes about 5 years become a lawyer, even longer to become a medical doctor. Takes a lifetime to a become painter, a songwriter or a good harmonica player. Why is it that as soon as some people get a camera in their hand they become instant photographers? You tell me.
The point is that they don’t. It is impossible.
The good thing is that photography is a craft and like any other craft it can be learned. You cannot teach anyone to be come a Picasso, a da Vinci or a Bob Dylan. Or for that matter a Cartier-Bresson, but you can teach how to hold the pencil, how to wait and to point it the right direction when the decisive moment is there.
That said, I also realize that some do photography mainly by instinct. You can see it in their individual works, and even better in their portfolios. Such people are very rare. They are the onepercenters. Or even lessthanonepercenters. Call them talents. Even these talents have to cultivate their capacities, and that is just what the process from picturetaking to photography is all about.
I am afraid that for the rest of us it is even harder work. My 2P.
Here we go then.
For some time, I have had the idea of writing a bit more substantially about photography and phenomenology. Note that I have changed the order of things here: Photography first, and phenomenology second. That is also my priorities.
Not that I particularly fancy the work involved here, but looking over the literature I am actually not that impressed with what I see. If I see anything at all. At couple of years ago, I had the idea that someone else must take on this task or it will not be done. But no one raised their hands. At least not that I know of.
So I will do it, but I will do it my own way.
I have no intention of producing another unreadable, that phenomenologists, are so very good at. I will do this as a practical layout for an approach to photography. Street photography first and foremost. I will do this in no haste, since I have no haste. I will do it just the way I take pictures: The good way: Take the camera, get out there and anticipate that things will happen. They always do. In that respect, I am very lucky. I hope to have some of the same luck here.
This means, that I, at the present moment, only have a rough idea what to write about and the direction I want to move in. That is all, so this is going to be exciting to me as well. Look at this as a RAW file. I can always crop and modify the picture later.
Since both photography and phenomenology are personal matters, that, if you are lucky enough, others will take an interest in, the form of this essay will be an interview. I will interview myself.
The good thing with an interview is that you need to pose the questions before you give the answers, but as we all know, you also need to know the answers before you can pose the questions, this method seems appropriate.
I will a assemble all the interview sections in a large post later, but already now each fragment will be collected on a page simply called The Interview. Look for the page section.
If you are interested in following this experiment, he best way to stay tuned is to subscribe to the blog. You can do that in the right hand side bar.
Good luck with it. All of it.