Are we just shooting things or are we creating photographs?

[Xia_Ke]

I posted some shots in the Critique Forum yesterday under Memories Of Days Gone By. I posted these same shots in the gallery over at APUG. A member there posted a critique and part of it really has me contemplating my photography...

your objects in the field don't hold me. I have run across this with my work on the Clayton Farm project. So much ot shoot, but found I was shooting things not creating photographs.
just a thought

So, are we just shooting things or are we creating photographs? I know this will mean very different things to different people but, thought it might make for interesting discussion.

Aaron

[darkman]

So, are we just shooting things or are we creating photographs? I know this will mean very different things to different people but, thought it might make for interesting discussion.

Aaron

Probably a little of both and at different times.

Sometimes I go to take pictures with a preconceived idea and try to create a photograph. But this doesn't mean I don't go with flow, sort of speak, when I'm in the shooting situation and end up with something completely unlike my original idea.

Other times I'm just shooting things. For example, on vacation as memories. However, I still try and make interesting compositions - without going out of my way to do so. I'm also trying to tell a story of my trip. Therefore, you can argue that I'm just not shooting things.

Mike

[SmartWombat]

It's quicker to shoot things, creation takes time and effort.

I did my first business shoot (second if you count a dog portrait as a teenager) last weekend.
And I found very little time to be creative, as it was a fast paced conference where I needed to grab every presentation - without getting in the way of the audience.

At the evening party, I had free rein and summed up the party in one photo that has no party goers in it ... more creative, less pressure.

[Medley]

Great idea for a thread!

When I initially got into Photoshop, it was to learn restoration/retouching techniques. One of the best pieces of advice I got in my endeavors was from Katrin Eismann, author of several books on the subject. She said "It is important to remember that when retouching antique photographs, especially for other people, that we are not altering pixels. We are altering memories."

If that's true, then photography is about capturing memories. To me, that means using the camera to convey a certain feeling or mood. I'm not as sucessful at this as I would like, but to me, it's the difference between taking a picture (shooting things), and creating a photograph.

- Joe U.

[Loupey]

Aren’t they both the same?

“Shooting things” and “creating photographs” give the connotation that we somehow reached out through our lenses and actively captured something. Instead, I think it is a more passive action of simply recording a moment. Sure we may put significant effort into the scene with lights, make-up, and what not, but it still comes down to finally recording the moment – whether altered or not. So recording a moment, whether it is mundane or monumental, altered or natural, is still a “photograph”.

I don’t think the time or effort it takes to get “something” has a bearing. One person might come back from an afternoon stroll with 10 great images. Another might come back with 1. That alone shouldn’t make the one of higher significance or importance than the other 10.

A scene might unfold for dozens to see and photograph at the same time. Everyone will choose “what” part of the scene to record thereby altering the resulting mood and story that that one recorded moment might seem to state. The person who can most succinctly tell a story with that image (even if it is taken out of context) will most likely be considered the most successful. Everyone photographed the event. Everyone shot it.

[photophorous]

Hi Aaron,

The difference between shooting things and creating photographs is just semantics to me. I interpret the question to be "are we making meaningful photographs?" That's hard to answer, and will be different for everyone. I think on some level every photograph has meaning, but it may not be apparent to anyone, even the photographer, and it may not be anything important, relevant, interesting, etc... We choose compositions and subjects for a reason, whether we understand it or not, and we almost always impose some level of personal bias in the process. Even vacation snapshots say "this is what I want to remember" at the very least. So, why do you want to remember that? My goal is to better understand the meaning behind my photos so that I can more effectively communicate through the photos I make in the future. That doesn't mean I always (or ever) have something profound to say. It could be something as simple as pointing out the aesthetics of a sunset, or something as complicated as bringing attention to a political or social issue. My point is that the more aware you are of how you feel about whatever your shooting, the more likely it is that even a spontaneous photo will reflect not just the popular view of the subject, but your view of the subject. Sometimes it's an intuitive or subconscious process and other times it requires a lot of thought and planning. I still feel like I'm terrible at this, but just thinking more about why I take the pictures I take is helping to make sense of it all.

Paul

[Xia_Ke]

Ooops, hadn't realize anyone had replied to this ...

Aren’t they both the same?

In my own thinking, this was the conclusion I came to. Regardless if a photo is just a snapshot or a fully laid out shoot, something caused the photographer to want to record that moment, to tell that story. Even if that story is only apparent to person taking the shot. All shots are "created photographs" of "things".

I guess the real question for me ended up being how effectively do our photographs tell the story that we want to tell? The only real answer for that though will be in the eyes of the beholder.

I hope that makes sense. Sorry, just getting my morning coffee into me now

[Dstrickland]

I think this is a great discussion. Are we creating or are we just recording? As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. I think this example of the same baby explains my interpretation of what is "just shooting" and "creating". Both photos are focused, exposed, etc. One has a little more effort into trying to create something special. It's up to you (and me) if I was sucessful.

[MarcusK]

Well, this indeed was a very interesting topic to read here....

Loupey, Paul - I agree with what you are saying here....

Dstrickland - Your steer of the topic falls right in place, since it was something i was gonna get into in my own way!

First off, they are and are not the same thing: When you take photos you are really taking photos of something.... so you are shooting things...even when you are creating photographs....

Second, with reference to Paul's "second" business shoot, you have the "journalistic" approach, which is "kind of" the same thing as shooting on vacations (I am in no way demeaning journalism....) where getting the shot is more important than framing the shot creatively..... which you could always do in post!... Even when you are being quick, you are still creating photos!

But, as Dstrickland said, creating v/s recording, then the comment in that other forum takes a new meaning (which we all agree upon i know)... Even when you take the shot of things, if the "mood" or "feeling" of the photo (memory or not) is not strong enough, or simply non present, then this would be a reference to "just taking shots", which means it does not qualify as a good photograph... and ends up being something that in itself only holds value to the people involved!

Marc

[Grandpaw]

Am I recording a snapshot of what a desk looks like so I can build it later in my wood shop? If so the lighting, background and DOF probably really doesn’t matter one way or the other. On the other hand if I am taking a photograph, this would be something that would warrant more thought and consideration because when looked at later you would expect more than just a point and shoot approach.

Sometimes things are happening fast enough that you just have to do the best you can with what time and circumstances give you.

So for me I would like to think we do both. Sometimes a snapshot is appropriate but most of the time thinking about the conditions first and giving it more thought will create a nice photograph. I believe I do both and they both have a place depending on the circumstances. The trick with me is to figure out which one I was trying to do, Jeff

[open_shutters]

In my opinion, shooting things and creating brilliant photograpghy are two different things but are inter-related with each other. When you "shoot things", you may be creating photography and to "create photography" you should start with shooting things. Both really goes hand in hand. It is really in just how a person understands and perceives what photgraphy really means.

[hollis]

To me, just shooting implies Snapshots, have camera phone will travel
To See & Create a photo is art, the level "Art" depends on the artist
So its all up to you :thumbsup:

[Greg McCary]

Marc you make some great points. It's one thing to know how to use a camera, pick the right time of day and nail the composition, but to put mood into your shots a completely different thing. The one thing I am working hard on is to create a mood that keeps the viewer looking more than just a glance. I see many photographers that can make a pretty picture but adding mood and emotion that's the hard part.

[uilq]

arts are from our lives. great works from life. shooting is art.