Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Take photographs of everything

View, originally uploaded by jiihaa.

Houses, originally uploaded by jiihaa.

Three, originally uploaded by jiihaa.

Winter, originally uploaded by jiihaa.

Aspen, originally uploaded by jiihaa.

Blur, originally uploaded by jiihaa.

School, originally uploaded by jiihaa.

Lamps, originally uploaded by jiihaa.

It seems the discussion which started with "worst photograph" isn't stopping, or at least I can't stop thinking about this.

I was going to write about the topic of "photographs which are your usual style", but then the sentence "You can't photograph everything!" hit me, and I had just to write about this. And in fact, these things are related.

I think (but maybe I'm mistaken) that I take photographs to see how a thing looks like in a photograph. One thing which supports this claim is that I'm regularly surprised by how the photographs look like. Some are very bad, some are not bad, some may be even passable or good, but they seldom are what you expected.

So, my approach is more like "take photographs of everything". And if the subject is everyday and familiar, take a photograph even if you have already take one before. You can be surprised. At least I am, quite often. As evidence I offer these photographs taken today.


Anonymus Maximus said...

The worst photo is the one that didn't quite come out right.

The one that is 99% there, but not 100%.

I can throw away the "bad" photo.

The photo that was so close to "fantastic" but ended up "just ok" - that is the worst of them all.

Sven W said...

@Maximus: I know what you mean. But perhaps a few months ago you might only have a taken a photo that was 95% "there", so a "99%" image means you are improving!

Sven W said...

@Juha: I don't know if it's a good thing or not, but I generally have a good idea what the photo is going to turn out like. For me the "surprise" is in the seeing, so to speak.

Perhaps because a lot of your images are taken in twilight with artificial light present (how it appears to my eyes) or you are using unpredictable techniques like motion blur, that the photo becomes a surprise? Nothing wrong with this at all, but perhaps it indicates I subsonsciously opt for "stable" lighting conditions and camera position.

Juha Haataja said...

@Maximus: I think you have something there, but on the other hand - one can learn a lot from those 99% photographs.

@Sven W: Once again you made me think. I wrote about it in a new posting.