In a post several days ago, I was looking for assistance in taking better photographs of Trillium. In that post, I mentioned that as part of my query I was breaking a taboo by purposefully showing poorer images, the ones that I would never display, to an audience. There is even an old saying about this that goes something along the lines of “The difference between an amateur and a professional is that the professional never shows you the shots that didn’t make it”. I was thinking about this issue some more, and feel even more strongly that it can be a wise decision to show your poorer images, it just depends on the venue and purpose.
For example, I would never display images that I thought didn’t quite make the cut. I would never want to make a show out of them. But I think that there is a good deal to be learned by examining these shots that ‘didn’t make it’.
For one, and this is probably the most obvious reason, it gives an opportunity to request input from others about improving aspects of an image that you think have failed. Sometimes you can go around in circles missing obvious, or not so obvious, solutions that are more apparent to someone who might think about things just a bit differently from you. Secondly, it gives an opportunity to receive feedback about which aspects of an image work well and which don’t.
However, there is yet another reason. While this may be the most obscure, I also think it is quite important. It allows others to learn from you. It allows others to experience the creation of an image through your eyes. This is perhaps best illustrated with an example.
I have always been moved by the iconic image “Migrant Mother” by Dorothea Lange. Most people have seen this image (and my understanding is that there are no copyright concerns with the use of these images):
"Migrant Mother"
However, many people do not realize that “Migrant Mother” was but one in a series of images that Dorothea Lange had taken on that particular occasion. The other images from the sequence include the following:
Images By Dorothea Lange
http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/list/128_migm.html
Had Lange destroyed the negatives from the images above, we may well have lost an opportunity to better understand how she approached her subject. Seeing the other images raises various issues that are useful to think about. Why did she take the entire sequence? Was she ultimately working her way in, knowing that the images she was taking up until “Migrant Mother” was just ‘exercise’? How did she think about framing the image? Did one image ‘lead her’ into the other? Was the final choice of image as apparent to her as it seems to us now?
Imagine what could be learned if we were able to look over the shoulder of photographers that are more accomplished than us, no matter what our individual level of expertise is, and watch the editing process of another image maker.
I believe that polite but very objective feedback regarding one’s images is important for growth. As long as it is clear that the venue is discussion and learning and that the audience is not “The” audience, I think it can be a very positive experience to discuss one’s failures. Through that discussion, other photographers besides ones self might end up benefiting as well.
4 comments:
I think you asked some good questions about Dorothy's sequence. I would be curious if there were ever answers published by her talking about the sequence. Certainly the more well known shot communicates much of the same thing as the others, but in a stronger, simpler composition.
I attended a seminar once by David Middleton and he did much of what you are describing. He took a sequence of shots on an approach to a landscape and had some discussion about each one, why he then proceeded to change position, etc. I thought it was a very effective way of teaching how someone else 'sees.'
I find myself acting with a similar progression. I have to remind myself that even if I am not seeing anything I think I will keep - it is important to keep shooting to get the groove started. Often I find that it is that process of study and selection that helps me acheive my end goal rather than just coming upon a scene and making a single decision.
Interesting point, Howard. I completely agree with you on the positive effects of showing our audience what we consider unsatisfying shots and try to find a solution through constructive criticism.
Like you, I'm fascinated by the opportunity of watching a photographer's editing process. I think I could learn a lot from that.
Howard, I agree it is helpful to have a friend to show outtakes, contact sheets to. But that person has to be carefully chosen. I don't have anyone like that around me now and I miss it a great deal. Not an internet relationship but A friend where we can just sit with a cup of coffee and talk and look. It is very valuable. For me, just hearing myself talk about the work sometimes clarifies issues and gives me ideas.
Mark, As far as I can tell by looking it up on the internet there seems to be no information from her about the sequence.
As a matter of fact, according to "http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/list/
128_migm.html" the fact is that
"The images were made using a Graflex camera. The original negatives are 4x5" film. It is not possible to determine on the basis of the negative numbers (which were assigned later at the Resettlement Administration) the order in which the photographs were taken."
Post a Comment