Category Archives: Commentary

Photography & Emerson’s Self-Reliance

29 Wednesday Jan 2014

Posted by in Commentary

≈ Comments Off on Photography & Emerson’s Self-Reliance

Tags

,

Share

To believe your own thought, to believe that what is true for you in your private heart is true for all men, — that is genius. Speak your latent conviction, and it shall be the universal sense; for the inmost in due time becomes the outmost..

— Ralph Waldo Emerson; excerpt from his essay Self-Reliance

When I read this essay back in high school, it really reverberated with me. I was raised to be independent–both in thought and action–and this essay supported that upbringing.

When Emerson wrote this essay, it captured the hearts & souls of a people (Americans) who had established a new nation and were moving West setting up new homesteads out on the prairie.

What has self-reliance got to do with photography?

There’s a modern infrastructure of sorts beckoning photographers with the message that they need editors/experts/contests/portfolio reviews/feedback to determine the worth of their work and the direction they should take with it. Instead of learning from trial-and-error and trusting their own opinion of what worked and didn’t (and then incorporating judged outcomes into future work), photographers are wholeheartedly encouraged to seek outside direction at nearly every juncture; and this outside direction usually comes with a price tag (fees payable to contests, editors, reviewers, etc).

You–the photographer–can’t possibly judge your own work. The worth of your work must be judged by others. ‘Worth’ is a social construction.

Something like the preceding quote seems to be at the basis of this need for external affirmation when it comes to judgements of value or worth. I get the impression that many people pursuing photography end up quitting when external affirmation stops or even subsides a little.

In short, there are photographers pursuing photography in order to get praise from others. And when it comes to selecting their best work (for an exhibition, book, contest, etc.) they absolutely need feedback from others to make their choices–even tabulating social media “likes” to make their final determinations.

Producing an artistic work with any sort of internal integrity or purity of vision cannot be done by committee or the crowd-sourcing of feedback. It requires the utmost focus and alignment of values, beliefs, and experiences within the mind of a determined individual.

This is not to say multiple individuals cannot produce a work of art. The vision and direction, however, must come from and/or go through one person in charge of the ultimate outcome or be at high risk of losing artistic integrity.

In practice, I have gotten feedback from others and used it to make decisions in some of my photo series (though only occasionally). However, I have found it almost “suicidal” to simply accept feedback without questioning it. Instead, I view it as “advice”–as another source of “data” really–and incorporate it into my decision process, wherein the final decisions must still be my own.

Relying on yourself to evaluate your artistic work is not easy, and lots of photographers have a hard time editing their own work, both in terms of lacking confidence in their own artistic judgements and just finding it difficult and unpleasant to do!

What do you get from self-reliance in photography anyway? Here’s what you get:

  • A Sense of Control
  • Confidence
  • Growth
  • Intense Gratification
  • Your best chance at Exhibiting Genius

That’s all.

 



Visit Michael's Art Photography Portfolio at SaatchiArt.com!

My Top Tweets for 2013

07 Tuesday Jan 2014

Posted by in Commentary, Writing

≈ Comments Off on My Top Tweets for 2013

Tags

, , , ,

Share

I opened a Twitter account last June to replace my personal Facebook page (the latter became distracting and problematic in a number of ways). I tweeted 161 times in 2013 over the six months I had the account.

When I was a teenager (well before the time of The Internet), I used to write things and post them on the back of my bedroom door. Occasionally, I would remove notes that seemed stupid or were no longer relevant to my life and keep the ones that still “spoke to me”.

Here now are my favorite tweets of 2013 (in chronological order), some of which may seem stupid or irrelevant by the end of 2014…(!)

  1. True artists are self-propelled…the fanfare is nice, but that ain’t why they’re doing it
  2. Art has become a hard sell it seems. Entertainment, however, continues to attract a hearty share of people’s “disposable” income.
  3. Belched and said “excuse me” with only my cat in earshot. I suppose there’s nothing wrong with manners between species..
  4. I like doing #photography, but it’s not about being a “photographer” for me. It’s about communicating something interesting.
  5. Facebook is not necessary.
  6. Making money “doing your own thing” requires mega marketing because you have to convince people “your own thing” has anything to do w/ them.
  7. Once upon a time, people had to buy books or magazines, or go to a museum or gallery to see artistic photographs.
  8. When you wipe all the friends off your FB list, what happens? There’s less to see on FB, so you move on to other things, like taking walks.
  9. W/ few exceptions, there’s no such thing now as shooting the one photo that knocks people out. consistently producing..that’s where it’s at.
  10. Important thing I learned at Grassroots Festival today: use porta-johns that are in the shade! Otherwise they get up to 150 degs in the sun.
  11. I don’t like to copy/repeat what others have done. I don’t like to repeat/copy what I’ve done.
  12. And somewhere in my mind is the thought: If I ever became famous for my photography, I’d have to quit and start doing something else.
  13. I need to go to more art museums…whether there’s photography included or not.
  14. For some reason, I find it way more interesting to watch programs about musicians than photographers to gain insights into creative process.
  15. A photo that doesn’t distinguish itself is a commodity
  16. Doing your own thing and hoping someone notices isn’t a very efficient way to get notoriety or make money
  17. Most successful artists were able to dial in “commercial” when it came down to it.
  18. Some need others’ opinions to have their own opinion
  19. I don’t think there’s an option: if u don’t like what the art photo “establishment” calls good, develop a dialog directly w/ the collector.
  20. A successful photograph investment-wise requires that it contain a good amount of “cultural currency”.
  21. I just think if my name were David Butt Philip, I’d tend not to use my middle name.
  22. I find it kind of funny how artists refer to their artwork as “The Work”, thereby distancing themselves from it
  23. The web is like putting *everyone* in charge of television programming and having all of it broadcast simultaneously.
  24. Sex: the adult pacifier
  25. I used to think I wanted to be a web designer, but the promised land turned into a shitter. This is the last one I do, I swear.
  26. Size “zero”? sounds like the clothing size one’s imaginary friend might wear
  27. I find it interesting that YouTube seems to group Amy Winehouse and Janis Joplin together in search results
  28. I think there’s something alluring about an artist who’s work you sense was created without looking for your (the viewer’s) approval.
  29. One of the things that stands out about Marilyn Monroe: she was pre-cosmetic surgery.
  30. Without communication, the best we could do would be hedonism.
  31. Taking a photo is not the end. It can then be contextualized and recontextualized. I see photos as fluid and dynamic.
  32. Art that is not relevant is not art; if it doesn’t communicate something relevant or consequential, it’s decoration
  33. “Though she never considered herself an unattractive woman, she felt like she was suffering from ‘premature ugliness’ in her middle age.”
  34. Wanting to be rich & lazy is just a reaction to being poor and overworked. Ultimately, rich & lazy would be pretty boring.
  35. Maybe if people focused more on creative activities, they’d spend less money on trying to purchase joy.
  36. Maybe most photographers think that emulating past photography is what “doing photography” is
  37. Art yearns for a unique voice, not a refinement of a previous or existing voice.
  38. For me photography is just a way to capture portions of my visual experience so I can do shit with it.
  39. The challenge is to find your own voice (when making art) & it may take a while. And it may come from a very different place than u expect.
  40. Maybe I could come up with a better word than “art” to describe what I’m trying to do..
  41. When you’re finally *not trying to be like anyone*…that’s when you truly get there.
  42. Momentary “truths” have an annoying habit of expiring before you can string them together with other “truths” and make an actual dent.
  43. What is needed is not *more* photography, but rather, better editing.
  44. It’s pretty easy to like or not like almost any photo. It depends pretty hugely on the context and one’s frame of mind at the time.
  45. “Michael is a self-taught photographer. His photography explores the relationship between his camera and his visible surroundings.”
  46. A “good photo” no longer involves anything like light, composition, etc. It just means *people want to look at it*.
  47. One of the big misconceptions: that a good or great idea will be instantly recognized as such.
  48. With photography, I see stuff I would have *never* noticed otherwise because my field of view as I move through life is too fleeting.
  49. One of the most splendid is capturing the hidden moment on display to all but only “seen” by a device that can pluck out a sliver of time.
  50. Going forward while integrating backwards.
  51. Maybe there’s an alternative to riding on the ever-increasing-shock-to-gain-attention train wreck…?
  52. Aging = becoming a caricature of yourself.
  53. Here’s one to keep pounding: There’s more to art than making pretty or beautiful objects. Meaning is not always pretty.
  54. Circumventing the 140 character constraint..BbtE6pzCQAAkqGR
  55. Street photography is as much *sport* as it is art.
  56. My (woman) dermatologist wears pink rubber boots during appointments

Hopefully my 2014 tweets will be even more fun, insightful, and goofy…:p. And, of course, feel free to “follow” me @MGMSBRAIN.



Visit Michael's Art Photography Portfolio at SaatchiArt.com!

Hedging is Poison in Photography

21 Thursday Nov 2013

Posted by in Commentary

≈ Comments Off on Hedging is Poison in Photography

Tags

,

Share

I hedge a lot in my life. When there’s not a clear good choice, I often hedge my bets: I’ll either allocate resources to both options or find some in between option and go for that. I think this works well for practical/material/financial/logistical matters and aligns well with the financial investing idea that you “don’t put all your eggs in one basket”.

When it comes to editing photos, however, you’ve got to treat hedging like it’s poison.

We’re already awash in a sea of way too many photos–via ads, magazines, billboards, and the Internet (esp social media). The last thing people need to see is more photos because you (the photographer) can’t figure out which one is your best shot to present; so you present multiple versions.

This latter strategy may be okay when someone paid you to take photos and they have a strong vested interest in them. The client likes the photographer to edit the collection of shots down to the best ones; but I find they often like to make the final choices for prints, albums, etc.

However, when you’re foisting unrequested shots onto the viewing public, you’ve got something like a nanosecond to get their attention. If you don’t pick out and present just the one best representative of a particular shot scenario and instead hedge by presenting multiple versions of it for the public to decide which they like best, you’re more than likely going to lose them down the slippery slope of indifference…even before you can say, “but I like so many of them, I wasn’t sure which one to present..”.

Editing, editing, editing…

Be brave and fearless my timid photography editing friend because hedging–when it comes to editing photos–is a recipe…not for disaster exactly, but for driving any audience you hope to engage away from your photos.

(Note: I’m not a perfect editor either. I’m working on it!)

 

 



Visit Michael's Art Photography Portfolio at SaatchiArt.com!

Free For the Picking

15 Friday Nov 2013

Posted by in Commentary, Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Free For the Picking

Tags

,

Share

When I lived in California, you sometimes saw orange, olive, and/or avocado trees with fruit falling off of them and no one (apparently) harvesting the bounty. So you’d take a few home and have a free snack. This ubiquitous supply made it somewhat difficult to rationalize spending money on these things at the grocery store or the farmer’s market. Sometimes the free fruit wasn’t perfect, but the price ($0.00) lowered your standards a bit and you still had a wholly satisfactory experience.

I get the sense that people think of photography in a similar way. Nowadays, almost everyone has a digital camera or a an electronic device that happens to include a digital camera (e.g., a cell phone camera). Scenes or objects that photographers photograph in public places (indoors or outdoors) are also available to others with cameras. The thinking goes something like: “Why would I buy a print from a professional photographer of a scene I could just take for myself with my own camera for free?”. “Sure, maybe it’s not the same quality as the professional’s, but hey, it’s FREE!”.

I think this happens all the time at events like weddings too, where wedding guests take their own photos and then don’t feel the need to buy prints from the hired wedding photographer…even if they can see that the professional’s images are quite a bit nicer. They’ll live with their lower quality representation (at least they’ve got something!) to save the money.

I know there are photographers and photography organizations out there that think professional photographers and photography groups should be doing more marketing and PR work to disabuse the public from thinking that the work of professional photographers isn’t so much better that it’s worth buying prints from them even if one has a camera and can take one’s own photos.

My inclination is to accept the public’s behavior as it is–because I have no interest in spending time or money trying to change their behavior or values–and figure out what works (in terms of selling photography prints and/or services) taking the current state of the public’s attitudes as a given.

Some of the options available to photographers:

  1. Photographing things/scenes that the public can’t easily photograph themselves (aerial photography is one example of this; constructed scenes is another example–especially when they’re quite elaborate or done with famous subjects who aren’t easily accessible)
  2. Making and exhibiting large, high-quality prints that wouldn’t be possible with the images from smaller, cheaper cameras
  3. Photos that most people don’t have the nerve to take (e.g., Bruce Gilden quickly goes up to complete strangers in the street and takes flash photos; most people I know wince at the very thought of it)
  4. In terms of photography as a service: offering reliable and consistently high-quality photographic work (this works particularly well for repeat/ongoing clients; getting the client in the first place means having a long record of consistently high-quality work–done for other clients–to show)

I think that one of the biggest dangers facing art photographers trying to sell prints is if the general public no longer distinguishes between photos they can and cannot make for themselves, or–similarly–if the devaluation of photos (e.g., one thinks one can take with one’s cell phone) “spills” over into devaluing *all* photos–regardless of whether special equipment, expertise or an elaborate construction is required to produce the photo.

In any case, if any of you photographers out there have any other ideas about what professional photographers can do to have a chance at making a living doing photography in a “sea” of amateur photographers, please feel free to comment below!



Visit Michael's Art Photography Portfolio at SaatchiArt.com!

Creative Activity as its Own Reward

10 Sunday Nov 2013

Posted by in Commentary, Shoutouts

≈ Comments Off on Creative Activity as its Own Reward

Tags

Share

Perhaps the most important quality, the one that is most consistently present in all creative individuals, is the ability to enjoy the process of creation for its own sake.

— Read more of Matthew Schuler’s blog post titled: “Why Creative People Sometimes Make No Sense“.



Visit Michael's Art Photography Portfolio at SaatchiArt.com!

The Message from Juried Exhibitions

09 Saturday Nov 2013

Posted by in Commentary, Fashion/Glamour, MGM's Photos, Nudes, Street

≈ Comments Off on The Message from Juried Exhibitions

Tags

, , ,

Share

About 1-3 times a year (on average), I submit photos to juried photography exhibitions. Although I’ve broken through on occasion, my record of success is pretty dismal (at least to me). Especially when you have to pay entry fees, the experience is definitely a downer…just rejection (with the underlying message that “your work isn’t as good as the work from the 40-50 photographers we selected”) and a loss of money that could have been spent on something useful, like groceries.

Perhaps the worst part is seeing work selected that you wouldn’t even consider successful–i.e., you wouldn’t even consider submitting some of the ones that end up “winning”.

The latter leaves you with a sense of powerlessness, like you can’t trust your own artistic sense. It makes you wonder if you should be posting all of your photos at a photo sharing site like Flickr, and only submit to photo contests the photos that get the most “favs”.

But this takes the basis for the evaluation of your photographs out of your own hands and puts it into the hands of a bunch of (mostly) strangers; it’s effectively “crowd-evaluation”.

I believe an important part of an artist’s growth is making their own decisions about their artistic successes and failures. If you base the evaluation of your work on crowd response (e.g., Facebook “likes”), you’ve lost. You’re stuck being a crowd-pleaser instead of seeking and experiencing authentic artistic growth.

True art is communication. Much of what passes as art is just visual gimmickry. Visual gimmickry can be very popular, but it doesn’t really communicate anything..at least not anything of much substance. Also, certain kinds of photos become fads and then all the photos you see are copies with slight variations; these often do well in juried exhibitions and contests…and drives me absolutely bonkers.

Ultimately, juried exhibitions are just another source of feedback, not so different from the crowd of viewers seeing your work at Flickr, etc.  We assume jurors are better judges of work than the many users and contributors to photo sharing websites, but in terms of what?

Many photography contests are judged by photographers who have experienced at least some “success” as judged by the fine art photography world. But what is someone who has experienced success going to judge as “good”? Work that looks like theirs? Work that is very different from theirs? Work that they just happen to like? Work that doesn’t in any way compete with the work they do? It’s unclear to me.

However, if I’m not letting Flickr tell me which of my work is best (because I don’t want to give Flickr or any photo-sharing website) that sort of power or “say” in the artistic work I pursue, is it any different letting jurors of photo contests/exhibits tell me if or which of my work is actually any good?

Here are two problems I have with the latter:

1) My ultimate “customer” (say, if I want to make money with art) is the collector, not other photographers or people who run contests or competitive exhibits.

2) “Artistic success” is doing work that is meaningful to you and which may find an audience willing to buy it. Trying to generate or emulate work that appeals to people involved in contests (whose true motives are typically unclear) doesn’t mean you’re doing meaningful work or that any of your work will actually sell. You may get some “advertising” out of it–which is usually not a bad thing–but even that is pretty short-lived.

In the end, the message you take from being accepted or rejected by a juried exhibition is up to you. The underlying meaning is often assumed to be “your work is good” or “your work is not good”. However, I don’t have that much confidence in the process to believe either verdict, even when the verdict has been in my favor.

I’d like to finish with a gallery of images I’ve submitted recently (from two different submissions) which fit the themes of the calls for entry, but were (as they must be) my interpretation/s of what fit best.

These are images I have taken that I really like; the jurors for the calls for entry obviously didn’t like them so much…or thought them “bad fits” to the exhibition themes for which they were acting as jurors. (Themes are typically pretty abstract, but I suspect jurors come up with specific working interpretations that may or may not ever be communicated to anyone else.)

Fortunately, the Internet makes it possible to see & hear art that goes beyond the constricted exposure offered by long established and self-proclaimed gatekeepers.



Visit Michael's Art Photography Portfolio at SaatchiArt.com!

Current Deadpan Fine Art Photography

07 Thursday Nov 2013

Posted by in Commentary, MGM's Photos, Street

≈ Comments Off on Current Deadpan Fine Art Photography

Tags

, , , ,

Share

This is a photo I snapped while on vacation last August (2013) in Michigan.

Boyne Falls, Michigan (Aug 2013)

Boyne Falls, Michigan (Aug 2013)

(click image to see it larger..)

It struck me (while looking through my images from the trip) that this one fits–particularly well–a current deadpan aesthetic in fine art photography. Not much is going on (there can’t be much going on) and the colors go well together but can’t be too saturated (the red here is probably a tiny bit too strong), and there’s a fair amount of “balance” to the layout or composition.

In short, the image needs to be fairly “boring” so as to (presumably) engage the higher, more sensitive areas of the cerebral cortex without engaging too much sensory perception or emotional response which could hinder lofty cognitive processing.

I’m not totally “down” on such images (I take them myself sometimes), but I’m getting a little sick of them and find them kind of gutless.

I don’t think that staying away from any strong sensory or emotional response is the solution to getting people (viewers) to experience the sublime or (at least) something elevated above everyday experience.

To me this type of art photography is like a nice soothing break one takes between engagements with really interesting art photography…:p.

 

 



Visit Michael's Art Photography Portfolio at SaatchiArt.com!

Photography as Emulation versus Creative Exploration

30 Wednesday Oct 2013

Posted by in Commentary

≈ Comments Off on Photography as Emulation versus Creative Exploration

Tags

, ,

Share

Sometimes you miss something because it’s too obvious.

Maybe most photographers think that emulating past photography is what ‘doing photography’ is

Not everyone cares about innovation or thinks that producing works or performances like those in the past is a bad thing. In fact, if they can approximate the work of their heroes/idols, they consider that a damn good accomplishment.

There’s nothing inherently bad about such a goal; it can be lucrative. In fact, some artists have actually done better than their predecessors (commercially and/or in terms of fame) by basically copying and extending somewhat work that influenced them and which they liked.

It’s not what I want to do however.

I want to discover something different using photography as one of my tools; I don’t even care if it ends up being a combination of photography with something else (e.g., words, drawings, audio, animation, whatever). Seeking out something new to me is what drives my creative endeavors.

Emulation isn’t evil or bad and, in fact, I find myself doing it on occasion and actually having fun with it. It can be a good touchstone and launching point.

Whether you want to go any further into uncharted territory is an individual “thang” and probably just depends on your personality…:-).



Visit Michael's Art Photography Portfolio at SaatchiArt.com!

Totally Bizarre but Awesome Songs

30 Wednesday Oct 2013

Posted by in Commentary

≈ Comments Off on Totally Bizarre but Awesome Songs

Tags

,

Share

This is quite a change from my usual topics, but I’ve been going back into the archives of music recently (mostly on YouTube) and have been discovering some songs I missed back when they first came out. In particular, I’ve been finding some totally bizarre but awesome songs that I’m going to highlight in this post.

I’m starting this post with two songs (Brian Eno’s “Baby’s on Fire” and Roxy Music’s “In Every Dream Home a Heartache”), but I hope to add more in the future…if for no one else but me…:-).



Visit Michael's Art Photography Portfolio at SaatchiArt.com!