chantal said:
740 days ago

I enjoyed that article as well. I find Alec Soths observations very interesting, and accurate within the context in which he describes, ex:travel vs home photography---either you shoot close to home or you don't. And it brings up the topic of labeling oneself, as a photographer. For a while I was troubled by the fact that I don't feel I have a clearly defined style. My photography is all over the map, style-wise, and this really bothered me...I was beginning to equate lack of style with lack of talent. But what I soon realized was that my lack of a style could actually be my style.

So I wonder then, what people would say about what I shoot---"she's the chick who will shoot just about anything".

My favorite quote from the article would be: "I come to realize throughout the years that if I'm not part of something then I have no business photographing it."

And that's how I feel....if I can feel it, then I can shoot it, otherwise, there's no point.

Love this image, btw...her expression is priceless

ndiginiz said:
740 days ago

Tena koe ehoa
Whether tragic or jubilant, your image has an air of suspense about it more so with the subject being a child. The noise levels work well to add emphasis to the overall one and atmosphere. I like the way your created "shake" as a substitute for tension. The whole image is quite adjective in its simplicity.

Regarding Alec Soth I'm quite inclined to agree with much of his surmise. Photography for the simplistic nature of it, is art! As art it is conceived, perceived and received as differently from each individual instance of image captured as any two days are!

Like all things, love of anything including photography becomes an insatiable appetite that must be fueled and consumed at every possible "logical" and "illogical" opportunity. The nature of photographers I would suggest is constant and most if not everything observed is seen within a frame of some sort at some time. Perhaps an occupational hazard or not?

For my own thinking, photography in some part becomes a self analytical process and the way in which we view our own life is somewhat reflected in the images we capture, whether directly or indirectly involved in the instance of that time or moment. I believe entirely that a part of a photographer must be woven into the photographic intellect, result and conveyance of any moment we capture. (By intellect I don’t refer to the technical attributes either).

If I am to assume photography is art in my own recognition of it then I would also be confined if I was to adhere to the basic technical processes of photography. Hence I don’t!

“The ten commandments are not a ruling for life they are the basic fundamentals of life”~ for me technical processes of photography are thought of in the same manner, a basis for photographic creation not the rule by which it has to be created.
My apologies for rambling Brandon and comsuming your space.