James Dyas Davidson Photography

Creativity: Permission to fail sir?

2012-01-06T13:49:00.000-08:00

"The D4 is announced. I am convinced more than ever that my photography will improve in 2012 by investing in me and my passions than in gear."

I tweeted this today. It was, as they say, a wee 'light bulb moment'. Let me explain why.

In my previous post I sorted out my top 10 'advice to myself'. The top 4 were:

Know who you are.
Embrace life. It helps creativity.
Always have art in your world.
Shoot what interests you, your passions. Find your voice.

These sentiments mirrored something I remember reading. It was Scott Bourne's free e-book 'Visions' and, as ever, the most obvious, common sense advice can sometimes resonate the most and Scott's words of wisdom kept coming back to mind.

He suggested that when it comes to creativity, most limits are self imposed. It can hamper growth.

Try new stuff and fail with a purpose. Give yourself permission to fail so you can learn from it and eventually move on to a new level of competence. Experiment, jam, brainstorm - just as musicians, artists and writers do, so why not in photography?

Make experimentation, expression, authenticity, storytelling and joy the measurements of your success.

To tell a story in a picture I think you have to have a story to tell. You have to have an interest, a passion in what you're photographing. You need to know and understand why you're making the image. You must avoid trying to be 'new' or taking a shot to please others. You have to be you. It is therefore important to know who you are. What moves you, what angers you, what saddens you. Be engaged with life, embrace it and be a person you would like to know.

You may be thinking, "I know all this already"- well, so do I, but in 2011 I felt I didn't stay true to this due to distractions like gear, social networking and other 'side-shows'. In 2012, I'm going to try to make images that are authentic, tell a story and convey some passion.

Am I talking rubbish? Do you think differently and approach your photography in a different way? (I am, of course, excluding work done for clients which have a different set of criteria, often defined by the client.) Let me know your thoughts.

Taking My Advice: A ‘Top 10’

2012-01-03T10:04:00.000-08:00

I started this photography blog in March 2009. The entries ended up being more sporadic than I intended. My excuse, as always, was ‘lack of time’. I’m a full time head of History at a secondary school, which is certainly no 9-5 job (or 9-4 as the dumb media portray), so it is usually a genuine excuse. I like being a teacher and will always give it my full attention. So how can I also satisfy the strong need I have at present to immerse myself in my photography much more than at present?

One answer is to be more focussed on what it is I want to achieve with my photography. I have no time to go back over ground already covered. That said, I will go back to ground covered but with a clearer, more purposeful eye. I may in fact, keep going back to one place, to one spot this year. I now see that, as well as perfecting my technical skills that bit more, I can only move on creatively if I thoroughly explore my immediate environment, my homeland. That will entail, not only devouring more historical knowledge, but being more aware of the current economic, political and social situation.

So, to start 2012 and to make sure I don’t keep going back over old ‘thinking’ any more, I have made a list of the advice and intentions I have already stated in my blog posts in an attempt to keep me moving forward as a photographer and a more creative person.

Know who you are.
Embrace life. It helps creativity.
Always have art in your world.
Shoot what interests you, your passions. Find your voice.
Don’t be concerned about what others think of your work.
That said, engage in conversations with other photographers. Network.
Always be learning. Get out of comfort zones.
Remember why you got into photography in the first place.
Keep on top of the ‘business’ side of things.
Be disciplined about archiving your work.

I’ll leave the final words to Bruce Springsteen who said this in his late twenties:

“...as you get older, you can end up in a life in stasis, shackled by memories and hurt. Old habits die hard and patterns repeat themselves and you can unintentionally let past disappointments effect your present and it can be difficult to move forward.”

Alex Boyd - Scottish artist and photographer

2011-11-05T12:38:00.000-07:00

(Photo of Alex above by © Carl Radford)
(All other photos © Alex Boyd)

I can't actually remember when and where I first came across Alex and his work. More than likely it was via his Flickr site where I saw his Sonnets series and I was impressed by what I saw. Very quickly, you sense Alex is friendly, helpful, knowledgable and passionate about art. He is an interesting guy, clearly talented, successful and doing a great job of getting his art seen. He his currently mastering the more fiddly and tactile aspect of photography - wet plate collodion. I wanted to get to know him and his art better.

I did some homework and I could quickly see that he had been interviewed in the past and had explained and answered many of the questions I would have started with here. So, readers, once you have read the interview with Alex, go back and check out these other links.

JDD: Wet Plate Collodion – why the fascination and interest?

AB: I had been familiar with ambrotypes, glass plate negatives and tintypes for many years through my work in museums, but had never thought it possible to actually produce this kind of work myself, although I was aware of contemporary artists like Sally Mann who had been working extensively in this process in the US.

It wasn't until I was asked to exhibit with the Scottish Photographers group alongside Carl Radford that I became aware that someone in Scotland was actively creating their own wet plate images. A few months later I had a chance meeting in Glencoe in the Highlands at the foot of Buachaille Etive Beag with Carl, and it led to us talking in more depth about wet plate, and he convinced me (without having to use too much persuasion) to become one of his students. During that weekend workshop I became convinced that this approach to photography was one which I wanted to pursue further - I had never become more emotionally invested in the creation of images before. Other than Daguerreotypes, I had never seen images which looked so visually arresting - wet plate portraits and landscapes have a tangible almost three dimensional quality to them.

Why do you want to make the process of photography more challenging?

I think that question is relative to the individual. As I've evolved as a photographer I've found that my methodology has taken on a slower, more considered approach. Instead of taking 300 images in one day, perhaps I'll make 3 or 4. I went from the sheer adrenaline of shooting gig photographs, to landscape photography, to very slow landscapes with long exposures, to collodion. It may change, but at the moment I'm largely uninterested in the quick fix of the digital image - I want the involvement that this process brings. For me making images any other way would be more challenging.

Why make photography less instant?

Wet plate collodion much like any other process is one which comes with strict limitations. It isn't just the cumbersome equipment itself which presents the biggest obstacle, or the chemicals, or the technical knowledge required to create images, but the whole reason of why I'm making an image in the first place. Collodion has really forced me to sit down and re-evaluate what I'm doing as an artist. Every image is therefore the end result of a rigorous cross examination process. I learned a lot from photographer and explorer Thomas Joshua Coopers approach to photography - he would travel to the most extreme edges of our planet with only a handful of glass plates, and this would force him to focus his mind on what he was trying to achieve. The downside however is that I'm not as prolific as I could otherwise be, but I'm happy to work at my own pace.

What are you hoping for from the results?

Introspection and inspiration. I don't know if I will be working with wet plate in 10 years time, but for now it makes sense. Maybe when I look back on this period I will understand more about myself and my choices. That would be enlightening, as now I have no idea!

Are you not just being trendy? Is it a fad?

The wet plate community has grown immeasurably in the last few years, which is no doubt why it may be perceived as being 'trendy' - due to the increased exposure it is receiving. This expansion has been in part due to the more widespread teaching of the process in Europe by people such as Quinn Jacobson, Kerik Kouklis or Carl Radford. It's also easier to get your hands on the chemicals required, but crucially it's access to the knowledge required to make your own images. For many years Collodion based photography was the preserve of a small group of wealthy middle class Americans, however in the last ten years all of that has changed as people have begun to share the secrets of their craft, and the price of workshops has dropped. At present I can't say if it's a fad or not, but I suspect not. It's very early in the rebirth of the medium and people for the most part are still finding their feet. As a result there are only a few established artists who are pushing the format forward in any meaningful way, but those who are will leave a long legacy.

I think wet plate collodion works best with portraits. You’re known for your landscapes. Can we expect to see more portraits from you in the future?

I've never really worked much in portraiture in the past so I don't really see why that would change now just because I'm using a different process. I would however agree with you that wet plate is ideally matched to portraiture due to its immediacy, and a survey of the modern community reveals that the majority are producing works of this type. When I was taught by Carl I too produced many portraits, however this was more to do with the workshop environment. To date I've largely eschewed portraiture altogether in favour of a return to landscape. That being said I have spent the last few months working on a project called Lux et Veritas which is based in portraiture - hopefully I can complete it in the coming year.

Does your recent wet plate work have any commercial potential?

It all depends on the viewer and the market I suppose, but it isn't something I'm particularly concerned with at present. My current project Low Lands is not as commercial as Sonnets, and it remains to be seen if the public or collectors will respond well to my new collodion work. My perception at present is that museum curators down to ordinary members of the public just can't get beyond the process itself to view wet plate collodion images objectively on their own merits. It's my hope that perhaps in a decade or so they will be able to view these images in a more considered way.

Do you wish you had been born in another time in the past? If so, when?

It's probably quite obvious, but I'd love to have interacted with the luminaries of the Fin de siècle such as Wilde and Whistler, or have witnessed Weimar society first hand, I'd like to have lived through the first wave of photographers who struck out from the UK to photograph the world, such as John Thomson or Alexander Gardner.

What part, if any, does your family background, your nationality and upbringing play in how your images turn out?

Growing up in Scotland I was acutely aware that my accent (which I'm still quizzed about on a near daily basis) and general worldview marked me out as slightly different. When I first moved to the UK I lived in several different places in the first few years, and found it hard to adapt to my surroundings when I finally did settle in Irvine on the Ayrshire coast. I generally rejected life on the west coast of Scotland and clung onto my German roots, becoming quiet and insular in the process. As a result of this I became fairly obsessed with ideas of self and identity, and my place in the world, and that has fed into anything that I've done subsequently. The Sonnets project is probably the most obvious example of this. I'm using a very clear motif from German art (the rückenfigur) to explore ideas of identity in some of the most well known landscapes in Scotland.

You appear to me to be someone with a clear and confident individual style and taste, not only in photography, but in music, film and literature as well. How did that go down with your contemporaries, at school say for example? Did you meet like-minded people at school/university?

When I was younger I tended to be more introverted, and spent much of my free time reading anything I could get my hands on. Whilst at school I was aided by a rather brilliant librarian called Alison Sinclair who managed to acquire anything I wanted to read . From Goethe to Gogol I managed to develop my own interests in literature, and was aided by a supportive English Teacher called Anne McGowan who first introduced me to poet Edwin Morgan, and a Mr Fleming who introduced me to Kurt Vonnegut. These influences coupled with my time in the Art Department learning about the great American landscape photographers really did give me the foundation from which to begin to create my own work. In respects to my contemporaries I think there was a lot of indifference to anything other than the here and now, but that was to be expected given life in a little town on the West Coast of Scotland. University of course was much different - it was good to meet people who had similar interests, but even better to find people who challenged my views and preconceptions.

How important is it for photographers to be with other creative people?

I think it's important that there is a constant exchange of ideas between creative people, and for photographers to create work which reaches out beyond the usual role that photography fulfills. Most of my own projects have come from being inspired by literature, film and from visual artists - I don't really want to repeat the work of other photographers.

You have exhibited in some high profile places; you have collaborated with some high profile people. How do you achieve that? What can other photographers start doing to market and promote themselves as successfully as you have done?

Once I left home I lived pretty much hand to mouth for many years. Some of the places I lived in leaked badly, and some had walls which had gone black due to damp and mold. I was constantly ill. I wouldn't have money for anything other than the most basic food. Living in those kind of conditions can really push you hard to want to succeed, and as much of a cliche as it is to be a 'poor starving artist' it did give me the motivation to get out there and make images. I was lucky to have the support of my wife, my dad and my friends, who amongst them helped me to get out to locations, model, and even move and hang entire exhibitions. As for high profile names, I made a list of people I wanted to work with and wrote to many of them. Sometimes it worked out*, and sometimes nothing happened. I had nothing to lose. The important thing was having the ambition to get out there and believe in what I was doing. Nothing much has changed in that respect.

What are your thoughts on the future of photography?

There will be an ever increasing demand for so called 'alternative' processes as photographers try desperately to mark themselves out as artists in the face of what they perceive as the soulless nature of digital. This misguided view, which I'm seeing becoming ever more prevalent, is producing a wave of increasingly dull imagery which hides behind the processes themselves. Beyond that I don't know - photography as a medium is generally losing its importance, but will always have the potential to communicate something vital to the viewer. That will keep it relevant I feel.

What would be the best thing anyone could say about one of your photographs?

I think the best reaction for any artwork is to inspire others to create their own. Praise passes quickly and in the end doesn't really stay with me - I just wish I could say the same about negativity, but I'm just happy that people are engaging with what I do.

Is there a photograph you wished you had taken?

There are many, but the one which immediately comes to mind is an image by Harry Benson of Willy Brandt taken in 1961 when he was Mayor of West Berlin, a city in the heart of crisis.

Its a deeply resonant image, and in it I see a man with the weight of the world on his shoulders. There is a similar feeling in his image of exiled Russian author Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Benson really was the master of capturing such moments.

What question should I have asked you and what would your answer be?

Talisker Bay on Skye. That's where it all made sense.

I would like thank Alex for the time he took to answer these questions and for the quality of his answers. I hope you enjoyed this interview as much as I did. Feel free to comment and share.

* http://bowiezone.com/#/alex-boyd/4553432882

Originality, Neil Young, increasing numbers and making money.

2011-10-22T05:06:00.000-07:00

This is my last day here on Skye in the Highlands of Scotland. A place renowned for its dramatic scenery and beauty.

My wife and I rent a house and have done so for a few years now. I have a set of photos taken on these trips here.
Another thing Skye has is artists of all kinds. There is a very vibrant artist community here. I, naturally, tend to go and visit the photographers who nearly all take landscape shots. This year I have been struck by how similar these landscape shots look- you know, rocks in the immediate foreground, loch or river leading the eye to the mountains lit by either the setting or rising sun, perhaps with some snow. A wee white cottage or a lone dead tree the icing on the cake. Personally, I've yet to capture such a 'perfect' shot and I have no doubt that if I could see one and I was skillful enough to capture it as well as these photographers do, I would take such a shot. But why?
Just to see if I can. Just because it is recording the beauty of the island I visit so often. People buy such pictures. And why not?

Not very original though and in a crowded, networked and technically advanced environment, how do you stand out?

How can you be original these days when there are so many competent and enthusiastic photographers out there (and the numbers keep increasing!)? I was thinking about this last night whilst watching a BBC4 documentary on the great Neil Young who is well known for experimenting, for exploring new forms of musical expression, for putting the music first. Even though one musical 'formula' was highly profitable and popular, it was not to be repeated as far as Neil was concerned - often with disastrous consequences, losing sales and fans. Neil was not trying to make his music popular or interesting, he was making music that interested him, that stretched him, that advanced his craft and got him out of a comfort zone.

Neil isn't short of a bob or two, so having talent, being true to your craft, getting out of your comfort zone and working hard can be profitable, even if you lose fans and friends along the way.

Bland, unoriginal music also survives and makes money - and so does bland, unoriginal art.

Is this how photographers make enough money to live these days - produce the 'goods' that sell but try to be original in your free time in the hope that some people may love your original and personal work? Probably. But I also wonder if other employment is needed such as running courses, giving talks and, who knows, some other part time work.

I enjoyed David Fleet's blog post this morning on the viability of being a landscape photographer (you can read it here, as well as my comment). His post, as well as the Neil Young documentary, inspired this rambling entry today. I hope you followed my train of thought and what I was trying to say. I've said similar things here, here and here.

Please feel free to comment, especially if you are a full time photographer.

Lucy Telford: Wet Plate Collodion enthusiast

2011-09-22T11:55:00.000-07:00

I am a member of a local photography club and for the third year running we have come together and put on an exhibition as part of the annual NEOS extravaganza. We had a preview evening and that night I stood, for a long time, in front of some pictures that oozed feeling and soul. They were by fellow club member and Flickr contact Lucy Telford. Some of the pictures were taken without a camera, some with modified shoe boxes, Diana cameras, old film cameras and, her current love, wet plate collodion.

Lucy recently went on a wet plate collodion course with Carl Radford where she was, not only in expert hands, but she met some great photographers, such as Alex Boyd and Deborah Parkin.
Lucy shared her knowledge and showed us the equipment she uses in a talk to the club last night and it was both interesting and informative without being boring or over her heads.
I recently asked Lucy if she would kindly answer some question I wanted to ask her and I'm delighted to share this Q&A we did. Enjoy and check out her work. Thanks Lucy.

(JDD) Wet Plate Collodion – why are you so interested in this?

• (LT) During the last year I have been searching around for photographic processes or techniques which enable me to make visible the way I see things in my mind's eye. I have “tried on” various different things – 35mm film, toy cameras, pinhole cameras etc etc. I had already come across examples of wet plate work on Flickr (my contact Allan Barnes) and been very taken with the look of the images, they are somewhat dream-like and timeless. The more wet plate images I looked at and the more I got to know about it, the more interested I became. Plus, well – I just like old things ;-)

• Do you want to make your images more challenging?

• I presume here you mean the end result? Yes, maybe. In a way. But no more than I want to make any of my pictures challenging. I am not very interested in images where what-you-see-is-what-you-get. I prefer there to be an ambiguity. I would hope that people might emotionally engage with my pictures and begin to interact and interpret.

• Will using wet plate produce better results and/or more personal results?

• I am hoping that the more I do it and the more competent I become, that it will be a process which I use frequently. I believe that it is a technique which suits my way of seeing. More personal? Yes, maybe. The process is slow (compared to digital) and so invites ideas of constructing photographs which is something I am thinking of for the next year.

• Old Cameras – why the fascination?

• Well, for a number of reasons. I actually think that old cameras are quite beautiful in themselves. I like old stuff :-) I am not mechanically minded, unfortunately, but there is a delight in the (relative) simplicity of these cameras. They are made to be mended. I also like the results I get from them!

• Why make photography less instant?

• Because I find that I work too quickly and don't engage my brain so much when I use a digital camera. I prefer to slow down and think and I can do that more easily with a film camera which only gives me 36 or 12 exposures. Nowadays, so much of life is fast-paced and instant and I'm not sure that's a good thing.

• Is this not just being trendy? Is it a fad?

• No. I am not sure that I know what IS trendy in photographic circles! For me it is about experimenting, trying different things out and seeing what suits. I honestly struggle to get the results I want from a digital camera so I don't use them. Maybe this says more about my incompetence with digital cameras...

• When I see your images made without a camera, it seems to me that you want to create images that may be in your head so you may even move onto other 'tools'/mediums?

• Yes. :-) You are clearly a mind reader James so you know the answer to this already ;-)

• Photograms have been used for a long time now and I wanted to have a play around with the medium. There is no rule which says that a camera has to be used to make a photograph.

• Are all of the above more the a scientist in you coming out?

• Err...no! Although I have been surprised at finding how interesting old lenses etc are to me.

• Are you more interested in the mechanics of photography than creating art that expresses you and your feelings?

• No, definitely not. The mechanics of photography don't interest me much. I am not entirely sure why the things happen as they do...I just accept it! For me it is all about making images which express a mood / emotion.

• What is your background? School successes/university/occupation – does it matter do you think?

• I was only ever any good at arts/humanities subjects at school. Science and maths were beyond me although I am now beginning to appreciate them. I read English at Uni with philosophy which I absolutely loved. Being able to spend 3 years reading books, dyeing my hair and going to the pub – what's not to like ;-) As far as occupations go, well – I have had boring office jobs like most people. I worked in sales for a publishing company before moving to Germany for a while and then, eventually, when we moved up here I became a recruitment consultant in Aberdeen. I think that my love of literature does have an influence on my photography, I will often think of a quote or a book and that will sometimes spark off an idea. I think, inevitably, our backgrounds and interests have an effect on the work we produce. I like being outside and so consequently I tend to take a lot of photographs of the natural world, nature moves me more than buildings do and that is reflected in what I choose to photograph.

• Who or What have influenced your Photography?

• Other photographers. Until I got going with a camera seriously a couple of years ago I didn't really know any photographers apart from the really famous ones but I set out to immerse myself in the work of others to see what can be achieved. I am constantly discovering new (to me) photographers and that's really exciting. There are many photographers I admire but the ones who have had some influence on what I do are probably Sally Mann, Susan Burnstine, Josef Sudek and some of the Pictorialist photographers.

• Do you have any thoughts on the future of photography?

• Well, it wouldn't surprise me if there were a digital backlash – film is still being used (and not just by me) and I think people are now discovering digital's limitations as well as its advantages. Everyone is a photographer nowadays and it is easier and easier to make a decent image so photographers have to up their game. I suspect, though, that as time goes on there will become a greater and greater divide with digital and computer technology veering off in one direction and simple homespun cameras going in the other. Never the twain shall meet and may everyone be happy in what they do :-)

• Does your work have any commercial potential?

• Lol...not sure about this one! Maybe. I think the wet plate stuff could be a goer as far as portraits go. There can be nothing more unique. Some people might go for a lomo wedding shoot but it would be stressful shooting a wedding with simple film cameras – not being able to see what you've got until it is too late! I can see the potential for doing large format or wet plate portrait work.

• What are your feelings regarding digital and video?

• I think that photography is about choosing the right tool for the right job. I would use a digital camera to shoot a wedding, no question. I can, in fact, use a digital camera – I know it is hard to believe ;-) I like using my homemade lensbaby lens on a digital camera too. Video is a closed book to me. Other than videoing my kids learning to crawl and walk etc I haven't done any so can't really comment.

• Is there a photograph you wish you had taken?

• That's a difficult one. Probably one of Sally Mann's photographs from her “Immediate Family” book.

Does your photography reflect your passions or the world you live in or both?

2011-09-11T13:30:00.000-07:00

Last Friday, I set up my photography exhibition as part of the NEOS 2011 exhibition alongside fellow photographers from Deeside Camera Club. There was a real eclectic mix of styles and range of subjects - a healthy, interesting selection.
I've heard it say that the pictures you take of subjects that interest you are nearly always better than trying to make interesting pictures. Abandoned communities in the area where I live interests me. These images are becoming my most viewed, most talked about and most lucrative aspect of my work.

Exhibiting alongside some of your peers can also let you see how your images come across to the viewer. I was emotionally taken by the work of Lucy Telford who uses old cameras, 'toy' cameras, homemade cameras or no camera at all. I loved them. It got me thinking. What do my and my fellow photographer's pictures say about the world today? Should they say anything about the world we live in? What if your interest say nothing about the world you live in? Does it matter?
Today is the 10th anniversary of 9/11. There is much reflection and consideration of the actions taken since then. Have photographers represented, recorded, reacted and reflected the last 10 years?

To help me answer that question, I listened to Jeff Curto's class on 'The Atomic Age and New Frontiers' which looked at the work of photographers and artists who worked in the changing world after the dropping of the atomic bomb and the post war world. This was a world of abstract expressionism, be-bop jazz, anti-communism, rock 'n' roll, beat generation poets, civil rights, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Cold War and growing mass media.
Having looked at some of the photographers in Jeff's talk, I personally think the images reflect the photographer's passions and interests that have been used, if that's the correct word, to reflect the times by others. Some photographers have documented their world, some have picked up on the mood of the times and others have used the technology and media of the time. It all adds up to a great and exciting body of work.

Take a look at this selection and ask - 'do they reflect those post WW2 changing times?'

Aaron Siskind:

Ralph Eugene Meatyard:

Jerry Uelsmann:

Summer months will be different in future.

2011-08-09T14:52:00.000-07:00

Hello!

I missed blogging on here in July and I'm sure I could have and should have done at least one. Sorry guys.

A few things to report and update. My summer shooting started off well with a walk up a glen I drive past every day near Alford. Initially I went up the wrong track but this happen to be fortuitous as I spotted a ruin I didn't know about. Re-traced steps, moved the car and park it beside the gamekeepers house which meant I had to walk passed him and explain where I was going. No problem really with him but I think it is important to not draw attention to yourself or to antagonise gamekeepers. I got to the ruin which looked promising but, and I need to remember this, when I got to it, it was surrounded by nettles, ferns and gorse. Rural exploration should be saved for Spring, late Autumn and Winter. An internal shot of the the ruin called Mains of Brux is above and an outside shot below:

The great thing about this day was when exploring this place I spotted another ruin just up the hill a bit. I also spotted a red rusty roof - great! The place was called Ferneybrae:

So a good day and a fantastic start to the summer. More shots here.

Unfortunately, the weather this summer has been restrictive, so I've decided that, with the current poor weather we're getting in the summer in Scotland combined with the fact that the houses are so covered in undergrowth, I'm going to concentrate on other aspects of my photography during these months.

One project I'm starting to build up is photographing local musicians. A local folk club is run by renowned fiddler Paul Anderson and his highly acclaimed singer Shona Donaldson. Luckily, I know them both and have done work for them so I have been allowed to shoot during the folk night in Tarland. Here is a shot I took of Jonny Hardie of the Old Blind Dogs:

The challenge for me shooting the folk club, apart from the fact I am not really a portrait photographer, is the low light. I use the 85mm f1.8 on shutter priority to maintain the shutter speed no lower than 100s so it ends up shooting wide open, making focusing tricky. As the evening went on I resorted to flash which I hate when shooting performers, but it was needed in the dimly lit room. Next time, I'm going to try the auto ISO to see how that goes.

Anyway, I'm glad to get back to the blog. I did actually listen to another Jeff Curto podcast but I didn't feel a blog could be constructed from it so that also delayed things. Also, my wife's father has been ill and in and out of hospital, so that takes priority.

Thanks for visiting, all the best, James.

The female POV

2011-06-30T13:27:00.000-07:00

My experience of female photographers on the internet on sites like Flickr, is that they can be the most inspiring, creative and exciting exponents of the craft of photography seen today, but they can also be the most predictable, boring and self indulgent of all photographers. Self portrait after self portrait, flower after flower, shoes after shoes, pet after pet, baby after baby. That said, it was seeing the work of a female photographer (Diane Arbus) that slapped me across the face and woke me up to the power of photography again.

To get to the point of this post - can (and should) forms of expression be discussed in 'men's' or 'women's' art? Does gender affect output? (Not many female landscape photographers is there?) Does gender of the photographer affect the viewer's response to the image?

Well, having listened to Jeff Curto's Class # 11, Spring 2011 podcast, the answer seems to be, no. Time and place determine style, not gender. The so called golden era of photography (1880-1920s) coincided of course with social, cultural and political change, especially for women. Historically, photography has been a male dominated field, due partly to the technical and scientific nature of the art form, but also due to the fact that men were involved in photography as a commercial, money making venture. Women's place remained in the home, as wife and mother, until quite recent times. Women were often stuck at home and not until there was a series of technological advances which could 'release' them from the home, could they grab the new Kodak and shoot the flowers, pets, babies and friends that surrounded their world, i.e not too far from the hearth. Working class women of course remained in a life of poverty and toil, in the factory or working in the 'big house'. Interestingly, many started late in life to help deal with 'empty nest syndrome'. Women moved from the hearth to groups like the photo secessionists, FSA and f64. They were soon making social and political comment and embracing all technical aspects of their craft.

As their world changed and more opportunities opened up for women photographers, they have produced some of the most creative, original and powerful pieces of work. They have moved far from the hearth and are often at the forefront of photography. A great excuse to show some examples of the development of women photographers (mostly American):

Julia Margaret Cameron:

Lady Clementina Hawarden:

Frances Benjamin Johnston

Gertrude Kasebier

Anne Brigman

Chansonetta Stanley Emmons

Imogen Cunningham

Dorothea Lange

Marion Post-Wolcott

Margaret Bourke-White

Thanks again to Jeff Curto's History of Photography.

Alfred Stieglitz and the Photo Secessionists

2011-05-29T13:47:00.000-07:00

There can't be many photographers who haven't heard of Alfred Stieglitz nor be unfamiliar with his classic Steerage:

What I wanted to learn more about was the curiously named group of photographers called the Photo Secessionists. I listened to Jeff Curto's History of Photography Class 9 Spring 2011 to find out more.

In its early life, photography wasn't sure what it was to do with itself. Was it art or commerce? It tried to be art by mimicking styles, look, subject and composition of painters.
Pictorialism was the name given to an attempt to make photography an art and be taken seriously. The subject matter came second to the finished product. Manipulation was common to try to achieve the look of a painting and to produce something that didn't actually exist. Fictional stories were reproduced in images and multiple negatives were used to create fantasies, or recreations from mythology or the Bible.

Peter Henry Emerson, an iconoclastic photographer in a way, wanted honest depictions of real people and spoke out against 'art' photography. He even used processes and slightly out of focus techniques to simulate what he considered a more realistic view a normal person's vision. His beautiful images from the Norfolk Broads in England:

Emerson eventually convinced himself in the 1890s that photography was not art but just a copying device.

If I have understood the thinking behind the Photo Secessionists correctly, Alfred Stieglitz wanted to combine the realism Emerson spoke about but produce pictures that were not only realistic, of the moment and often technically superb, but had a deeper meaning and were also beautiful prints. What was in front of the camera was less important. What was important was to break away from the narrow rules and customs of the day.
He was also one of the first to just print part of the negative and he often used small cameras, relatively speaking of course. He also managed to produce stunning night time shots when taking the basic technology at his disposal into consideration:

Some more examples of his work:

Not only was Stieglitz an influential photographer, he was also a promoter of American photographers. He set up a yearly salon and the group, Photo Secessionists. The idea behind the secessionists was to break away from photography of the past and make photography its own thing, to change thinking about what constituted a photograph. He wanted to advance photography to a higher artistic form and make an active protest against the old thoughts on photography and, perhaps more controversially, the dictatorship of the entrenched institutions, galleries, art schools and professional art organizations that enforced or at very least sanctioned copying or imitation. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo-Secession)

Some examples of work by Photo secessionists:
Gertrude Kasebier:

Anne Brigman;

So there you have it, a short introduction to the Photo Secession movement which I hope may stimulate you to find out more.

Thanks again to Jeff Curto's History of Photography.

The choices landscape photographers make - but make the same shot.

2011-05-08T08:00:00.000-07:00

If you ever get to the Isle of Skye (is it still called that now it has a bridge to the mainland?) and you drive from Portree to the Old Man of Storr, you will come upon this view and will more than likely take a shot, as I did:

Now, if you Google Image 'The Old Man of Storr', the results will throw up very similar images, including the above view, for example:

So, am I guilty of plagiarism? No, of course not because there are 'honey-spots' like this all around the world. Do a Google Image search for Eiffel Tower, Houses of Parliament, Empire State Building, Great Wall of China' Tower of Pisa, etc. and you'll get my drift.
My shot of the Old Man of Storr (the black and white one) I titled 'So you think I should have just kept on driving?' because I was very aware of how cliched the shot was when I uploaded it to my flickr account. I felt the same about this shot I took standing at the Old Man of Storr:

There are many, many more better pictures of this scene on the internet, but I still took it and posted it. Take a look at Billy Currie's one for example:

Billy's shot is far superior to mine so why did I bother posting my effort? Well, I feel by taking the shot and making a decent effort, and then comparing it to others I can learn and improve by considering what my shot didn't have that a better picture did. (Let's not forget the basic function of letting friends and family see some of my holiday snaps!)
Now, here's the thing, I hadn't seen his shot before taking mine. In fact, I can honestly say that I never consciously studied any picture of the scene before going there to take it. I ended up at that spot because the well worn path led me there!

Nineteenth century photographers shot the same scene over and over again for financial reasons (people would buy prints of popular places and landmarks) and it was expected of you if you wanted to be known as a travel/landscape photographer. There was a high demand for these popular scenes and photography was a business so they satisfied a demand and flooded the market with views of foreign lands and stunning natural and man-made monuments.
I then wondered how competitive this market was. These early Victorian photographers were exploring and venturing into wilderness and if you found a stunning view, positioned yourself to capture it effectively you could make a bit of money with such a print. Consider then how annoying it must have been to have someone follow in your footsteps and find the exact same point. El Capitan in Yosemite by Carleton Watkins:

And by Eadweard Muybridge:

You don't have to be any kind of expert to see why some photographs of exactly the same spot can be more pleasing to the eye than others. In today's competitive, saturated market how can a landscape photograph stand out? Removing the subject matter in a landscape photograph (because in this scenario it is the same), what choices do photographers make to help them create a 'different' shot of the same scene?

Time of day, time of year and quality of light. Weather conditions also.
Your point of view. Are you going to stand exactly where everybody else stands?
Your field of view. What will you include/exclude?
Horizontal or Vertical?
Lens choice - will either pull the subject closer or push it farther away (unless using a standard lens).
Camera choice, medium choice, camera settings.
People/objects included or not.

Here's a question for you - if you were to include something personal to a classic view, let's say for example a red chair in the classic Glencoe shot and then somebody went back to the exact same spot with a yellow chair, took a shot, is that plagiarism? Or is it flattery?

On a similar theme take a look at the work of Klett & Wolff

Thanks again to Jeff Curto's History of Photography. This blog was inspired by his Spring 2011 Class 7.

Photography and painting: a symbiotic relationship.

2011-04-29T11:47:00.000-07:00

Imagine being a portrait painter in the 1840s and watching with some concern, the growth in the popularity of this bastard child of art and science called 'photography'.
Photography, created in 1839, was tied closely to the conventions of art at the time and early photographs mimicked, not only the subject matter of paintings, e.g. still lifes, portraits and landscapes, but some even tried to look like a painting by manipulating the plate to give the impression of brush strokes. So photographers initially tried to give this new medium some status by trying to produce photographic paintings. But with the sensitivity of early plates, especially to blue, skies were often washed out. Landscape painters could show up this limitation by 'completing the picture' you, might say. For example: Gustave Courbet's 1874 painting of Chateau de Chillon

can fill in the washed out sky and mountains of Adolphe Braun's photograph of c.1863-65:

Portrait painters painted the emotion of the sitter but photography showed the real emotion, the real person and this shocked but fascinated people. Take Julia Margaret Cameron's portrait of J.F.W. Herschel of 1867 and I think you'll see what I mean:

The power of these photographs must have alarmed portrait painters. Edward Steichen's striking portrait of JP Morgan made artists go in the opposite direction, e.g. Matisse's 'green stripe lady'.

On top of this, the detail in photographs could be looked at very closely whereas, the closer you got to a painting, the more you saw the paint strokes. Painters painted the light coming from the object and close up, it just looked fuzzy.
Early photographs were in monochrome so shapes were easier to define and use, creating more artistic images such as Timothy O'sullivan's survey work:

Photographers also had to frame their image but of course artists didn't have to, allowing some 'artistic license in the accuracy of their work. In fact, when photography took over the role of 'recording the world' from painters, it allowed painters to stop representing the world and experiment. Photography could also explore the emotions that painters used and produce what is often termed 'pictorialism'. Alvin Langdon Coburn's photograph of a bridge in Venice, for example:

Some painters, quite early on, used photography to record the human body in various poses to help in the construction of paintings. Thomas Eakins is a good example of this:

At the early stages of photography, there were two things photographers couldn't do - complete abstract images and very large images. This was an area where painters could deflect attention away from photography back onto themselves. Picasso was, not only painting figures and portraits in a way that no photograph could do, but was depicting the horrors of war, as well as, if not better than any photographer.

Jackson Pollock removed any subject matter from the paiting and his image was all about the material, i.e the canvas and the paint (not to mention the evidence of his presence on the canvas). How do you compete with that photographers? Well, Lucas Samaras put his 'mark' on his polaroids as they were developing.

Did Duchamp get inspiration from Muybridge for his 'Nude descending a staircase'?

Dorothea Lang and Robert Frank may well have been inspired by social realist painters. Maybe not James Guthrie of the Glasgow Boys, but I think you can see what I'm suggesting.

Some photographers use photoshop, make up and props to get their photographs to look like old paintings, e.g. Cindy Sherman

And, most recently, painters have gone to amazing technical lengths to make their paintings look like a photograph (often a bad photograph to begin with too!). Alyssa Monks is a fine example of this craze.

Thanks again goes to Jeff Curto's History of Photography. This blog was based on his Spring 2011, class 6.

The key to failure?

2011-04-23T04:53:00.000-07:00

I subscribe to a UK magazine called 'The Word' and this morning I was enjoying Robbie Robertson (he of The Band) having a snigger at all the young bands (Fleet Foxes, Midlake, Iron and Wine, etc,) trying hard to look like The Band did on the cover of the Album 'The Band'.

The photographer, Elliot Landy wanted to shoot them at a spot in Woodstock. It was raining that day and the members of The Band just look pissed off at being there. They were wet and bedraggled, mostly bearded, unshaven and looked like backwoodsmen after a good night out. This 'look' has become the thing to aim for by some young new bands, much to the amusement of Robbie Robertson. He states, "I'm somebody who was always looking for what was not going to be trendy..." He goes on, "We just wanted to be learning our craft and absorbing enough music so we could make something with it's own character."

I thought that last statement should be the 'mantra' for all creative people.

I also read Scott Bourne's blog which echoed these sentiments. He wants us creative people to plough our own furrow and ends with the great Bill Cosby quote which I have used in the title of this blog:

And remember what Bill Cosby said…
“I don’t know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.”

Is photography still our window to the world?

2011-04-20T14:34:00.000-07:00

I was listening to Jeff Curto's Spring '11 Class 5 on Photography as transport in the 19th Century and it made me think about how difficult it is for photographers nowadays to bring a new image of the world which we hadn't seen before, into our lives. Haven't we seen it all by now? Some of the amazing BBC/Discovery/National Geographic documentaries I've watched took to me places I never imagined existed. Some I have an urge to travel to and the means of transport is available to me (but, alas, maybe not the finance!). Some places I think we've seen too many times and they have lost their allure perhaps.

In the 19th century, technological and chemical advances made it possible to take camera equipment out to the great wildernesses, and demand for images of the unseen world made it viable to capture the 'new world' and all its wonders. Coinciding with this was the transport revolution which made it possible for people to travel further afield and perhaps start a new life. In such cases, it would be beneficial to 'see' the terrain, the landscape and just exactly what the 'wild west' looked like. (Jeff's talk concentrated mostly on American examples.)

Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote about travelling all around the world sitting by you fireside and how marvelous it looked.

Carleton Watkins' images of Yosemite made it a place of wonder and beauty.

Eadweard Muybridge (yes, the guy who did the multiple images of movement) did some technically brilliant landscape shots too.

The American Civil War photographer Timothy O'Sullivan also did work for surveyors so his photographs were perhaps the least picturesque but he still recorded, with some style, the land as it was about to be 'opened up' via railways, etc.

Andrew J Russell helped document the trans continental railway construction in America which helped investment and exploration. His images often had people in them.

William H Jackson realised that for Americans, devoid of all the grand churches and man made monuments so prevalent in Europe, the landscape had become their 'cathedrals'.

So what part of the world can photographers bring into our lives today that we haven't already seen? Well, maybe that's the wrong question. A better question might be 'what can a photographer bring into our world that we should see? The consequence of travel, industrialisation, urbanisation and the rapid population growth perhaps.

Sebastiao Salgado:

Edward Burtynsky:

Portraits

2011-03-27T11:51:00.000-07:00

I was listening to Jeff Curto's Spring 11 Class 4 podcast on portraits called 'Light and Likeness' in which he considers What makes a good portrait? Are they the same today as they were back in the mid 19th century? It certainly gave me some food for thought and provided some fine examples of portrait photography for me to consider. This blog entry is just some brief notes and links to the photographers.

Only the rich could have their portrait painted so when a relatively cheaper alternative became available, the photographic portrait became popular. Daguerrotypes were one of a kind so it was only natural to do portraits because the sitter would, not only have an image that would 'deny time' but they had something to show others. With advances in lenses and lights, exposure times were reduced, but the process was still a joint effort between photographer and subject.

A stunning example of the quality daguerrotypists, Southward and Hawes:

There was also post-mortem portraits done.

With the invention of the calotype, a Scottish duo, Hill and Adamson began to take more outdoor portraits.

Does era make a difference to portrait photography? Some examples to consider.

Julia Margaret Cameron (active 1864-75) was a wealthy woman who did her photography for herself so could be creative and do her own thing.

Paul Strand (1920s-'50s) did realistic, straight on shots and well posed groups.

Yousuf Karsh had well oiled posed shots.

Arnold Newman (1950s-80s) typically shot the subject in their environment and isolated them within it.

Irving Penn (1950s-90s) took people out of their environment. (I knew immediately knew who this portrait was of - do you?)

Richard Avedon (1950s-04) used a neutral background and people out of their environment.

A previous blog entry spoke about Robert Mapplethorpe, Cindy Sherman and Annie Leibovitz and their contribution to portrait photography, so I won't repeat myself here but move on to Alec Soth (2000- present)

Suzanne Opton (1990s - present) photographed soldiers in an original and thought provoking way and made very large prints for viewing in galleries.

Lorettea Lux (1990s-present) took, what I consider slightly scary and surreal pictures of children,

And coming right back to where we began, a photographer who, amongst other things, takes daguerrotypes, Chuck Close (1960s-present.)

So what has changed regarding portrait photography? Well, certainly the technology has but as we can see in sites like Flickr, many are going back to old technology in a desperate search for originality? Or they may genuinely prefer the look and quality. There are more shots of people in their environment but also more elaborate staged and set up shots. The approach to the function of a portrait has altered as it has become so cheap and accessible to perform. Are they more disposable too, making them less valued? Has photoshop clouded the 'deny time' aim of portraiture too. Paparazzi and the cult of the celebrity has flooded our appetite for that.

One thing is for sure we all still love looking at portraits don't we?

The best of the past with the inventiveness of the present in Photography

2011-03-03T14:36:00.000-08:00

Ever thought of mixing realism with Zen spiritualism in your photography? Ever heard of Minor White?

How exciting was it, I wonder, to shoot the world of jazz and the American civil rights movement like Roy DeCarava? His portrait of John Coltrane, 1963:

Jerry Uelsmann's shots enter the surreal world, using multi-negatives and many enlargers to make an image in the darkroom. It is post-visualisation. Untitled 1969:

Olivia Parker's still life shots using various cameras :

Annie Leibovitz: documenting and era's culture:

David Hockney: a painter using photography to explore perspective and how we see and look:

Cindy Sherman: self portraits, many like paintings or movie stills or magazine adverts:

Robert Mapplethorpe: documenting the gay community and producing exquisite still life shots.

Sally Mann's old processes and equipment and family portraits:

Martina Lopez's stunning images of the past and the new by assembling old images with new processing:

Gregory Crewdson: staged and elaborate shots, visualised by him but executed by his assistants:

There it is. A quick visual run through of the last part of Jeff Curto's excellent History of Photography, Spring 11 Class 3 and the final part of my 'lecture notes'

Photography has come out of the centre of Daguerre and Talbot and spread out in all directions but mixed with each other on the way.

Hope you enjoyed just looking at the pictures if nothing else! Some great artists here to explore in detail.

"Change Agents"

2011-02-28T12:49:00.000-08:00

Part 2 of my lecture notes from Jeff Curto's History of Photography, podcast Spring 2011.

Change agents can sometimes be people or it can sometimes be technology.

In the 1920s, Andre Kertesz was using a new camera and lens, the Ermanox f/1.8. This allowed photographers to capture moments of real life as it happened. The wide aperture allowed for faster shutter speeds as well as shooting in dull light.

The idea of using a roll of 35mm film in a camera came from a perforated film used in a minigraph camera. A man called Oscar Barnack halved the size of the film, designed a camera at the company where he worked, Leitz Camera, to accommodate it and called it a Leica.

Then we get to Henri Cartier-Bresson and the Decisive Moment.

The Lumiere Brothers came up with Autochrome at the turn of the century, the start of colour photography. In 1934, we see George Eastman making another appearance as a 'change agent' with his Kodachrome. This used subtractive colour using Cyan, Magenta and Yellow. Edward Steichen used Kodachrome in the 1930s. A great example of early colour fashion photography by Horst P Horst:

Back to photography with a social conscious now and the Farm Security Administration (FSA) with Dorothea Lange, Walker Evans and Arthur Rothstien. These photographs had a social impact, told a story and were works of art.

Since the 1950s, 'change agents' have produced advances in technology, faster speeds, greater automation, digital photography and, more recently, video.

Today, there really is no argument about whether or not photography is seen as a tool of commerce or art. It is both. A more current debate is regarding its commercial survival in the current free for all regarding the sale and use of images.

The next entry will look at fine examples of photographers who mixed ideas, styles, formats and technology.

19th century 'photoshop' and what IS photography? Part 1

2011-02-27T12:02:00.000-08:00

Just spent another enjoyable couple of hours listening to Jeff Curto's History of Photography podcast. This one was the second part of a two-part survey, a fast trip through the history of photography, attempting to get a handle on who did what, when they did it and how it happened. It starts in around 1880 and finishes up in the 1990s.
There were some iconic images which made it a very pleasant way to spend the late afternoon. Here is part 1 of my lecture notes so to speak:

Problems around 1880:

speed
size of prints
proper use?
colour (lack of)
spectral sensitivity

The biggest issue then was: what is photography?; what was it for?; Was it an art form?; should it try to look like a painting? Gustave Le Gray made a multiple print in 1865 to try to make his picture look more like a painting. Oscar Gustave Rejlander in 1837 made, what reminded me of images by David LaChapelle, pictures that looked like allegorical paintings, such as The Two Ways of Life, by using many negatives printed onto a large sheet of photographic paper.

Another example of what could seen as 19th century 'photoshop' or manipulations - Henry Peach Robinson.

Realism began replacing contrived shots with people like Peter Henry Emerson working in the 1880s.

Pictoralism remained though. An example of alterations to the chemicals used in the image process by Robert Demachy (1888) to simulate paint or scratches on the negative by Frank Eugene to give the impression of drawing.

Iconoclast Alfred Stieglitz (working 1880-1940) championed photography as an art form. His masterpiece 'Steerage' 1902.

The class then heard about the group called photo-secession. Edward Steichen, Gertrude Kasebier and Imogen Cunningham were sited as examples.

Gertrude Kasebier's portrait of Evelyn Nesbit:

Imogen Cunningham's 'arms'

The next part will have links for and examples of photographers with a social conscience, Group f/64, Bauhaus, Dada and Surrealism and 'change agents' that moved photography in different directions from its centre.

Photography - some History

2011-02-20T03:52:00.000-08:00

This morning I've been catching up with Jeff Curto's excellent History of Photography podcasts.
This is what I picked up from it and maybe it would get you interested enough to go and listen to his podcasts.
(These notes I took whilst listening to his Class 2 Spring 11 podcast)

Artists grappled with how to convey perspective, motion and distance and space. An Arabian scholar was the first to record how a pin-hole image appeared around 900AD!
'Camera obscura' means 'room dark' ( from the Italian)
Artists like Van Eyck and Vermeer used the camera obscura to paint highly accurate and realistic images - including aspects of lenses, i.e. blur and depth of field. So they start to paint out of focus stuff. Interestingly, at the same time Asian art remains flat and lacking in realism because they were more interested in telling the story than getting perspective etc correct.

Niepce is seen as the person who produced the first photograph in 1827 using his bitumen coated metal plate process.
Daguerre worked with Niepce to come up with the process eventually to be called 'daguerreotype' which produced very sharp, very detailed, one of a kind plate images. Costly but became very popular as people wanted a portrait of themselves and family. So photography began in January 1839. One of the best and a famous daguerreotype is of abolitionist Frederick Douglass:

Meanwhile in England Henry Fox-Talbot came up with his 'Calotype' process which involved light sensitive paper to make the negative placed on light sensitive paper to produce the positive image. This meant you could reproduce many prints but the image was fuzzy.

The 'wet plate collodian' process, invented by another Brit called Frederick Scott Archer, made sharper images that could be reproduced. However, you had to quickly expose and develop your plate so the photographer had to basically have a darkroom with him. Wet plate collodian images were printed on Albumen paper and the size of your print was the size of you plate. So if you wanted a large print, you had to have a large plate format camera. Landscape and travel photography becomes popular and most pictures from the period 1851-1880 would have been produced using this process. Carlton Watkins image of Yosemite (about 60years before Adams)

War photography also emerges, but the need for all the chemicals and speed for the developing meant the images are of AFTER the battles which makes them interesting narratives. Roger Fenton:

This inability to capture the excitement of battle caused some photographers to manipulate and set up scenes. Alexander Gardner's now infamous 'dead body moving' to create better images for example.

Sir John Herschel coined the phrases 'negative' 'positive' and 'photography'. He also came up with the chemical we call fixer.

Other people and topics touched on: Eadweard Muybridge; stereoscopic photography; cartes de visite; dry glass plates; George Eastman.

The wonderful Julia Margaret Camera was also discussed but she deserves a blog all of her own! An image of hers for now:

Well, there it is. Just some lecture notes really, so try Jeff's podcasts - they are very informative.

Diane Arbus

2011-02-11T09:00:00.000-08:00

Today I went to the Diane Arbus exhibition at Aberdeen Art Gallery. This is the third time I've been to an exhibition of hers; the first was in Barcelona, the second in Edinburgh.

Her images, yet again, demanded my attention; they get my full attention. I'm drawn into them and quite stunned by them. They open up an America different from that normally portrayed. Many of her subjects were on the fringe of society. But she also captured familiar things and made them look strange e.g. the shot with the large Christmas tree in the corner. Some of the more exotic characters have very familiar items beside them; box of tissues, toilet paper, talc; etc. Some of the pictures are almost shocking in their purity and honesty but others have too much of their self hidden by masks or clothes or props. Her photos of nudists, drag queens, midgets, giants, suburban couples can be quite haunting.

Perhaps most haunting of all are her images from the institute of the mentally retarded (as it was called then.) As Nan Golden said about the shots of inmates taken outside,

...often in masks and costumes for Halloween, or on picnics, or just frolicking on the grounds. Among these are some of Arbus, most beautiful and unforgettable photographs of all. The vision of a mentally disabled patient dressed as a ghost with a skeleton mask, or of a couple in a dunce, hat and clown suit holding hands on a wide lawn under a dark somber sky, looks like Grimm's fairy tales. The people become characters in a medievel theater or a Pirandello play. Somehow these pictures describe the experience of being institutionalized, not from a documentary viewpont but from the magical and symbolic realm where reality sometimes arrives. They bring round other poets of darkness like Goya, or Pasolini, or George Grosz.
...after the amazing photographs of a bizarre parade of patients in nightgowns and bonnets and fake mustaches leading one another across a dark field like the blind leading the blind, one still feels it's fair to assume that after this Arbus felt there was nowhere left to go. ( Quoted from here.)

Apart from being enthralled by the subject matter, I found myself trying to analyse her style some more. I wondered why she stood where she did to take a shot; why she included so much of the surroundings; why she came in so close; did she care that she was shooting this portrait in the mid-day sun?; did she not see that tree in the background sticking out of the boy's head?; why did she not care about cutting off their feet? I couldn't come to an 'Arbus approach' to a shoot. You had to have the empathy and internal pain of Arbus to shoot like, and think like her. She must have felt like an outsider, a freak, perhaps even mentally retarded herself at times, to see the world as she did.

I wasn't disappointed by a third visit to a Diane Arbus exhibition. I could, and do, stare at her work for ages. They are narratives of, not only the subject matter, but of Arbus herself. Since her suicide in 1971, we seem to be searching in the photos for clues about her mental state, just like people do when a friend commits suicide. They go back over thing said, actions, hints, any clues at all that could have foreseen and perhaps, prevented the tragic event.

As I always do when I go to Aberdeen Art Gallery, I end my visit by looking at the four Francesca Woodman photographs they have. Another tragedy, another set of mesmerising photographs.

The sound of photography

2011-01-23T13:29:00.000-08:00

In a moment of realisation, I tweeted this today "Beginning to realise there are more than three chords to photography, not to mention finger picking and different tunings. Genres too. Oh my"

When I was about 16/17 I decided to teach myself the guitar. I sat for hours going from an E chord to an A chord and back again. I seemed to be disciplined and determined to learn how to play - and I did learn. I knew what kind of music I liked, therefore I tried to learn how to play like that. I jammed with a mate, Sye, who liked the same music. We got better. Sye got really good and still plays in bands today. I got to know all things guitar - makes, the differences and accessories. I studied past and present masters of blues and rock guitar - listening to their music and reading about them. Looking back learning seemed less 'cluttered'. No internet to lead you off in distracting directions! I realised today that I should maybe be taking this focused approach with my photography.

With photography, however, my tastes seem so eclectic. I love street photography, landscape photography, portraits, fashion and even some staged creations. Might it not be profitable to study and learn just one genre, like I did with the guitar? Yes, but how do I pursue street photography in rural Aberdeenshire? I suppose it is possible but logistically difficult. But the approach is sound I think.

I'm going to study, emulate and create from a genre/style/photographer. It will be one linked to my current ongoing project. If that genre of photography has only three chords to it and is played on an acoustic guitar with a plectrum and normal tuning, then I shall master that and then start to come up with my own tunes, in that genre.

For some odd reason, thinking of photography as music has helped me today. Maybe it helped you. Maybe you do something similar with poetry or food or sport or whatever. Let me know.

Some thoughts on competition

2011-01-19T00:34:00.000-08:00

I've been reading David duChemin's book Visionmongers and came upon, what I think is some sound advice for photographers regarding competition. He states:

'....I see competition as an intrinsically destructive force in a creative person. There is a sense in which competing pushes you harder, that comparing your work with others encourages you to hone your craft more aggressively or inspires you to move in different directions. But more often it pulls our focus from where it ought to be - on our vision, our work - and on to others.....You can't shoot for every market, you can't produce images in every style, and when you try to do so you create a moving target for potential clients who look, not for a jack-of-all-trades, but for someone whose vision and visual style matches what they're looking for.'

I still think looking at what other photographers do can inspire you do improve your craft and ultimately find your own style and vision (duChemin of course is not saying otherwise) and it can also boost sales and business in general, but the point he makes is so true. If you see another photographer selling more prints than you, how tempting is it to look at what people are buying and emulate it, taking your eye off the ball? I would be really annoyed if Neil Young started to copy rap artists to boost his sales. I want Neil Young to be Neil Young - in all his variations!

(Pic © James Dyas Davidson)

Think more, think less or let others think for you?

2011-01-18T01:31:00.000-08:00

I recently watched the documentary on the making of Bruce Springsteen's album Darkness on the Edge of Town. I was moved by it in many ways. Bruce was only in his 20's when he made the record but his philosophy, work ethic and vision seemed to me to be so mature. He was trying to come to a reckoning with the adult world; dealing with a future life of limitations and compromise but finding the resilience and commitment to still embrace life. He also was considering what is sin in a good life and how do you carry that, deal with that? Thus, he wanted the album to be stripped down to its barest and austere elements with no distraction to the narrative.
When it came to deciding on getting the photograph for the album cover, Frank Stefanko was chosen. Frank had just moved into a new apartment so it had little furniture and old wallpaper on the walls from the previous blue collar working class family. Bruce just took a sample of his usual clothes and Frank took a few test shots.

© Frank Stefanko,

Of course Bruce chose those test shots as they were very stripped down, revealing and 'blue collar' - just what he wanted for the album. Fortuitous for Frank but what if he had found out more about Bruce's vision for the album? Would he have done something similar or entirely different and perhaps cliched? Who knows, but a good story and perhaps a lesson to photographers - show the client all your shots?

Back to Bruce; his maturity at such an early age stunned me. He seemed to see that as you get older, you can end up in a life in stasis, shackled by memories and hurt. Old habits die hard and patterns repeat themselves and you can unintentionally let past disappointments effect your present and it can be difficult to move forward.

I'm listening to that album with new ears whilst smiling at the cover shot by Frank Stefanko.

Getting critique on your work

2011-01-02T06:30:00.001-08:00

Knock Castle
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

Happy New Year!

This blog has been neglected of late due to many boring reasons. But in 2011, I'm just going to use it as a place for me to 'store' thoughts and ideas. There's so much content on the web now and the number of amazing blogs and sites can be paralysing. I no longer expect many people to read mine but that is not a reason to stop it.

I'm at a stage in my photography where I need to know from others if I suck or not and how to improve. It is not easy to get people to be brutally honest with your work.

Fortunately for me, a fellow photographer whom I respect, decided to spend a great deal of time going through pictures of mine that I had picked from Flickr from 2010 and put on my Facebook page. (The shot which goes with this post is one of his favourites.) Here is my comment to him:

I can't thank you enough for doing that Rob. I'm very touched by the time and effort you've spent. It is very difficult to get critique on your work on the net. It tends to be 'Nice shot' or nothing. I've had some detailed and helpful comments from fellow photographers on Flickr which I appreciate immensely. I'm going to do more of it myself in 2011.
At this point in my life and photography I need to know whether to pack it all in because I'm crap/bland/boring or to keep improving to hopefully get to the next level. I can see what I have to do, and want to do which was expressed in some blog posts (Thoughts from my hospital bed) but frustratingly, the weather, work and illness put that on hold.
I've had time to think about my work recently, to get back on track and I can see that in 2010 I've explored other areas (portraits/fashion/studio) and moved away from others (abstracts) just to see what I can learn. This has also helped me see what I don't want to do and be more focussed and thoughtful about what I do want to do.
I'm sure if all photographers put up a selection of their work they did in 2010, they would see that there were some good shots, others that were a missed opportunity and some that you can't quite understand why you put it up for show in the first place! It all helps to improve your craft.
I need a mentor, I need a picture editor and I need to get out with other photographers more. This may or may not happen this year but what I can do and will do is exactly what you suggest - think more. I'm going to describe the picture more BEFORE I take, i.e. what POV?, what lens?, what settings?, when?, why?

Paul Anderson

2010-10-31T11:57:00.001-07:00

Paul Anderson
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

A wee taster of the photo shoot I did with Paul a few weeks ago.

Due to holidays and going back to work with a bang, it is only now that I can share some of them with you. Hope you like them and I'm open to your thoughts as I'm not normally a portrait photographer and I don't have a studio or studio lights. We enjoyed doing them!

Paul was happy for me to take some shots knowing I didn't have any studio lights or a studio. I got some black curtains and rails from Argos and put them on the wall and on the floor. Just in front of Paul is a white sheet to reflect some light up. I set up a SB600 off camera to the left and a small reflector to the right. Some natural light came in from the left. We knew we were going to do something with the fiddle suspended and Paul would be in full kilted dress, so it a bit traditional and a bit fun.

Please tell what I should do to improve as inside portraits is not my normal shoot.

Try it bigger.

My first experience of using a studio and a model

2010-09-27T13:42:00.001-07:00

Claire
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

I went to Elgin Studios last weekend to learn about studio lighting and shooting with a model, in this case Claire Emson. The instructor was David Porter who clearly knows his stuff. I, on the other hand knew nothing about using a studio or using a model. David set up the lighting for this shot, so please don't praise me for that. All I tried to do was use the props and get Claire to pose, take a shot that was exposed well enough.
I would love some real constructive comments on this shot as I discovered that I didn't have what might be called a natural flare with posing models - in fact I was crap at it. It was my first real experience of doing it and I'm sure I would get better at it if I did it more. I didn't shoot enough and left too much time in between shots which meant Claire lost her momentum of posing and wondered what I wanted as I wasn't taking any shots. So that's a lesson learned.
I felt a bit awkward as I suppose I'm a landscape photographer generally and when I walk about looking at a beautiful Aberdeenshire landscape, I decide which part of the chaos I'm going to frame and wait for the correct light. With studio shots using models, the lights are in your control, background (and foreground) is in your control and there is no chaos to frame, there a model standing in front of you. Yes, you deicide about how much of the model you're shooting but the real skill I think (as well as getting the lighting correct) is what you do with the model (or what she gives you).
Anyway, that's some initial thoughts.

What I decided whilst in hospital regarding me and photography. Part 3

2010-09-07T13:14:00.001-07:00

Upstairs, Badenyon
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

I have decided to remain a hobbyist photographer who will shoot mainly local Historical sites and abandoned communities. Will I be bothered then if there is no interest or enjoyment from my pictures? The answer should be no because I will be shooting what I’m passionate about and I should be fulfilling my creative urges. But in reality, we humans like to get some encouragement and praise - don’t we? We tend to trust the people who are like us so if people who have an interest in local History and/or abandoned communities see that I too have that interest, then perhaps I will have an audience for my work. It is like serving a market where you are already an ‘insider’, so it should help me empathise with that market.

The question ‘Am I good enough?’ will come up. A question like that will never be answered probably, and self doubt can be the motivator to improve one’s craft. I will be (and have been) dogged by such a question but I know that all I can say is, I’m getting better, I’m improving but will fall short of being ‘good enough’ because I will always want to be better. Talent is not easily evaluated or quantified.

I need to tackle and focus more on questions like ‘Am I willing to work hard at learning my craft?’ ‘ Am I willing to research and learn and make mistakes?’ ‘Am I willing to put my work under scrutiny of my peers so I can improve?’ ‘How passionately do I want this?’
I have to accept the fact that highly talented photographers may not need to work so hard as less talented photographers. That said, how do we know how much work someone has put into their craft? Why do we tend to think ‘they got lucky’ or ‘it was handed to them on a plate’? I need to always assume they have worked hard to get where they are. For me, bold steps are needed. Some interests and activities may need to jettisoned or at least cut down.

High quality, technically perfect but mediocre photography is everywhere now and organisations have a vast quantity to choose from, and at the best price - free! I don’t know if I can rise above this but I’m going to try and recent deals with publishers and record companies and a solo exhibition success has given me some encouragement. However, marketing knowledge will now take a back seat to honing my craft. I want to be a good photographer. I want to produce images that people like and get pleasure from and that is why, for the meantime, I will remain a hobbyist photographer.

Taken from Visionmongers by David duChemin.

What I decided whilst in hospital regarding me and photography. Part 2

2010-09-06T12:06:00.001-07:00

Remicras
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

So I’ve decided to shoot what I love and learn my craft. Also, I can see that I will probably not be a professional photographer. Why not?

I like my day job and it can fund my hobby.
I can shoot what I want.
I can create when I want to - when I’m inspired and when I feel it is the right time. Only financially secure and successful professional photographers can do that as well as complete commercial work I would imagine.
I can love my photographs, get opinions on my work without feeling my work sucks just because nobody buys it/wants it. I can feel like a ‘real’ photographer without having to have people buy my work.
In truth, maybe I’m just not willing to do all the hard work that is needed to become a successful professional photographer (and to some extent to sacrifice my passion for commercial reasons). I’ve put my creative urges to one side for too long and it is now or never for me to pursue my creative vision.

Hobbyist or professional, a photographer should know who they are and what they have to offer. I need to ask myself which shots gave me the most satisfaction and is there a pattern? I have studied and taught History for many years now and local History, namely abandoned settlements, is still an big interest to me. I’ve been told that I have captured the spirit and essence of these abandoned places. Whether that is true or not, I’ve certainly felt the toil, hardships, relationships and tragedies of these places. I enjoy researching these places beforehand, planning the route, finding the remains and, if possible, enter these premises. The real challenge is trying to get an interesting shot which conveys the drama and remoteness of these abandoned communities.

More of my time will have to be spent honing the skills of my craft. I’m still not there when it comes to getting the exposures right. I can still screw it up and wonder why it screwed up. Also, my processing and printing needs more of my attention. I will probably never be one of these Photoshop experts who spends hours and days on one shot, but I could make small (and continue to make small) improvements to my processing and workflow.

To be continued. Taken from Visionmongers by David duChemin.

What I decided whilst in hospital regarding me and photography. Part 1

2010-09-05T12:50:00.001-07:00

Portrait of a cow, Friggie-Fraggan
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

I will buy the best camera and lens I can afford but acknowledge that it will not make me any more creative or talented. Photography is a craft that can take years to learn and get better at. Gear can just help with that craft. It takes hard work to be good at something - accept that and work harder at it. Stop relying on gear and start trusting my vision and loving the act of putting the world into a frame.

I will probably not get to where I’d like to be - or where I think it is. That is, the life of a professional photographer is not what I think it is. I guess it is the journey not the destination that’s important. As a hobbyist photographer, I seem to have so little time to learn, take shots, process shots, attend courses, read books, see exhibitions, etc., so it must be even more difficult for a pro as they have so many other ‘business’ issues to deal with (and, in the current climate, worry about).

If I was serious about becoming a professional photographer, it would be to take the shots I want to take and hopefully make some money doing it. So it is about being creative and expressing myself really, not becoming rich and famous. But would there be a market for what I shoot? If not, then I wouldn’t make money, so take the shots that make money? No. My original goal would then be lost. So it is all about ‘what do I want?’

If the point was to just make money, then I would be much, much better off staying in the rewarding job I’m currently in. I love photography, so doing it professionally could in fact suck the life from it if I went the ‘Weddings, pets and babies’ route. It is so true what they say - shoot what you’re passionate about. I will still try shooting stuff outwith my ‘comfort zone’ but just for the sake of learning.

I’m focused again.

To be continued. Taken from Visionmongers by David duChemin.

Keep Learning

2010-08-12T08:57:00.000-07:00

I was asked to be one of the photographers at the recent Aboyne Highland Games. Trying to capture the best of highland games is not easy as there is so much going, often at the same time and at different parts of the field (much the same as any games). Also, it was my first experience of doing a shoot at a games, so along with the question of what to shoot, was the question of how to shoot. I decided to stay on Raw and mostly on Aperture priority. It was a changeable day weather wise, and to try to reduce complex backgrounds, I was often shooting from ground level and getting much sky, making the exposure too dark. In future, I would just shoot getting the background as blurred as possible or completely over expose the sky.

I also shot in continuous mode a few times. I rarely do this and, though a simple thing to do, I was pleased with the camera's continuous auto-focusing. It uses up too much memory though and much deleting afterwards is needed. There was one sequence I thought I would use to try to learn how to make an animated Gif in Photoshop Elements (hence the title of 'keep learning'). It was more time consuming than difficult and then you find sites like Flickr don't support them, (although there is a work around) so why bother?

Dancers, Aboyne Highland Games

2010-08-08T03:05:00.001-07:00

Dancers, Aboyne Highland Games
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

You can read the manuals and books as much as you like - the best way to learn is by doing. I was one of the official photographers at the Aboyne Highland Games today. It was a long (10.30-6.30) but enjoyable day. Weather stayed dry but cloudy with glimpses of sun - this was one shot during such a glimpse. (If I remember correctly, these girls won a prize for the best outfits, as did some other girls but had gone. Look great don't they?)
What did I learn?
A zoom lens would have been good but I didn't miss it as much as I thought (I used my 24-70 on a non-full sensor D300 which gives me something like 35 - 110mm). I was able to get close to the action.
Backgrounds are an issue. It's messy and distracting, so there was lots of kneeling down, pointing up and then having to deal with exposures pointing up into the sky.
I went the opposite way and stuck on my 10-20mm wide and got some different shots which got a good overall feel to the day.
Continuous shooting is not something i use much but did at these games. Great for capturing those hammer throws etc but cards fill up too quickly and then time is wasted deleting the ones that are useless.
Auto-focusing isn't as good as the manufacturers make out. Continuous tracking focus? Well, maybe I need to be shown how it works but I wasn't impressed.
It's sore on the back and legs, so I would take one camera, one of those wide range zooms, 70-200, and the 24-70, memory cards and battery pack.

Scottish Emigrant

2010-08-04T14:15:00.001-07:00

Scottish Emigrant
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

Still from a video shown at the National Museum of Scotland about Scottish emigrants to Australia. I just grabbed a shot - ISO 3200; f2.8; 1/250s.
I'm very interested in Scottish emigration from the push and pull reasons for why they left to the experience of the journey to each story of how they got on in their new lands. But what is also fascinating is the heritage and culture they have installed in their new countries. What I can actually photograph is what has been abandoned back home, here in Scotland, from the decayed houses and ghostly silent communities to the heritage remnants.

You can try to break me, but I will remain beautiful.

2010-08-01T14:54:00.001-07:00

You can try to break me, but I will remain beautiful.
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

This is, according to Flickr is my most popular and most interesting picture. It got to the front page of Explore. I was regularly getting pictures into Explore, but since I've become busier with my photography (and I think better at it), I don't spend so much time on Flickr and consequently less shots get into Explore. Does this mean anything? Do I suck? Or is getting a picture into Explore just some kind of 'pat on the head' to say 'good boy' for participating on Flickr?

Judy

2010-07-27T14:49:00.001-07:00

Judy
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

A promo shot for her business. Done in about 10 minutes at home. One SB600 and a reflector. It did the job and was used in her literature for her business.
I'm sure strobists could rip this apart but at the moment, that is the sum total of my lighting equipment! I'm going to attend a studio lighting course soon and I will decide when and in what way, I'll embrace studio work. So far I've tended to go and find the light, not create it, but I'm getting more requests to do work that requires lighting and more control of the light. More stuff to learn but they say you should always keep learning don't they?

Workflow?

2010-07-26T13:57:00.001-07:00

Lucy in black bead necklace
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

Over the last couple of days I've been trying to get back on top of my photo files, back-ups and photo logs. It got in a bit of a mess, very much to my surprise, quite quickly. I'm usually very disciplined when it comes to this sort of thing but after a few photo shoots, a trip abroad and deadlines, things piled up.
Part of the reason for the mess is I'm partly working on a MAC to see if it better than a PC, so the files get a bit mixed up.
My 'workflow', if I have the correct understanding of that word, goes something like this:
Shoot in RAW; upload files to PC and copy straight to CD-Rs. Files set up by date as RAW, TIFF&JPegs.
I chose a shot to work on, converting in ViewNX to a TIFF file. Usually there is not much done to the shot after that, but if anything is needed then I still use Elements 5 or 6 for the MAC.
This shot is filed as V.1 and as smaller resolution one as a Jpeg, filed as 'web'.
Once I've processed all the shots I want to do, I 'close' the file by renaming it '[Date} All Done' This completed file is then copied onto a DVD and is sent to two external hard-drives.

What's your thoughts on this 'workflow' and what is yours?

Tram, Nieuwpoort Belgium

2010-07-21T13:27:00.001-07:00

Tram, Nieuwpoort Belgium
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

John Szarkowski (director of photography at New York's’ Musuem of Modern art) in 1976, designated photographs as mirrors or windows. The ‘window’ photo was one in which the subject matter is of primary importance, a scientific record for example, and the view of the photographer secondary. The ‘mirror’ was the opposite, the photo existing mainly to reflect the photographer’s viewpoint, a self-conscious ‘art’ photo, for instance.

A useful distinction but most photographs are both mirrors and windows.

From The Genius of Photography by Gerry Badger.

Alasdair Fraser, Bruce Molsky and Natalie Haas

2010-07-16T01:45:00.001-07:00

Alasdair Fraser, Bruce Molsky and Natalie Haas
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

I'm still buzzing after an amazing concert at the Woodend Barn in Banchory. A concert with the very best of fiddlers and dancers from Scotland and beyond, featuring Alasdair Fraser and Natalie Haas (Scotland and USA), with Bragod (Wales), Boreas (Norway and Scottish Borders), Göran Premburg, Pernilla Stendahl, Gill Redmond, Mats Nilsson and Ingegerd Sigfridsson (Sweden and England), Caoimhín Ó Raghallaigh (Ireland), Bruce Molsky and Nic Gareiss (USA), the Aberdeen and Banchory Fiddlers (Scotland). It was 100% talent - none of your divas, charlatans or hacks of today. Well done NAFco for organising such a wonderful night - all for £10 too!
www.abdn.ac.uk/nafco

I wanted to share with you what I did to take these shots. I'm not experienced in taking concert shots at all and didn't want to use a flash which I think is really off putting for the performers. I also didn't want lug the heavy D300 with the 24-70mm lens so took the D50 with the great 50mm f1.8 lens. I knew I didn't want the shutter speed slower than 1/60 so set the camera to shutter priority at that. I then set up auto ISO in the menu so that the camera controlled not only the aperture (which stayed pretty much at f1.8 anyway) but the ISO as well. What is interesting is the ISO values that appear. This one for example is 560 ISO. Interesting eh?

Updated my website

2010-07-14T12:48:00.000-07:00

Added another set to my website tonight. The Glenbuchat and Strathdon pictures continue my project on abandoned communities in Aberdeenshire. The picture above forms part of the set. Check it out.

It is coming up to a year since I decided to pay Photium to have this website. It cost me £80 for the year and I did sell a couple of pictures through the site which just about covered that outlay. But overall, I don't feel the site does much to promote me as a photographer. If you Google JamesDyasDavidson, this FREE blog seems to come up first, not the website. I suppose it adds to the 'social networking'/Web2.0 idea of promoting your work, but I think my money could be better spent. Anyway, 24 days left to decide if I will continue using Photium. Any thoughts?

Howe of Cromar from Slack

2010-07-12T12:59:00.001-07:00

Howe of Cromar from Slack
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

I think Chase Jarvis has a point. Went for walk the other night and just had the wee P&S Canon Ixus70. Pleased with the way this came out. Has some real depth to it.
The idea was to constantly record just stuff in my daily life with this camera (I don't own an iPhone) and shove them on my Facebook page. I started off well but I realised I was taking pictures but not removing them from the card. I'll try harder.

Lucy

2010-07-10T12:14:00.001-07:00

Lucy
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

This is the lovely Lucy and I took these shots way back in May using whatever I could find at home to make backdrops, one SB600 speedlight and one reflector. My wife Yvonne was there to help Lucy with clothes and jewellery(none of which you can see here!). It was a great experience and I learned a lot and became a bit more confident in dealing with poses as Lucy was so cooperative and willing. The feeling when you look through the viewfinder and you see a gorgeous woman posing so professionally and the light is (nearly) right is quite something. You realise you are not looking at someone else's photo - this is a shot YOU are about to take. A real buzz. More can be seen on my Flickr page.

I did a few fashion shoots for The Millers and boy, do the photos pile up quickly! I work full time and I was doing all of this in my free time so the processing soon fell behind. Anyway, I'm now on holiday and catching up. However, I do need to think about how I can speed up my workflow. Any tips?

I guess the higher you want to go, the greater the obstacles.

2010-07-08T13:30:00.001-07:00

I guess the higher you want to go, the greater the obstacles.
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

I'm on holiday just now and an opportunity (in between chores) to try to take my photography to the next level, if you get my meaning. Well tonight I hit the all too familiar feeling of 'Oh My God, I know nothing! I have SO much to learn! I so suck at this photography lark!' For example, I want to learn more about light and using flash, so, the best place to go would be strobist.com which I duly went to and very quickly realised how much I need to get, to learn, to do, to read, to watch, etc. etc. One website seems to lead you hundreds of others - where do you start? where do you stop? Argh! The wealth of info on the web is, on one hand just so fantastic and helpful, but on the other it can be almost paralysing.

Time - there just isn't enough of it.
Advice - there is just too much going around. Some scare you - "Your pictures should stop me dead in my tracks, everytime." An Art dealer/buyer. "You should take pictures of things no one else has taken"!!

And what have I NOT done today? Yip, taken a picture. I think that is what I should focus on more. (excuse the pun)

Any views on my grumble?

Last few weeks!

2010-07-07T02:52:00.001-07:00

Last few weeks!
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

My first solo exhibition finishes at the end of July so if you're in the area and can get along to Millers (which has a restaurant, gifts, deli, books, clothing etc.) I would be delighted. I'm looking for some comments on the exhibition too, good and bad! Go to www.jamesdyasdavidson.com for more.

Thomas Carlyle by Julia Margaret Cameron

2010-07-04T03:09:00.001-07:00

Thomas Carlyle by Julia Margaret Cameron
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

I went to Aberdeen Art Gallery to see the exhibition of photographs by Roger Fenton and Julia Margaret Cameron yesterday and was, yet again, taken by this one of Thomas Carlyle. It is a very blurry, out of focus shot but it has an impact and resonates, especially if you know something about Carlyle. Anyway, this is my contribution to blurry photographs in respect to these pioneering Victorian photographers.
There is also a room full of George Washington Wilson photographs of the royals at Balmoral with nothing better to do than to dress up and recreate scenes from mythology or the Bible and summon Wilson, by telegram, to get himself over to Balmoral and take a few pictures. Fascinating.

You have 4 weeks off work - what would you do to improve your photography?

2010-07-01T12:32:00.000-07:00

If you had the following 4 weeks off work, what would you do to move your photography to the next level?
I intend to know every nook and cranny of my camera and all the other pieces of equipment I've bought recently; to take the shots that have, until now only existed in my head; to study more art and photographers; to complete a project that will, yet again take me into an area I'm not familiar with; do more portraits; understand light and flash better; and last but perhaps most importantly of all, take photographs, be creative and fun.

Inspiration - Part 2

2010-04-25T09:14:00.000-07:00

Inspiration - Part 2

In his article, ‘A Long Way from Home’, former computer scientist Hin Chua remembers how, looking back on his life before photography, he can’t recall much. His memory hazy and indistinct because the routine of his daily life passed in a blur, seemingly without acknowledgement or event. Finally, like many others (and in an attempt to get over a girl), he had to slow down and examine his environment carefully, to ‘finally appreciate the idiosyncratic beauty around me which would capriciously reveal itself from time to time. I gradually learned to perceive and comprehend the innate dynamics and tension within a scene that, whether an ephemeral moment passing in a blink of an eye or an elaborately sustained drama, the end result had a far longer period of gestation.’ He found that this new appreciation of his environment cured his apathy and inertia and instead, ‘the very act of venturing forth and engaging with the world could not help but present new opportunities.’

He admires photographers who have a ‘sensitivity to the chaotic forces and unpredictability found in the world.’

He compares photography to jazz and quotes Charles Harbutt, who wrote, ‘ photographic design is more related to jazz than to formal, classical composition. It is a spontaneous, instinctive, even subconscious act, not rigidly thought out. Yet the final print must have both form and content wedded with a certain inevitability.’

Although Hin was speaking specifically about street photography, I think the process of taking time to be in, and to know your environment, whatever that might be, to be sensitive to the beauty and uniqueness of what is all around us, will pay dividends. For sure, I have done this often and come back with little or nothing to show for it because my environment is predominately rural, but when I keep going back to familiar places, I look at a different spot or the same spot and see something different or notice change. Whereas Hin may get changing characters in his street photography, I get changing weather, clouds, light and colours. What I don’t do enough of is being in my environment at different times of the day to make the most of these changing factors. Before sunrise and after sunset will be my next ingredient in the mix.

As regards, the Harbutt quote above, I’m not so sure I agree as there are some stunning ‘composed’ photographs out there, for example, the work of David La Chapelle or Annie Leibovitz. It’s just another ‘genre’ of photography which we can be inspired by or not. I seem to be inspired by both - the composed, planned and staged shot as well as the ‘decisive moment’, street shot. I don’t have the time nor the skill to do the planned shot but I would love to do more street photography - difficult in rural Aberdeenshire!

These notes I made after reading ‘Inspiration’ in ‘Publication’, a biannual periodical produced by street photographers for street photographers (of which I am not one!). (Nick Turpin Publishing)

Inspiration - Part 1

2010-04-18T11:51:00.000-07:00

Inspiration - Part 1

In his article ‘The One Eyed God of Photography can be whatever I want her to be’, David Gibson recalls, as a student of photography, pouring over photography books and absorbing as many different styles as possible. This instinct and desire to take and look at photographs has never really left him. But slowly he abandoned what inspired him and drifted into what he wanted to take. Drifted into his style. We are awash with images now. Sites like Flickr are both humbling and unsettling, Gibson feels. Inspiration should be all around us now surely? But we still lose our way and feel uninspired.
Some photographers lose their passion and lose their confidence which, Gibson reckons, we should take solace from. He also considers Cartier-Bresson’s lack of progression over his career - but then he had an unerring eye when he began!
Reaching his pinnacle in 1958 with the publication of The Americans, Robert Frank spent the rest of his career trying to escape this legacy. He didn’t want to repeat himself. His success became a burden.
Like Diane Arbus’ work for me, Gibson suggest that great photographs make one say ‘Yes!’ ‘Yes, this is my direction. Yes, this is what I want to do.’ Gibson wonders if, ‘..inspiration from one’s own work should never exceed the inspiration gained from seeing the work of others? Our own work should satisfy us only to the point of seeking more inspiration.’ I have no worries there then, that’s for sure. Mostly I feel humbled and inadequate, but at the same time inspired to do better when I look at the work of other photographers. Gibson mention photographers who embrace their demons or doubts to find ways forward. In a child like way, we should continue to investigate, to try different things, plunge into the unknown with enthusiasm and curiosity. ‘Inspiration is innocence reshaped’ - Gibson
We can, and should, find inspiration from anywhere and in any form , not just photography. Inspiration may not be able to be used directly. A song can make you feel a certain way but you may not be able to take that feeling further in photography. ‘Sometimes inspiration can just restore optimism’ according to Gibson. He concludes, ‘Inspiration cannot be taken for granted - you have to meet it half-way.’
My summary from this is to keep going back to the photography books and keep on researching others, keep feeding your inspiration, keep learning, keep trying and above all keep living life.

To be continued.

These notes I made after reading ‘Inspiration’ in ‘Publication’, a biannual periodical produced by street photographers for street photographers (of which I am not one!). (Nick Turpin Publishing)

What do you do with creative block?

2010-02-15T03:23:00.001-08:00

Dummy
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

After reading the blog, iso50 I decided to summarise what was thought by some to ‘unblock’ creative block. So here, in no particular order are ideas to get your creativity flowing again.

Playing music, often ambient, instrumental music. Some just want to dance
Play a musical instrument
Read books or magazines for inspiration, preferably in a bookstore or library
Listen to podcasts of inspiring people
Take a break from your work and just watch and listen to the world around you
Housework, gardening, DIY, cooking, tidying up, long showers
Go for walks, cycle or run in nature if possible and think
Watch movies
Go to galleries, museums, etc and see the work of others and aim to be as good
Look back at your scrapbook of ideas, pictures, drawings and add more
Draw, sketch. Do it quickly, spontaneous
Try to hang out with friends with similar interests
Travel
Do things that keep you happy and positive as that can be where creativity comes from
Exercise both sides of the brain, not just the creative side. So do some maths, read a difficult piece of literature

So, many are obvious but clearly they work. The key seems to be get your brain to do nothing or something else. Keep your mind active.

I’m not sure if I’m in a creative rut or I’m just moving on to the next stage of my photography. I feel like I’m trying to catch up with all the years I couldn’t and didn’t do anything with my photography. The upshot of this feeling is that I tend to focus on photography and nothing else, neglecting my guitar, movies, books, museums, galleries, socialising, etc. And there, friends, is my solution to becoming more creative with photography - spend less time on it!

What type of photographer are you?

2010-01-31T01:32:00.000-08:00

It is only when you start thinking about WHY you are taking a photograph that you begin to question what kind of photographer you are.

Don’t all photographers go through an initial period when they just take what they think will be received as good photos, only to discover that it has all been done before and done better? I know I have. Praise for some of my pictures has come my way (and I am grateful for it and been encouraged by it) but I know that many of my shots are clichéd, bland and generally do the job.
Once that reality had been grasped, I am now thinking more about why I’m taking the shot. Many attractive and pleasing to the eye scenes have come my way, but I find myself thinking, “I’ve taken something like this before – why do it again? What is the point of the photograph? What am I taking to the shot?” So I am actually taking less pictures which I’m not sure is a good thing or a bad thing. Time to do some reading and thinking.

Having read ‘The Photograph as Contemporary Art’ by Charlotte Cotton, seven approaches to photography become clear:

1. The photographer devises strategies, performances and happenings especially for the camera. The picture has been preconceived.
2. The photographer tells a story in a single picture. Props, gestures, settings, etc. have been used. Again a preconceived shot.
3. Photographic aesthetic is the criteria. There is a distinct lack of visual drama or hyperbole; the subject is paramount.
4. The photographer presents the ordinary and the bland. The subject matter at its most oblique.
5. The photographer’s personal and emotional stories; the diary of human intimacy. The pictures can often look casual, amateur and have a ‘family snap’ feel.
6. The documentary and ‘aftermath’ photography recording the political and human upheaval and isolation.
7. The photographer mimics other visual genres and revives historical photographic techniques.

This recent shot of mine is one a small few that I had preconceived in my mind:

My initial thoughts are that, at the moment, I seem to be a combination of numbers 3, 4 and 6 with hints of 5. What is interesting though, is that I tend to enjoy looking at photographers in the 1,2 and 6!

Can you think about your photography too much?

2009-11-01T08:15:00.000-08:00

At the moment I feel like I am thinking too much about, 'will my camera and lens do what it is supposed to do?', 'have I got the right combination of aperture, speed and ISO?', ' am I using the correct lens for this shot?', 'will it be in focus?', 'I hope there is no dust on the sensor'. I know - I worry too much, but problems associated with these issues have been happening to me a bit too much recently. I never had as much problems with focusing with the D50 as I have with the D300. Anyway, I hope I can get back to a point where I just go out and concentrate on the shot. Is the technology getting too complicated and technical issues causing more worries?
After I get on top of these issues and take some shots, I then compare what I do with my shots with others, mostly on Flickr, but yesterday I looked through the Editor's choice in the Digital Camera Photographer of the Year (http://poty2009.dcmag.co.uk/)and concluded that I just don't take enough time over the post processing bit. Thing is, I don't want to spend hours with PS and end up with the unreal look of some of the shots, especially some of the HDR crap I you see. That said, many of the finalist's shots of the POTY look over processed and cliched. (BTW - I did enter some pictures to this competition and one shot came to the attention of the Editor:

and I was asked to submit a HiRes version and supply some more info on me, so yeh, maybe I am envious of those who got through, but I can voice my opinions.)Of course, some shots were just plain outstanding.

So my point is? Well, I think there are so many photographers out there doing such great work, not only in digital, highly processed work, but also in little processed digital and film work, that I have to quickly get on top of technical issues (it's hard work James, 'Just Do It'!)and return to taking photographs which tell a story from the interests and passions I have. Be inspired and study others and never stop learning.

I am so determined to prove to myself that I can be creative and show that creativity through photography.

Out of my comfort zone again

2009-10-04T13:32:00.000-07:00

I suppose my 'comfort zone' is in the middle of an Aberdeenshire glen shooting abandoned communities or clachans. Well, over the last few weeks I have done 2 weddings, a traditional singing festival, horses and last Friday, a fashion show.

It all adds to the steep learning curve. I played around with my settings at home tonight because I was convinced the camera wasn't doing what it should have done on Friday night. On Friday I had the D300 with the SB600 flash on. I put the camera on Shutter priority to keep the speed at 1/80s (50mm lens, 400ISO) and I thought the camera would control the aperture to suit. However the aperture stayed at f1.8 which is very dodgy as the DOF is narrow making focusing an issue and it tends to blow highlights. Tonight I reproduced the settings and the set up and the camera changed the aperture to suit which means it detected very low light in the hall and kept the aperture open. Our eyes are amazing because I thought it was well lit but obviously not. Maybe I should have put the ISO up but the noise I hate. I'm sure a more experienced photographer can tell me what I did wrong. Essentially, I haven't quite got to grips with getting a correct exposure using flash in a dimmly lit room which also has spotlights working. NO, to be truthful, I haven't quite got to grips with getting a correct exposure using flash!

The great thing is, I learnt a bit more about photography on Friday night.

Ironically, my favourite shots taken without the flash:

And one taken with the flash but inside the small changing room:

Love to hear any comments or any advice.

Back to Earth with a bump.

2009-09-27T11:42:00.000-07:00

Is it ego, is it vanity or is it just naive stupidity? Over the past 4 years I have been trying to get back up to speed (and go faster, much faster!)on the techniques and technicalities of photography as well as just get back into being creative after years of enforced neglect. Over this period I have been lucky and fortunate enough to get support and encouragement, as well as praise, from a variety of people. So, naturally, you feel as if you must be getting somewhere and must be alright at this photography lark. Then you go and attempt a couple of weddings, enter a couple of competitions, take photos outside your 'comfort zone' (my case - horses) and be part of an exhibition. It's then that you come back down to earth with a bump:

The wedding shots I am generally happy with but boy do I have a greater respect for wedding photographers - you have soooo much to think about and perform 'live'. Then I foolishly thought you could nip up to a town, take a prize winning photo for a calender competition and beat the people who live there and have 100's of shots! Pillock. But worse than that, I didn't even get a look in - no runner up or highly commended mention - nothing. I prostituted myself too by taking a calender shot (shame on me):

I loved being with the horses and I don't care what others think of those shots because I had a great experience:

I participated alongside others from the local camera club to put on an exhibition as part of NEOS (Google it). There was an impressive eclectic mix of photos. I sold - none. We ran a wee competition asking visitors to pick their favourite shot - I came nowhere near the winners. It was stiff competition that's for sure!

So what do I make of all of this? Yes, I spent some of this weekend thinking I must be crap at photography but, and this is important to me, all that it did was make me want to push myself even further and faster. Everything I have done over the last two months has moved me forward. Before the exhibition I never printed my photos(to my wife's annoyance)nor had I mounted pictures either. I also got a reminder of why you should NEVER try to judge your audience (or indeed the judges!) - just be yourself.

I have learned an awful lot, not only about photography, but about myself. It's good to have a hobby don't you think?

My experience as a wedding photographer

2009-08-24T13:38:00.000-07:00

This summer I had the opportunity to photograph two weddings. There is one thing to be said about taking wedding photos - it is exhausting, especially when you are there from when the bride is getting her hair done to the last Auld Lang Syne. However, it is a steep learning curve. Using flash almost constantly is unusual for me and I had to always remember that 1/250s was the fastest flash sync speed (well it isn't really in the D300 but we'll leave that just now) and when the sun kept popping in and out of the clouds, I had to think aperture, NOT speed. At the same time I had to remember about the correct poses and watching out for clothing flaws. For the second wedding I was also using a lens I had never used before (Tamron 18-270mm – Nikon user avoid this lens) and wasn't sure where its 'sweet spot' is. Sharpness seems fine but fuzzy at the edge of some shots and some annoying chromatic aberration, which the dpreview said was very good. I will need to get to know it a bit more.

That said, I think I've got one or two more unusual shots which I hope will post process well. When I finally deliver their wedding photographs, I hope I have given them a decent record of their special day. I learnt a lot those days and I was so grateful for the opportunity to be their photographer. At times I made mistakes or struggled to understand why the exposure wasn't quite correct (lots of whites and blacks in suits/dresses together with sunshine/clouds and using flash); sometimes the lens wasn't as good as I hoped; sometimes it came together and I captured a moment and it didn't matter if the shot wasn't technically perfect. It was a great experience all in all and I don't know why I thought I would instantly be a great wedding photographer when I had never done anything like it before but I suppose I did think I would be good at it. Truth is, there is so much to be in control of - not only the camera and all of the technical stuff, but the poses, the clothes, hair, expressions, making sure all the important people/events were taken, and so on.

Finding a 'voice'

2009-07-23T04:27:00.000-07:00

I was responding a Flickr photographer's great 'essay' underneath the photo 'Klimt's Island. I was so in tune with what he said that I didn't want to just slap down some instant comment. In fact, he put down in words exactly what I'm going through at the moment, namely, trying to find a 'voice' to my photography.

I have days when I think I may just have something with my photography and there are days when I feel I am just another bland, boring photographer making up the numbers. I have felt like that with other things I have tried in my life but the difference with photography is that I have not, and will not, abandon it as I have done with other pursuits. Inside me there is a feeling that I have something creative to offer and I'm convinced it is via photography.

However, the days, weeks, months and years roll on and that 'voice' has still to appear. OK, many shots have been blogged, used, and explored and, probably like many other Flickr users, Getty are interested in 26 of my shots . This month a CD of a well respected traditional fiddler will use 4 of my photographs, hopefully a book will be published soon with one of my shots on the cover, weddings have been done and a music festival will be shot by me. So, I'm not crap at photography obviously, but where is 'me' in these photographs?

When Rob said - "but the more I try to explore who I am and how that relates to my work, the more confused I become. I know it sounds rather self-centred, but to understand and further my photography I need to understand and further myself" - I thought, "Yes! somebody else going through this." I have read in many places that the best advice successful photographers give to aspiring photographers is to LIVE LIFE. Go to the theatre, opera, dance, movies, museums, concerts, read literature, etc. Also, have a passion or passions in your life - what really interests you? who areyou? These last questions are more difficult to answer than you think I feel. As Rob said, the elusive ‘I’ shows an alarming tendency to disappear when we try to examine it. I often look at other photographers I admire, or even some I don't even know, and I see work I am very impressed with but don't try to copy or emulate them. I just absorb it. Often they are city scenes and/or have people in them - two things I am short of up here in rural Aberdeenshire.

Add to this, the mess my head gets into when I think too much about the technical aspects of photography which I'm still fumbling to grasp. There is so much to learn and so little time to learn it. I now have enough knowledge to now that a particular shot could be improved with a different lens/filter/lighting and it kind of puts me off taking it! whereas in the past I would have given it my best shot. Recently my new D300 had to go and get fixed/calibrated and I was so happy taking my old D50 and 'snapping' away without giving a damn about technical concerns.

One aspect of photography Rob didn't talk about was 'networking' with other photographers, I live in rural Aberdeenshire and 99% of the time I am on my own taking shots. I don't have a network of photographers I could tap into and share ideas (or see what I will never do!) I think this might help me find a 'voice' so I am going to try to work on this somehow. What do you think? Do you network with other photographers (or artists for that matter) and does it help find 'you' in your work? I started this photography blog but failed to keep it up to date (how often have we heard that?) and I am in the process of setting up a website (truth be told, I can't be bothered with it but I will persevere). I need to get my work out there and my name known I guess if I wan't to see if I can cut it.

Shoot your passion

2009-04-28T14:23:00.000-07:00

In an earlier blog I was commenting on advice given to aspiring photographers by successful photographers. The gist of which was - photograph things you are passionate about and hopefully some fine pictures will emerge. I think they are right. I decided to spend some of my Easter break reading up on deserted glens in the North-East of Scotland - something I've been interested in for years. I have given myself the challenge of finding these abandoned and deserted glens and trying to take visually pleasing pictures. Many of these deserted glens only have a pile of stones as evidence of the remains of houses, so photographing these 'piles of granite' and making them interesting was a challenge.

On one or two days I was blessed with vivid and intense light and dramatic skies which helped greatly. Every now and then there would be a whole house still standing like the shot above of a place called Ardoch. “They call it the ‘Metropolean o’ the Waterside’. What they meant was that it was Glen Gairn’s metropolis; where they said ‘fowk had a’thing amang themselves’. This was Ardoch, one of the biggest clachans on Gairnside, whose fourteen fire-houses (houses with chimneys) lay on the lower slopes of Mammie Hill, looking down to where the River Gairn sweeps towards the River Dee.” The Land of the Lost by Robert Smith.

I really enjoyed mixing hobbies like this - reading local history, walking or cycling in Scotland and taking photographs. But what gave me even more pleasure was how much others on Flickr enjoyed the pictures. My views, comments and favs increased and that led to a few shots getting into Explore. Yeh, some might say it's pathetic to care about such stuff, but I would far rather I got many responses than none at all.

So I plan sticking to this 'passion' for local history of cleared glens and photographing as many interesting ruins as possible.

Anybody else experience such 'win-win' situations?

Inspiring and not so inspiring photography books

2009-03-29T11:34:00.000-07:00

The picture above is of the foyer of the CaixaForum in Barcelona where I stumbled upon a major Diane Arbus exhibition. I had never heard of her and the exhibition blew me away. I couldn't stop thinking about how powerful photographs can be and I decided then (2005) that I would get back into photography after a long spell of neglect due to, mainly, getting on with the structures of life (qualifications, jobs, marriage, house, etc). Photography was well into the digital era and I thought it was a good time to get back into it. I bought the book Diane Arbus (An Aperture Monograph) and still flick through it for inspiration, which is a bit odd because my photographs will probably never have the same subject matter as her. That said, her work inspires me.

Another book I often look at is The Great LIFE Photographers (Bulfinch). Within the covers of that book lie many outstanding photographers. I remember being in Borders in Inverness waiting for my wife to make her purchases and simply losing myself in that book.

The Photograph as Contemporary Art by Charlotte Cotton is jam packed with a range of styles and photo ideas and is written with great insight and knowledge.

I read Annie Leibovitz at Work and A Photographer's Life 1990-2005 last year and was left surprising ambivalent and in no great way, inspired. I love so much of her work but can be left flat by others. It was the same with her writing. She works very hard and was clearly in the right place at the right time but, I don't know. The jury is still out on her.

On Being a Photographer David Hurn (Magnum) in conversation with Bill Jay was a very honest and insightful read. I recommend it. Less satisfactory was Image Makers Image Takers by Anne-Celine Jaeger, but it was good to read the thoughts of so many photographers and gallery owners.

I find the catalogues from exhibitions worth buying. Vanity Fair Portraits, How We Are: Photographing Britain, Harry Benson and Cartier-Bresson's Scrap Book to name a few.

I feel it necessary to study the work of others, to emulate the work of others on the road to finding your own voice and style. When I was learning to play the guitar in my teens I listened to blues, country, rock, jazz and tried to play in that style just to learn what made them different. I see it as just the same with photography.

One way to improve your photography?

2009-03-24T15:20:00.000-07:00

I subscribe to Digital Camera magazine and have done for over a year now. I find it very informative and the CD that comes with it, jam packed with help. Now, I would have thought this was a good thing to do if you wanted to improve your photography but if you listen to some photographers (and you may be one of them), they would never dream on doing such a thing. I heard that 'famous' Flickr photographer Rebbeka say she doesn't believe in getting help from instructional CD's and the like. Why not I say? If I had all the time in the world to 'discover' the oddities and complexities of Photoshop, I still wouldn't do it. No point. Somebody else has and you can benefit from that. I mean, who the hell would have thought to use a 'high pass filter' to sharpen you picture - or even use unsharpen mask! I am so glad the CDs are there so I can cut to the useful stuff and get out to take more photos (and still not be as good as Rebbeka!).

Will reading such a magazine affect what you take shots of? Only if you don't have a ounce of interest in life and your own little passion. True, the magazine suggests a theme for you to shoot every month. I think this is healthy as it can make you take something different to help you on your way to finding your own style. The magazine certainly can improve the technical appearance of your shots - isn't that a good thing? I have discovered photographers I never heard of - some I don't want to hear of again.

One issue I have with the magazine is that it claims to come out every month. Well, the pile I have waiting to be read makes me suspect (a) it comes out every 2 weeks or (b) I need to find more time to work through them quicker! I suspect (b) is the truth. I often say, "You're kidding me" when another arrives in the post and I'm just getting on with the last one.

Any other good magazines out there? Will talk about useful books next time.

The photograph above is just one of many I take in an effort to record abandoned glens and farms which litter the North East of Scotland. It's a interest of mine. Hope you like it.

Camera Clubs - thoughts on them?

2009-03-20T14:14:00.000-07:00

Are all camera clubs full of retired men stuck on the rules of photography and taking cliched shots to win competitions?

I joined my local camera club a few years back and, although I met some really nice people, their activites and competitions left me feeling a bit numb. I decided to try it again this year and it has progressed since then with much more interesting talks and more digital acceptance. It can't be easy trying to run a club and please everybody. People take from it what they want and that can be frustrating for the organisers. I joined to try to learn more about the technical aspects of the camera, lights and printing. The print/slide/file competitions left me a bit unimpressed with cliche shots doing well and I thought, "well I suppose I could go out and take some shots to do well in the competitions." Thankfully I saw the error of that thinking right away. At the end of the day, going out to a camera club gets me out of the house, I forget work for a couple of hours, I make some contacts and occasionally, I get some hints and tips. So we shouldn't knock camera clubs. What's your views on camera clubs?

The shot I've posted today is of the last piece of ice on a loch. The water was very dark but I tweaked levels so that it was all dark. I love this shot but it would be met with puzzlement in some camera clubs and I wouldn't submit it in any competition. But maybe I'm the one that's got the closed mind.

Getty Images Invite

2009-03-19T13:54:00.001-07:00

Like many other Flickr users I allowed Getty to look at my images. Today I got an invite to submit 11 images. Great feeling and a wee boost to my motivation, which, as you could gather was flagging a bit. I haven't done anything about the invite yet but you start to wonder if this is killing the profession of photography. If Getty can get so many images I assume cheaper than paying pro/semi-pro photographers, then is this not destroying the income of photographers? Maybe the 21st century world needs such a range of images there is room for us all. Newspaper and TV stations often request images from the public and do the public get paid? It's like downloading music for free (legally or illegally) - it will eventually kill the music industry.

Having said all that, don't we all get a thrill from the thought that your pictures might be good enough for Getty? Or do I fool myself?

Flickr lows and Life highs.

2009-03-18T14:57:00.000-07:00

If I'm honest with myself, I am a bit disappointed by the fall in the number of views I've been getting on my Flickr stream of late. I've been trying to find a reason for it and, as you do, you come up with all sorts of reasons except the real reason - my recent shots have been lacklustre. Going back through my stream, earlier stuff looks weak and uninspiring but got more views, comments and favs, so maybe there is more than one reason. I got a small debate started on one of my shots.

Is Flickr too popular? Sometimes it downloads 17,000 pictures per minute - so how can you get your one noticed? Well, there are various things you can do which I'm not going to go into here. Suffice it say, much of it centres round groups and activity within them. The purpose of some groups seems to be to generate views and comments to each other in the group! Not for me. Easy if you have a fast broadband - hell if you don't.

I would love to get real criticism about my work but Flickr seems to be too polite and also, the people I would value help from would never see my stuff, UNLESS I take wonderful, imaginative, creative and striking shots which might get front page of Explore (whatever that indicates?). SO, if it's that good then do I need advice? Of course I do but won't get any because we are all too nice on Flickr.

Enough of Flickr. This blog is to record my next stages in my photography endeavours. At present, I'm waiting for confirmation that one of my pictures will be used on the cover of a book. A musician is wanting to use some pictures for his next CD, but hasn't chosen them yet. I will be taking the informal pictures at two weddings this year. At work, I've been asked to take more and more photographs for various uses. So all of that is positive. I get more praise for my photography than anything else I do so, even if I'm not brilliant at it (yet), I'm determined I'm going to give it my best shot before I leave this world.

New technology and old buildings

2009-03-16T13:33:00.001-07:00

Kirkstile, Midmar
Originally uploaded by James_at_Slack

I'm composing this entry via Flickr to see how well it works. I don't know what it will look like but if it comes out OK then it will be a good way to blog.

The picture above is just a shot to compliment two things - equipment and subject. I took this with the D300 and a SB600 fired remotely using the very effective Cactus V2s. My knowledge of cameras, exposure and photoshop is limited, but my knowledge of using flash is zero. So this is an experiment/playing around shot to see if I could light up the gable wall and still get a decent exposure on this poorly lit ruin. I have much to learn and much money to spend on more flashes! Can't wait.

The other purpose of this shot is to consider what exactly am I going to take photographs of? I recently read a book called 'On Being a Photographer': David Hurn (Magnum) in conversation with Bill Jay. I enjoyed the book greatly but wondered if his point about you can only take really good shots of things you are passionate about was strictly true. He suggests you consider your passions, consider which of them you could conveniently photograph, (and photograph regularly) be pleasing to the eye and of interest to the viewer. It sounded like good advice but not so easy to achieve. At present I have an interest in the many abandoned cottages, houses, farms and glens that litter the North East of Scotland, so I've been pursuing that and the results can be seen on Flickr. I also love where I live, so that is being photographed. I'm getting back into local history as well so I can see a project there. Now whether or not I'm being specific enough, I'm not sure. If any photographer reads this I would be interested in their views.

As regards Flickr, well that can be a pain and a pleasure. More on that another time.

Purpose

2009-03-15T10:12:00.001-07:00

Whilst in Barcelona on holiday, I stumbled upon a major exhibition by Diane Arbus. It stopped me dead in my tracks. Each picture spoke to me. I thought they were outstanding. This exhibition opened up a dusty file in my memory about photography and me. I took lots of photographs as a teenager and they got praised at school by the art teachers, which encouraged me. However, career guidance at school told me to leave that 'arty stuff' alone as there were no jobs and money in it, which was true generally, but you can't just ignore such urges. Now in my forties, I'm going to satisfy that artistic urge. So essentially this blog will play a part in bringing art and photography back into my life. It will record the things I am going to do to be a better photographer. It will be a showcase for my photographs as well and hopefully it will not get full of the junk my Flickr stream got cluttered up with.

So what have I done so far? I've been taking loads of photographs since Barcelona and trying to learn how a camera works, how to get the best from light and using Photoshop Elements. Many Magnum photographers were asked to give advice to 'budding photographers' and I was pleased to hear them say - 'embrace life'. I liked that and I will be doing much more of that. I have had a Flickr account for three years now and I feel it could be better and get more views. I have a Nikon D300 and D50, the kit lens 18 -50, a 50mm 1.8, and the Sigma 10-20mm. I will write more about what else I've done and plan to do later.