_valerian

In a slightly earlier post I said some stuff about how or if Thinking has anything to do with taking photographs. Justin and Brad discuss in the comments how Thought plays into photography.

Justin–>
“one of the reasons I photograph (I am sure) is that it is a way to control the world - or my own world - and somehow by capturing my perception, I am reinforcing my own importance.

If I don’t think, does that make me unimportant? Not to push Cartesian logic down the throat (my philosophy class is certainly making me rethink all things Descartes) but there does seem something more contrived about not thinking when photographing than thinking (because when you’re not thinking, you’re actually thinking about not thinking anyway…) - !”

Brad–>
“Let the photographs tell you what they are about…not the other way around. I try to think of my photographic process as a conversation that I am having with myself. For there to be a good conversation(in my opinion) there needs to be some sort of a balance between all that are speaking. If one person is talking too much, the potential for what could be learned is dramitically decreased. I guess to put it bluntly maybe you need to shut up for a little bit and let your photographs talk. I think letting up on the reigns of control would be good, even if it is only temporary. Sorry if that makes you think that I am a dick.”

Justin–>
I’ve heard that phrase “let the photographs tell you what they are about” a lot, and have nodded like I know what that’s supposed to mean, and I realize now that I don’t have a clue. Isn’t that just post-justification or post-rationalization? How does that affect the act of photographing itself? It seems like everything is a matter of editing.

Maybe if I had someone else edit my work and show it to me, I could actually learn something.

Otherwise, isn’t it always going to be the blind leading the blind?”

Brad–>
I am not smart enough to know whether the whole “let the photographs tell you” is post rationalization or not. It feels like it is something different for me though. I guess that I feel that my work is always ahead of me and that I am just this dumbass who doesn’t get if for about 3 years. I have also found that anyone can pretty much justify anything, at least to himself. It is especially hard for me since I am such a stubborn bastard. I try to come up with semi-elaborate arguments for why I shouldn’t have to change any part of my thinking or behavior. It is safe in my mind when I am always right. I guess it comes down to whether discovery is your motivation or not. It is for me that is why I try to have a loose contol over the image, to leave some room for discovery. This might quite possibly be the worst analogy you have every heard but it is like trying to hold wet soap. If you have a kung fu grip you just end up looking at your feet being pissed at yourself. You know how to take “good” picture so just go out and make some picture of things that interest you. Don’t think about why they interest you or whether other people will think they are interesting. I don’t know if you remember this but for about three semesters I photographed nothing but close line polls. I still have no idea why (maybe it has to do with OCD, who knows). But a person appeared in one and then my work shifted. That seems to be how it works. I photograph what interests me then one photograph shifts the work. I dare you to make a bunch of work where the images don’t seem to fit together. I can’t think of a single time in which I have seen your work where you even had one image that didn’t seem to fit within the group. I guess that I am surprised since you don’t seem like the type of person who likes to focus on one particular thing in any other aspect of your life (I could be wrong) but you seem multi-tasking in everything else. Anyway it is late and I am not making any sense. I will talk to you about this more later. Good night.”

John–>
And Good Evening. A Friday night alone in my apartment, (have you caught on to the pattern yet? It is like this every week.) and I will put down some thoughts.

First, Brad— that soap analogy is fantastic.

Second,
Since we can’t “not think”, how about Feel more?
I don’t think that thinking about photography as you photograph is bad, but rather what limits a photographer is thinking too narrowly. (the idea of “portrait lenses” etc)
The word “feel” is a tricky one, since you will never know exactly how you or anyone else ever really feels. Any sentiment/feeling that a photograph allows someone to draw from it is based on the viewer’s own experiences and education, their own desires and expectations are countered by what they actually see.
This first picture will mean very little to most everyone except for myself and one or two other people. The rest of you will see some shapes and 3 letters and some numbers. To be fair though, standing before that door at that moment, the most natural reaction was to take a picture of it.

The physical act of taking a photograph was how I dealt with my feelings at that time. I did not have to think about it. I guess I had an idea of what the picture was going to look like, but the picture is the visual manifestation of my reaction to something (feelings and a place) with a camera. Feelings were involved but naturally the ones I had do not come through in this image. Which is fine with me because I don’t trust pictures that are supposed to make you feel a certian way anyway.

And then there is this picture of a dog:

I said Feel in that paragraph above but what I mean by “feel” is not all lovey-dovey but instead rather a combonation of Reacting and Living. Seeing this dog on Wednesday morning in front of the am-pm shop I felt like I wanted to take a picture of it. I do not go out of my way to take pictures of dogs, or to have highlights on wooden structures in the back ground make dogs look like happy boy dogs. It looks like it is grinning and now I wonder if I will find myself taking more pictures of dogs. Which I might. I just won’t think about doing it though.

I enjoy the act of photographing something, and in that act I can deal with my way of feeling something. I sure thought that dog was cute, but I was not out to make a “cute” picture. When the visual results say something new and (visually) interesting it keeps me interested.

Justin said:

“Okay. So it’s all enough to make you just want to go out and photograph. But then how? and what? After everything is said, how do you refuse the proclivity to second- third- fourth- guess yourself out of taking any photograph at all?”

For me it is because I like to use a camera and I would rather push the shutter button and wind the next frame than not take a picture at all. It is very enjoyable to use cameras of all types and if it was not fun for me I would not do it. This is also why I would take a broken car into a shop than try and fix it myself.

Justin also said:

“one of the reasons I photograph (I am sure) is that it is a way to control the world - or my own world - and somehow by capturing my perception, I am reinforcing my own importance.”

Justin, are you talking just about the end results (photographs) ? I think the act of photographing does the same thing. This would probably in part explain some of why I take so many portraits of women.

I like to know people through photography.

UPDATE
Justin has added to this conversation here. He is a far better writer than I.