Blog Responses 8,9,&10

“My portraits are more about me than they are about the people I photograph.” ~Richard Avedon.

This is a pretty bold thing to say, but after some reflection, I'd have to agree with Avedon. It's a way I've never really looked at it before, but if a photograph shows you a look at the world, isn't the looker important? The subject matter behind the camera is just as important as that in front from that perspective. Taking photographs at different moments, different angles, or different anything can change the meaning of a photograph. Each creative decision made by the photograph reflects a piece of his personality. Last week's quote talked about photos taking a part of the subject's soul. Perhaps it's time to consider that they can take part of the photographer's as well.

“You don't take a photograph, you make it.” ~Ansel Adams

Adams's quote is kind of along the lines of Avedon's, but I disagree with it. I think making a photo if a huge part about being a photographer, you've got to throw yourself into your work to get the full experience out of it. That being said, I find the idea of capturing an event or subject you have absolutely no control over very beautiful. Sometimes you have to sit back and let things happen, like when that last "what the hell" shot you take at random winds up being the best one. In most instances, you do make your photographs, but if photographers don't recognize the times to just let be, they're kind of in the dark.

“All photographs are there to remind us of what we forget. In this - as in other ways - they are the opposite of paintings. Paintings record what the painter remembers. Because each one of us forgets different things, a photo more than a painting may change its meaning according to who is looking at it.” ~John Berger


I'd agree with this quote. It again relates to the previous. A photographer only has so much creative liberty in what they photograph. At the end of the day, it has to exist. Painters on the other hand, can pull entire abstract subject matters out of their imagination. In a painting, the viewer really does see what the painter saw, either literally or in the mind, but usually a mix of the two. Photograph is a sample of life. As a much more literal art, viewers are able to take in the subject matter and skew it in any way they wish to meet their needs. Sounds strangely like real life...