Breaking Down the Walls of Predictability…

[Benjamin Kanarek]

Breaking Down the Walls of Predictability…

On one of the photography forums a photographer who read my article “A Funny Thing Happened to Me in the Camera Store” responded by saying “…Thanks for sharing. Still waiting on my accident.” I thought about her remark and my response was the following;

Whenever you are about to do what you think SHOULD be done, stop yourself, take a deep breath and do the opposite. If you think you are coming in too close to the subject, come in closer. If you set up your lights for a subject with your intended orientation to be at point “x”, move to point “y”.* If you* are standing up to take the shot, don’t. Get up on a ladder or lay down on the floor to do your capture. If your images look too bright make them brighter. If someone tells you that your images are too dark, make them darker. If your images are looking too normal, mess them up. If you are worried about camera shake, don’t.** If the dress the model is wearing is begging for the classic accessory, don’t do it.* Take that Lagerfeld dress and stick a 3,95€* tacky* “Eiffel Tower” huge chain around her neck.

Breaking down the walls of Predictability is a tough call. If all of the competing photographers are cropping one way that is in “Fashion” do it the other way. When I was using film, I would go to the store and ask, “what is the shittiest or most obscure brands that you have?” Ever tried Konicachrome or 3M or “CrappyChrome”. Everyone was shooting Ektachrome…BORING. I would use Agfachrome 1000 ASA film. Polachrome or anything that would make my stuff stand out from the norm. I would set up shots using totally insane Fashion Stylists, Make-Up and Hairstylists, telling them to fly and that fear is the greatest hindrance to creativity. Let accidents happen. That is how they happen. Better yet, don’t even worry about them happening, just be open to the possibilities. Don’t be AFRAID to be different.* Just BE.

Thanks for your inspiration “Becky T”

Ben:-)

[yelvertoft]

There's some good advice there Ben, it applies equally well to other genres of photography as well as fashion. Looking at the work of others is often very inspirational, but it's up to each of us to take the inspiration anduse it in our own way.

Lovely lighting on the photo attached BTW.

[andy153]

Well said Ben, we should all remember that advice in all aspects of photography and should also put it into practice when looking at and judging other peoples pictures. It is the differences in our styles that should be appreciated, that extra spark that takes us beyond the image. We see a lot of technically excellent pictures that are soulless, that lack that something extra to make them stand out. The POTW by Duncan of the three wine glasses is a perfect example for me ( Sorry Duncan ) - we have all seen still life shots of wine in glasses, technically perfect shots, what gives Duncan's shots that extra for me is - the tilting of the glasses in one shot plus the primary colour mix and the wine flowing upside down in the other. This is where a skilled photographer has added that little bit extra that lifts the shot out of the run of the mill into something special. There are many such examples in our POTW slot (Thanks Moderators) - Ben, I'm sorry to say, your work lifts me to a level that is hard to put into words, suffice to say that you among many others in WPF lift this site and share with, and help us lesser snappers, with real insights and technique on how to improve our photography. Long may we all continue to learn and help one another
PS. Another great shot in the thumbnail Ben.

[andy153]

Perhaps a look at this link may stimulate this thread further?
With thanks to Ben, Duncan and Al

http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...hp?photo=44580

I repeat for those who have looked at the link.

"Definitely art or graphic design, but with no camera involved is it in any way photographic ...... ? Is use of Photoshop enough on it's own .....?

I agree Duncan (There are people who think so far outside the box, you need a big telephoto lens to even see the box.) but - even worse IMHO and in many respects, there are people who have a problem seeing anything beyond the narrow confines of their own box or a few boxes they are comfortable in - and so miss the creative opportunities presented by others. Is our photography something we should always be comfortable with ......?"

[Alex1994]

Excellent advice...HOWEVER.

I think we must impose a limit between what is original and artistic and what is downright silly. I see thousands of photos of absolutely sod all everywhere now. Someone sees a discarded crisp packet on the floor, stops, takes out camera, points it straight at the floor, hits the shutter and all of a sudden they're some sort of artistic genius, making art out of rubbish.

NO NO NO! These shots are still no good! A case in point is that ghastly feature that comes on cameras now which makes all but a selected colour black and white, making a single subject stand out. This was good for about 5 minutes, until every Tom, Dick and Harry fresh outta Currys with their new wunderkamera was taking pictures of banana yellow Toyotas in downtown Slough and declaring themselves to be the new Prokudin-Gorsky based on their (or more correctly their camera's) clever manipulation of colour.

All imho, rant mode off.

[yelvertoft]

Andy, you've got me confused here. This:

Originally Posted by andy153

pictures that are soulless, that lack that something extra to make them stand out. The POTW by Duncan of the three wine glasses is a perfect example for me ( Sorry Duncan ) - we have all seen still life shots of wine in glasses,

contradicts this:

Originally Posted by andy153

what gives Duncan's shots that extra for me is - the tilting of the glasses in one shot plus the primary colour mix and the wine flowing upside down in the other.

Which is your opinion? I have no problem either way, you are perfectly entitled to have an opinion, whatever it is.

[andy153]

Sorry Duncan that I'm not clear, what I was trying to say is that it is your extra touches that makes them so good and makes them stand out for me from the run of the mill wine in a glass shot. There are many technically excellent shots out there as Alex says, but as he also points out many are fads that will not stand the test of time. For me those two wine glass shots do stand out and will continue so to do. Ben suggests breaking down the walls of predictability and for me this means we should step outside our comfort zones when we look at some pictures, and we should also dare to be different. Whether the "looking outside the box" by Al is a photograph or a piece of digital art or graphic design is always going to be a matter of personal decision but we should all always be prepared to push the envelope from time to time. Stepping out of our comfort zone can be dangerous but also exciting, fun and stimulating. I've been racking my brains over how you can better those wine glass shots - no doubt you have something up your sleeve - but I suppose I'll have to wait and see

[Alex1994]

Digital art should not be considered photography on a linguistic basis. Photography means recording light as opposed to changing the colour of pixels with no real-world equivalent. Digital art is still art, but not photography.

[andy153]

Ah Alex, but don't digital cameras record pixels, and will a simple glass photographic filter not alter those pixels? Where does the real-world equivalent start for someone who is say, colour blind and has an altered perception of what you and I may call reality? Are you saying that Digital Photography is a form of Digital Art and not Photography? Can Digital art and Photography never meet?

[Alex1994]

Digital photography is still photography because those pixels are recording light, and whilst a filter may alter that light, it's still recording light.

Making something ENTIRELY from scratch in photoshop is art in the same way that a painting is art; the changing of the colour of each pixel is controlled entirely by the artist, like when someone puts a brush to canvas.