After writing the last post I remembered that I left out a whole batch of photos that I classify in Lightroom as “Personal” and I forgot to include them when I made the selection of my favorite 11. That’s probably just as well, so this way I get to show a few more favorites, and I don’t have to explain to people why I picked a tree or something over a photo of them!
I’ve taken nearly 7000 photographs this year. That’s nowhere close to what a lot of people take, but compared with years past it’s a pretty large number for me. Seven Thousand…I’m sure glad that wasn’t film!
A lot of people think it’s cool to do some kind of “Best Of” gallery or a collection of Greatest Hits for the year. It seems a bit cliche to me, but I’m going to do it anyway. But first a disclaimer: Out of the 7000 or so photos I took this year I have only processed a very small percentage of them. So this is not necessarily my “best” or even my “favorite” images from 2011, but it’s a group of photos that pretty well represent what I did this past year. I’ve found it very interesting to see what I’ve done and compare it with what I’ve done in years past.
Most interesting to me is the choice of cameras. Of these 11 photos, 3 of them were shot with the 5D, 3 with the 20D (with Holga lens) and 5 with the G12. The X10 came along a little late, but I’ll be off to a good start in 2012 with it!
I hope you enjoy this little selection of photos. I don’t think there’s anything here that hasn’t already been shown somewhere before, but I think it makes a nice little collection.
I also hope that everyone has a safe and enjoyable New Year’s weekend and starts 2012 off making more memories and more photographs.
Happy 2012!
Alan Ross recently posted an article entitled “Too Close To Home – Even for Ansel Adams” in which he discusses how he (Alan) rarely makes interesting images close to his home and how Ansel Adams had the same “problem.” Check it out.
It would be easy to read such an article and think, “Gee, I have something in common with Ansel Adams!” Not so fast. I agree that most of us do our best work in places other than where we live. But why is that?
Perhaps the biggest reason we don’t shoot close to home is that we have too many distractions at home. Whenever we’re home we have our “to-do lists” and other chores that make it hard to change gears and just go out and shoot for an hour or so. Maybe we’re too busy planning our next adventure away from home that we forget about what there is to shoot nearby.
I think shooting close to home can potentially result in excellent images, images that only those who take the time to know a place can make, because if we really get to know a location we can go there when the conditions are perfect for whatever we choose to photograph. But we have to work at it and be open to the possibilities because our subject matter is not as clear-cut as it would be if we were shooting somewhere “iconic.” And the great thing is that we have an opportunity to shoot someplace where no one else has photographed. True, it might not be Yosemite, but we can do some truly personal work in a place where you aren’t influenced by others’ photographs.
Why do we seem to make better photographs when we travel to new places? Think about it, and I think you’ll agree that it has to do with several main things: (1) when we travel to photograph we “give ourselves permission” to put our other obligations aside and just go shoot, (2) when we visit a new location we are usually excited, and shooting things that excite us generally results in more personal photographs, and (3) when we’re unfamiliar with a place, we work harder at finding things that interest us, because we have put our distractions (and our preconceptions) aside. There are many more, but I think those are the top three.
For many of us, we live where our jobs are. If we lived in the Caribbean or Alaska or the Rocky Mountains one would think it would be easier to shoot close to home. But that’s not necessarily the case. We get so used to things we see every day that we lose sight of how wonderful our home is. I used to work with a woman who grew up in Hawaii but always talked about how beautiful North Carolina is. She told me that since she had lived in Hawaii so long she didn’t think it was anything special. Wow, I can’t imagine that!
I’ve spent the last several years shooting on the greenway that runs through my neighborhood. It’s been a fun project, documenting the change in seasons in different weather conditions and different times of the day. But even when all I have to do is walk out my front door, it can still be a hard thing to do. For a while I tried doing a regular shoot there for some of my local photographer friends, but turnout was generally pretty low. Those who came out enjoyed it, and I had some regulars, but it’s just hard for people to get excited about shooting somewhere so close to home.
To be sure, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with traveling to other places to photograph, and I certainly do my share! We love to travel, and there is nothing better than going to a new place, returning to a place we haven’t been in a long time, or even going to a familiar place in different conditions or at a different time of the year. I’m planning to do my share of traveling in the coming year, too. But I think if we work at it we can see our home the way we see new places. Try it and see, and let me know how it goes!
Kathy & I were talking the other evening about her experiences photographing this year, and she mentioned how much she enjoys just walking around with a camera, taking photographs of things she sees and things that interest her. She seems to have the most fun – and does her best photography – when we are just wandering around with our cameras, no tripods, no bags full of gear, just a camera and a lens.
There are obviously times were a tripod is simply necessary to get a photograph. And when I need one I’ve got a couple to pick from. But the biggest problem with a tripod (besides having to carry it) is that it’s another piece of gear to think about. Just like carrying extra lenses, a tripod gives you more choices to make, another bunch of problems to solve. Adjusting, leveling, making sure the feet don’t crush some unsuspecting lichen, etc. takes time and attention away from the task at hand. It’s like carrying a bunch of lenses. The more lenses I carry the better the chance that I’ve got the “wrong one” on the camera. Of course I can solve that by walking around with multiple cameras slung Pancho Vila-style over my shoulders. Yikes! No thanks.
Some people handle all that just fine, but for many of us and certainly for me, having to fuss with the equipment distracts me from the flow of creativity. That’s what I love about the simplicity of using a compact camera or an SLR with one lens. I start out seeing based on what I have with me, I stop worrying about whether I’ve got the right lens on the camera or whether the tripod is the right height or not and I just go out and shoot. If I need to get lower I get down. Sometimes I lay on my back on the ground. I’d never bother with that if I had to adjust a tripod to get that low.
Admittedly there are some concerns with shooting hand-held. Concerned about precise composition? It’s perfectly OK to crop a little if you need to tidy up an edge or straighten a horizon. I can’t get straight horizons on a tripod with a built-in level in my viewfinder! I might get a little softness from camera movement so I have to be careful with shutter speed, although with today’s cameras cranking the ISO up a stop or two (or more) isn’t a big deal. And most of the handheld shooting I do is in daylight so that’s not too big of an issue. And you know what? If you use good technique and don’t try to make huge prints they’re probably sharp enough! I find that the best cure for soft photos is often to just stop looking at them at 100%
The tripod is definitely a great compositional tool. If you ever want to see how unsteady you are at hand-holding, switch your camera to video mode and try to hold a composition. That may convince you to use a tripod! But there are times when leaving it at home allows you to fully engage your creativity, to just go out and shoot. You may be a little limited in what you can do, but I firmly believe that if your shooting style allows you to respond to the things that “call your name,” you can react to them in a way that shows through in your photographs that a razor-sharp, technically-perfect but clinically emotionless photograph just can’t match.
I thought I would try something a little different for this post. I don’t usually post a bunch of photos on my blog, but there’s no reason why I shouldn’t. These were taken Friday morning while wandering around downtown Charlotte with my Canon G12. I sure have a lot of fun with that little camera.
In my last post I ruminated on the fact that the weather over the past few weeks had been “too perfect” and as a result I was having trouble getting motivated creatively. Well, as if on cue, like someone was telling me to be careful what I wished for, this past weekend…We Got Weather.
We often have a tough time deciding whether to get up early and hope for a good sunrise or just head someplace we want to shoot in nice light. That decision can be especially difficult in the fall because often the places for good color and the places for sunrise are mutually exclusive. We were in Cherokee, planning to shoot color in the lower elevations of the Smokies, especially in the Deep Creek area which is one of our favorite places. It’s generally quiet and out of the way this time of year since the water is too cold for the tubers and the outfitters have closed for the season.
The weather on Friday was rainy, and the forecast for Saturday called for clearing in the morning, followed by partly cloudy in the late morning and rest of the weekend. Hearing a perfect recipe for a possible “clearing winter storm” scenario we headed to Clingman’s Dome hoping for a good sunrise. On our way up 441 we could actually see stars in places, but at about the Kephart Prong parking area we started to see snowflakes. By the time we got to the Deep Creek Valley overlook it was snowing hard. Luftee Overlook was snowing and socked in, so we headed on up the road to the “Dome.”
Clingman’s Dome Road was getting snow covered in a hurry, but it wasn’t accumulating too much at that point, but the higher we got the more snow we saw. At the parking area the thermometer in the car said that it was 26 degrees. The wind was howling, snow was blowing across the pavement and visibility was about 20 feet. We pulled along the curb figuring that we might as well wait and see what happened, even though I don’t think I could have opened my car door with the wind. As we sat there several other cars pulled in, but most of them just kept going, heading back down the mountain. There were a few cars parked, but most of them looked like they had been there overnight.
About 7:30 a snowplow came into the lot. I figured he was checking out the road and would be back around in a minute or two. After about 5 minutes the plow pulled up next to my car, the driver got out and came over to our car and said “I’m heading down to close the road.” I said, “OK.” He evidently wasn’t satisfied with my answer so he said, “If you leave now I’ll make sure you get down OK.” I said, “OK.” He evidently wasn’t sure I got it so then he asked , “So are you coming?” To which I replied, “YEAH!” No stupid tourists in THIS car!
We drove down to Newfound Gap to use the restroom and could barely walk in some places because it was so slippery. But the roads were generally OK so we drove down to Luftee Overlook, hoping it would be a little more sheltered there, which it was. The weather never really cleared though, so we headed a little lower until we finally got to some overlooks where we could see. And what a sight! It was still really windy, but the snow on the mountainsides along with the fall color was amazing! I hope I made a few photographs that do it justice, but for a guy who doesn’t get to see much snow any more this was a lot of fun.
The rest of the weekend was back to more sun and blue sky, but you won’t hear me complaining!
Canon announced a new flagship camera yesterday, and immediately thereafter began the inevitable commentary about theoretical image quality. I find it amusing that there are so many people who find it necessary to speculate about the pros and cons of a newly-announced camera based on spec charts and such things as pixel density, photosite size, processor speed, number of focus points, etc. Why is this?
I suppose it is because there are just a lot of people out there whose interest in photography is rooted deeply in the gear, and pouring over things like MTF charts gives them something to do. The tech stuff excites them. They enjoy speculating about the next Canikonujilympus and their theoretical pros and cons and imagined image quality. Fuji recently announced a new camera that was immediately met with comments denouncing it’s smaller sensor as though there was no possible way it could take a decent photograph. But no one had actually used one to take a photograph!
I’m very interested in this new Canon camera. It would be an excellent upgrade from the cameras I currently use. But it’s a lot of money, heavy as heck, and frankly I’m just not convinced it would improve my photography. The weak link is still the operator! The cameras I currently use still work and still take pretty good photographs, and I’m not anxious to part with that kind of money just to have something new. I’m sure it will be a great camera, but I don’t need to be first in line, if I even decide to get in line.
Lately I’ve been seriously considering moving to a smaller camera just so I don’t have so much stuff to carry around. I’m thinking that smaller may be the way to go, and while I am very interested in the trend toward smaller, mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras, I’m content to see what develops over the coming months. Maybe something will come along that catches my eye. And maybe not. If I end up using my “obsolete” cameras for another year or two I don’t think my photography will suffer. But I’ll be out there taking actual photographs, not sitting in front of my computer analyzing camera specs!
Whatever comes along you can bet I won’t be standing in line for one until I see some actual photographs. Or I might be in the market for somebody’s used 1Ds Mark III.
I’m finishing up a long-overdue read of Alain Briot’s book “Mastering Landscape Photography.” It’s a very good book but one I never got around to buying until recently, when he made his 3 books available as e-books. Click here for information on buying your own. Needless to say, I am really liking e-books.
One of the sections of the book I found most interesting was the section titled “How to Establish a Personal Photographic Style.” I find that subject interesting because it is a subject I have thought about and struggled with for quite some time. I struggle not so much about whether or not I have a personal style, but rather about whether a personal style can be “developed” or whether it just “is.” Briot’s second book in the series, and the one I will read next, is titled “Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style.” I can only assume he goes into more detail in that book and I am looking forward to reading it.
The thing that I find most fascinating about the discussion of personal style is that it almost always seems to take the approach that style is something you can influence consciously, as suggested by the various terms: words like develop, master, enhance, define, improve and discover are often used. But so far I haven’t been convinced that that’s the case. I agree that someone’s personal style can be influenced by things like looking at other people’s work, learning about the expressive and artistic approaches to creativity or by expressing emotional content in our work. For me though, personal style is what results from the way I see, the way I feel and the stories I want to tell.
A lot of photographers create very identifiable photographs. It surprises me how often I look at a photograph on a website or in a magazine and know whose it is. The work that has the most impact (to me) is the work where the composition, lighting, and emotion define the “look” of a photograph. Michael Kenna, John Sexton, Galen Rowell, Annie Leibovitz have very identifiable personal styles. Closer to home, I can often identify a Kevin Adams image in a heartbeat. The same is true with Bill Lea, Don McGowan or Les Saucier. That is partly because I am familiar with their work but also because they each have a style that I recognize. This is not a rare occurrence either. I have a number of other friends – far less famous but still excellent photographers – whose work I can easily identify.
Can personal style be a result of software or processing? I suppose so, but while others will certainly disagree I’m not entirely convinced that software alone can make a style. The underlying photograph must be compelling on its own, and the software is used as a tool to realize the photographer’s overall vision. That opinion stems from my belief that software will never make an otherwise ordinary image compelling. I’d almost be more inclined to say that software can dilute a style if not used well, although I suppose photographs that are “overdone” can still be identifiable, just not necessarily in a good way.
Can you really change or influence your personal style? That is an excellent question and the core of my exploration. If you photograph what you love or something you have an interest in, you are attracted to subjects that somehow appeal to you personally. You respond to the subject in your own way and the photographs you take reflect your reaction to whatever it was that drew you to make the photograph. Since our creativity is influenced by numerous factors, the way we photograph will naturally reflect that influence. Our reaction and how we respond to a subject is based on our true feelings and reflects everything we know and believe. And while I’m not an expert on this and am probably not explaining it adequately, it seems to me that if you try to “force the issue” by trying to take a photograph in a way that is somehow foreign or unfamiliar to you, the chances are very good that the results will reflect this and somehow appear, shall we say, insincere. The image will fail by being not genuine.
I was told a number of years ago that my own photographs were recognizable, that they had a “style” that identified them as mine. I believe that and know that to be true. But I also feel that my photography has changed since then. I don’t think I take the same photographs that I took 8 or 10 years ago. But I didn’t set out to “change” my personal style. My approach to photography has changed, my vision has evolved as a result of many influences and my photographs – I think – are different.
I have a print by Les Saucier titled “Fern Herd.” Les told me that “Fern Herd” represents a turning point in his photography, because when he made that photograph was when he recognized the importance of relationships in his photography. I’m not sure that I could point to a specific photograph of mine that represents such a turning point, but if I look at a typical “Tom Dills” photo from several years ago and compare it to a “Tom Dills” photo of today, I feel like there is a noticeable difference. Whether they are both identifiable as “mine” remains to be seen and is probably not something that I am best qualified to answer. A lot of my earlier photographs were dramatic landscapes with sunbeams and clouds and great color – “Magic Moments” if you will. Today the work that most appeals to me tends to be work that is quiet and contemplative. I still get my share of sunbeams, but I spend a lot more time looking at intimate scenes, working more with composition, relying on more intimate scenes with lines, shapes and patterns to define my work instead of wide-angle grand scenic landscapes with dramatic clouds and god-beams.
I know that my personality has changed over the last 10 or so years. I suppose that just means that I have matured, but in general I find myself more relaxed. I like to take things slow and easy. I seek peace and quiet and time to think. Is that reflected in my photography? I sometimes wonder if non-photographic influences have been more of a factor than the photographic ones. Do the dramatic scenes represent the noise, the confusion, the voices that accompany the beginning photographer, while the intimate quiet scenes reflect the confidence that comes with mastery of the medium? Or do the differences reflect my own mental state of mind over that timeframe? I don’t think I’m qualified to answer that but the question is fascinating.
Is there a conclusion to all this? I don’t think there can be. Everyone’s personal style is just that – personal. And I believe it is constantly evolving. I don’t think – at least not at this point in time – that it’s something you can think about while you are out making photographs. In fact I think if you tried it would be such a distraction that you would only get confused and frustrated. I know there are as many opinions on this as there are photographers, but I think personal style is a characteristic or result of the feelings we have combined with everything that influences us, rather than something that obviously or consciously influences our work while we are doing it. It’s a fascinating topic and one that I think is worth continued and further research.
I’m looking forward to reading that next book.
Kathy & I attended a dinner the other evening and I happened to be seated next to Herb Jackson, retired Davidson College art professor and well-known artist. We spent some time chatting about what he had been doing since his retirement from the college, and the conversation at one point gravitated around to travel. He mentioned that they had recently traveled to Europe. I think he said they had gone to Italy, Romania and Switzerland…something like that. I mentioned that Kathy & I were thinking about taking a photo workshop in Italy next year. He asked me what appeal a photography workshop would have as compared to a normal tour, and I explained what appealed to us about the one we were considering, that it has a nice mix of sightseeing, culture, food & wine and photography, and that that was how we like to travel. The typical photography workshop “death march” is not for us, and that is the appeal.
Herb said that what bothered him most about traveling with a camera was that he was always afraid that if he spent a lot of time figuring out what to photograph that he wouldn’t spend any time enjoying the scenery. He said he doesn’t take a camera. As an artist he said he prefers to take in the sights, remember the visual elements that appeal to him then incorporate them into his work later, from memory. He related a story about a time when he had done video for the wedding of a friend and how when it was over and he was editing the footage he couldn’t remember the events. He was obviously there and participated, but because he was so focused on his “job” he felt that he didn’t actually partake of the event.
Kathy & I have found that a mix of sightseeing and photography is the way we like to travel. It’s very hard to find that balance, but there are times when it is appropriate to put the camera down or leave it in the car and just enjoy the moment. It’s possible – and sometimes even better – to enjoy a sunrise on the beach without a camera, sitting on the sand holding hands, than to be fussing over a camera and tripod.
Kathy likes to say that a sunset is best viewed through a wine glass. There are times that I agree. And of course there are times and places for being out with a camera. Deciding the when and where is part of what we enjoy about travel. I guess you could say that we like to photograph while we travel, rather than travel to photograph. I figure there is a sunrise and a sunset every day, there’s always a better one somewhere else and that if I miss a few in order to do something more fun or rewarding that’s OK.
Find your personal balance. Be sure to get out there and photograph, but don’t forget to enjoy the scenery while you are there!
I recently received an e-mail from a photographer who said that he desperately needed my help, that he needed to free up space on his hard drive, and had to do it “that day, right now.” The e-mail came on a Thursday afternoon, I had just gotten home from work and had an already full evening and upcoming weekend, so there was no way I had time to try and help this guy for several days, let alone that very minute. I sent him an e-mail suggesting that he just move some of his photos to one of his external hard drives, then come back later and figure out a permanent solution. I never heard back from him so I assume he figured out his problem. I can’t help but think that there was a lot more to the story than he was letting on, and I had and still have a nagging feeling that his actual needs may have been well beyond my ability to help.
I understand that dealing with computers and digital files and managing our photographs can be very stressful. One of the things I liked about the film days was being able to pull out a binder, toss a couple of pages of slides or negatives onto a lightbox and look at them. The voodoo that has become digital photography is wonderful but sometimes it is scary as heck. And to do it right it is a lot of work!
In hindsight I consider myself very fortunate that I recognized early on, well before I had photos in dozens of folders in different locations on multiple hard drives and several computers, that there was enormous potential for mayhem. I’m not the most organized person in the world, but I have always subscribed to the idea of “a place for everything, and everything in its place.” My workshop is that way, my sock drawer is that way, and my photo files are that way.
Not everyone has the foresight to organize their work from the beginning, and once a workflow is established, no matter how haphazard it might be, it’s tough to change. I understand that. We gain a comfort level in the way we do things, and once we are comfortable it can be very scary to think about making a change. That is especially true when changing software, because not everything “translates,” there is often a steep learning curve and it can be really intimidating to think about changing our habits. I emphasize in my Lightroom teaching that everyone needs to learn enough about the pros and cons of the different choices that they can decide on the method that works best for them.
Things like full hard drives don’t happen overnight. I’ve been shooting with digital cameras for 7 years and have scanned slides from before that. My photo collection is tiny compared to a lot of people I know. I started with 250GB hard drives, stepped up to $500GM drives and now use 1TB drives. I’m just about ready to step up to the next size. You have to manage this stuff, and it’s an ongoing process. If you are the type of person who can live with disorganized files and don’t worry whether you can find stuff, you don’t have much of a problem. If you are the type of person who worries about every minute detail and has to have every contingency covered, you can drive yourself nuts. But if you take the time to think about it a bit, learn what the options are and get some expert advice it doesn’t have to be difficult. But don’t wait until you have 30,000 images and a full hard drive. Make ongoing evaluation part of your process, budget for newer and bigger hard drives and make sure you have a plan in case something goes wrong. You’ll be much happier in the long run and will have more time and attention for making photographs instead of worrying about managing your assets.