# What is your Philosophy of Photography?



## colormesilly (Apr 27, 2006)

I'm doing a college paper for my Philosophy class and I wanted to ask others, what their philosophy of photography is. If you have one.

Thanks to any replies. Also you can leave your name (first or last, or last initial) in case I happen to use your quote, so I can properly credit you.


----------



## Rob (Apr 27, 2006)

My photography is my philosophy - love knowledge and improve myself.

Rob


----------



## JRuzich (Apr 27, 2006)

I don't quite understand your question.  Do you mean philosophy of all Photography?  Or my own personal photography?  Once you clarify i can write on both for pages.
Jeremy*


----------



## colormesilly (Apr 27, 2006)

*********
phi·los·o·phy

Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.
A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.
The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.
The disciplines presented in university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology.
The discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.
A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory: an original philosophy of advertising.
A system of values by which one lives: has an unusual philosophy of life.
*********

Pretty much what is your belief or idea or what photography is, is to you, is to others, what it is used for, why it is used.
I want to know why you photograph things, a hobby? But I'd like for you to elaborate.... ex. you like to photograph things b/c it calms and relaxes. It could be many things.


----------



## keller (Apr 27, 2006)

I like photography because it lets me make pretty pictures, and people can see them and go "Wow, that was amazing", and possibly "From this day forth I shall be your patron, here's a $100K cheque" (ok, the last bit was just fantasy  )


----------



## Jeff Canes (Apr 27, 2006)

I have thought about this before and have never can up with a really good answer. Other that it&#8217;s fun, I like pretty pictures and I not in the pictures if I taking them. Maybe it&#8217;s time to give it more thought. 

JRuziich IMO P of P is deferent for each person.


----------



## panzershreck (Apr 27, 2006)

i like images alltogether because they reveal something you wouldn't have seen otherwise - a feeling, a mood, a place at a certain time, a person in a certain way, light in a certain pattern, etc. it's psychologically stimulating, but in an abstract way

and i like abstract things


----------



## mal (Apr 27, 2006)

If you haven't already, you should read 'On Photography' by Susan Sontag. I think that'd really help you.


----------



## ThomThomsk (Apr 27, 2006)

colormesilly said:
			
		

> Pretty much what is your belief or idea or what photography is, is to you, is to others, what it is used for, why it is used.
> I want to know why you photograph things, a hobby? But I'd like for you to elaborate.... ex. you like to photograph things b/c it calms and relaxes. It could be many things.



It is one of the few things that allows be to be creative, in spite of my lack of many creative skills. I can't draw or paint, I don't play an instrument, but I want to be able to make something - photographs - which may be the only thing, the only artifact that can be attributed to me, that marks the fact that I passed this way. Something that my family can point to and say, yes, Thomsk made that.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Apr 27, 2006)

colormesilly said:
			
		

> Pretty much what is your belief or idea or what photography is, is to you, is to others, what it is used for, why it is used.


What you are asking for here is a definition of Photography.
I have been working on that one for some 20 years and it is forming the basis of my PhD submission.
I think you should ask people to supply something a little less ambitious.


----------



## 303villain (Apr 27, 2006)

I am in Thom's boat.  But for me, its kind of an outlet, sometimes I have an idea that I want to convey, and that is my medium to get my thought across.  I shoot tons of pictures that nobody sees(yet, until i have  my own website/portfolio) and they all convey some though, story, or idea.  Sometimes i carry this over to what i shoot for fun, sometimes i just shoot for aesthetics or seeing something new/neat/different/odd whatever.  From what I have noticed though, with alot of photography(especially conceptual kinds) you can tell more about the photographer by looking at a picture than you can about the subject or the content of the image...


----------



## LaFoto (Apr 27, 2006)

To me it sometimes depends on where I am.
While at home, it offers me a chance to be creative. I am no good at painting or drawing, but I like beauty, I like the sight of beautiful things, and I think often their beauty can be much enhanced by putting them into the frame given by a picture. You thus exclude anything distracting in the peripheral vision (or even more), you can exclude distracting backgrounds, and all in all you can create your picture. I like that, it is fun.

When travelling, I also like my photos to tell the story of my journey. I imagine a running travel journal along with the pictures and imagine them to be the illustration to it. Of late, though, I have also tried to be creative and not only form pictures of what I see, but to go deeper into things (it is always and again the beauty in things that I am after), and sometimes you have to frame them so they form abstracts, sometimes so that a nice light situation comes out and so on.


----------



## LilmaK (Apr 27, 2006)

Photography is there to "freeze" time. Every time you view a pic, you should be taken back to that specific time and place.


----------



## ksmattfish (Apr 27, 2006)

I always liked what Garry Winogrand said.



> I have a burning desire to see what things look like photographed by me.


----------



## Torus34 (Apr 27, 2006)

A philosophy of photography . . .

Are you requesting an epistemological analysis of the photographic image as it relates to the 'real' world?

Or perhaps you are interested in the philosophical aspects of a specific photographic image?

You'll have to clarify a bit using, if possible the specific language of philosophy.


----------



## THORHAMMER (Apr 27, 2006)

this is simplistic awnser, but im a visual person so thats how i like to communicate to a point. Also It allows me to help others (clients) communicate to their audience in an effective manner so Im doing what I love and enabling others to be effectve in their presentations/advertisments. etc

Besides that when I do nature stuff, Im just really recording some of the majesty of God's creation..thats my philosophy in a nutshell...


----------



## Alpha (Apr 27, 2006)

My biggest photography influence is Caroline Vaughan, who does mostly portrait work, which is my real passion. Once, I asked her how she knew when to trip the shutter. Her answer, which has become sort of my goal in portrait wok, was something to the effect of the following: "They [people] have to be connecting with the camera. You take the photograph when that connection is there. You're trying to capture someone when they're at most themselves. This becomes increasingly difficult when you photograph more than one person at a time. Then you not only have to catch both of them connecting with the camera at the same time, but also connecting with each other."


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Apr 27, 2006)

Torus34 said:
			
		

> Are you requesting an *epistomological* analysis of the photographic image as it relates to the 'real' world?


Are you sure you don't mean 'ontological'?


----------



## Alpha (Apr 28, 2006)

I second that. Epistemology and photography is a pretty convoluted combination.


----------



## Torus34 (Apr 28, 2006)

No, I did mean epistemological, though ontological also points in an interesting direction for discourse. A photograph, for most of us, is a representation [or mapping, of sorts] of outer reality. The relationship between our senses and 'reality' leads to the question of whether, and how well, we can know this reality. That question falls into the bin labeled 'epistomology.' The abstracted 'slice' of reality embodied in a photograph is simply reality presented to our senses one step further removed.

Incidentally, a photograph at it's best is also a representation of the inner reality of the photographer. [cf. Arbus vs Adams.]

One could also note that outer reality is best described by science, while inner reality is best described by art. Philosophy can link the two, most notably in the branch called aesthetics.


----------



## ThomThomsk (Apr 28, 2006)

Torus34 said:
			
		

> A photograph, for most of us, is a representation [or mapping, of sorts] of outer reality.  The relationship between our senses and 'reality' leads to the question of whether, and how well, we can know this reality.



It isn't just our senses and 'reality' though, is it? What about visualisation, or to use the Ansel Adams tautology, pre-visualisation? If the successful photographer is one who creates an image that matches his or her visualisation, and that is different from a purely documentary record, then the photograph is rather more than a representation of outer reality, more an expression of the photographer's inner reality, if there is such a thing.

Who here visualises before they release the shutter? I try, but it is a difficult skill to learn.


----------



## Torus34 (Apr 28, 2006)

Thom:

You're beginning to think this through! Bravo!

What links our senses and 'outer' reality is our mind. And you're absolutely correct in that a truly good photograph, as opposed to a snap shot [Is the current vernacular a 'chimped' shot?] is a comment by the photographer on the 'documentary' image.

Ansel Adam's mind was very different from that of Diane Arbus. They both saw outer reality, but were able to bend it to their will.

And if you think documentary landscapes and street shots are tough, think of the work of a great portraitist; the final print doesn't simply show the subject -- it tells us something important about the person. Check out the portrait of the justice in 'The Family of Man' as a primary example.

Keep trying. In that direction lies the few really great prints you'll eventually make, and treasure.

Visualizing such a final print is darned hard work. There's no easy road to success. I work in B&W, so I abstract from what my eyes see into shades and shapes, minus color. My absolute successes are few, but IMHO worth every bit of the effort.


----------



## Dave_D (Apr 28, 2006)

ThomThomsk said:
			
		

> Who here visualises before they release the shutter? I try, but it is a difficult skill to learn.


A simplistic answer to your question would be: everbody that uses a camera. If you never saw anything that gave you the inspiration to capture the moment on film (or whatever) then you would never release the shutter in the first place:er::lmao:


----------



## danalec99 (Apr 29, 2006)

Cultivate a relationship with your instincts. And let it be the guide while shooting and post processing.


----------



## ThomThomsk (Apr 29, 2006)

Torus34 said:
			
		

> Keep trying. In that direction lies the few really great prints you'll eventually make, and treasure.
> 
> Visualizing such a final print is darned hard work. There's no easy road to success. I work in B&W, so I abstract from what my eyes see into shades and shapes, minus color. My absolute successes are few, but IMHO worth every bit of the effort.



This is exactly what I'm trying to achieve. I realised last year that I had been a camera owner for more than 20 years, but was yet to become a photographer, and this is one of the big reasons why. I also shoot mainly in b&w, and I think I'm making progress.

Thanks for your reply; it has given me lots to think about.


----------



## ThomThomsk (Apr 29, 2006)

Dave_D said:
			
		

> A simplistic answer to your question would be: everbody that uses a camera.



Do you really think so? I'm not at all sure about that. As Torus34 says, it is very difficult to do, and although I had been taking photographs for a long time, I hadn't even heard of it until last year.



			
				Dave_D said:
			
		

> If you never saw anything that gave you the inspiration to capture the moment on film (or whatever) then you would never release the shutter in the first place:er::lmao:



Well of course, but visualisation is about knowing how you want your final print to look, seeing it in your mind's eye and taking steps to ensure that is what you get. 

Seeing an inspiring scene and pointing your camera at it may give you what you want, and that's fine. But visualisation is about controlling the limitations of your equipment and materials and making decisions so that your print matches what you saw in your head before you released the shutter. How many people really do that?


----------



## Torus34 (Apr 29, 2006)

David D:

Sure, everyone 'visualizes' before they trip the shutter. But what you are doing is trivializing the process.

One could also say that everyone thinks, but [and you may have to trust me on this one], there is a real difference between thinking about which foot to move next when walking and exploring the epistemological implications of the special theory of relativity [Yes, I've done both.]

But we're now getting away from the original question heading this string: how do we relate philosophy to photography? If I were to attempt a short answer [deep breath], it would be this: our inner view of outer reality is modified by our individual philosophies. In all probability, no two people see reality exactly alike. To the degree that we have purposely shaped a final print to conform to our views, the print has been influenced by our philosophy. Previsualization and darkroom/digital processing are parts of this process.

Colormesilly: hope this helps.  My very best wishes to you in your studies [and photographs.]


----------



## Jeff Canes (Apr 29, 2006)

danalec99 said:
			
		

> Cultivate a relationship with your instincts. And let it be the guide while shooting and post processing.


 
I agree 100% with Daniel on this definition of Philosophy of Photography.


----------



## Irminsul (Apr 29, 2006)

colormesilly said:
			
		

> I'm doing a college paper for my Philosophy class and I wanted to ask others, what their philosophy of photography is. If you have one.
> 
> Thanks to any replies. Also you can leave your name (first or last, or last initial) in case I happen to use your quote, so I can properly credit you.


 
I'm a newbie in this forum but have been around for many, many years.  
By the way, this is my first posting in this forum.  Hello everyone; happy to be here among fellow shutter enthusiasts.

But I digress.  Back to topic.  A long time ago, I read a book by Cartier-Bresson, "Le Moment Decisif."  I believe that it is there that you find the following quote, which encapsulates for me the concept of photography as something that must become instinctive, absorbed by the subconscious.  Part of life itself. so you don't have to think about it.

"The simultaneous recognition, in a fraction of a second, of the significance of an event as well as the precise organization of forms which gives that event its proper expression... . In photography, the smallest thing can be a great subject. The little human detail can become a leitmotif."  Henri Cartier-Bresson

I've chosen yet another Cartier-Bresson quote for my signature.


----------



## 2framesbelowzero (Apr 29, 2006)

colormesilly said:
			
		

> I'm doing a college paper for my Philosophy class and I wanted to ask others, what their philosophy of photography is. If you have one.
> 
> Thanks to any replies. Also you can leave your name (first or last, or last initial) in case I happen to use your quote, so I can properly credit you.


 
it can be hunting without killing - a physical and sensory stimulating activity. it gives me a purpose. it takes me amongst the people and gives
me a way of interacting with an environment. it changes the space-time 
experience of my life. allows me to re-experience places and things over again. the collation of different work juxtaposed is yet another satisfying aspect of photography. i get a buzz out of other peoples successful 'forays' with a camera also. it's a great activity...'a soul journey'. the purpose of existence, time, life on earth is mysterious and a photograph is a uniquely magical momento somehow wrapped up in all of that.


----------



## Dave_D (Apr 29, 2006)

ThomThomsk said:
			
		

> Do you really think so? I'm not at all sure about that. As Torus34 says, it is very difficult to do, and although I had been taking photographs for a long time, I hadn't even heard of it until last year.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes I really think so. Other then a pro in a studio or on location shooting for a client, anyone who uses a camera to capture a moment visualizes to a certain degree. The soccer mom talking pictures of her kid, the tourist at a zoo, Ansel Adams, Quang-Tuan Luong. They all saw something which compelled them to point a camera at something. 



			
				Torus34 said:
			
		

> David D:
> 
> Sure, everyone 'visualizes' before they trip the shutter. But what you are doing is trivializing the process.



I think not. On the contray, the way this discussion has gone has over complicated the process. Let's keep this simple for a moment: The difference between the soccer moms and people who "visualize" is knowledge and technique. The basic concept is still the same. I know this because I too have been there and back. I learned the technical aspects of this concept studying under Alan Ross. I know all about the zone system of pre-visualization and post processing. I try not to get too hung up on the particulars and do what comes natural. For more reference on the philosophical discussion here is a whole forum dedicated to those who opine and ponder that colormesilly and others might enjoy. My particular philosophy of photography is continually evolving.

 __________________


----------



## darin3200 (Apr 30, 2006)

The HCB approach. To capture life.


----------



## Torus34 (Apr 30, 2006)

Irminsul:

Welcome!


----------



## Irminsul (Apr 30, 2006)

Torus34 said:
			
		

> Irminsul:
> 
> Welcome!


 
Thank you for your kind welcome.  I'm very glad To Be Here.


----------



## Mr. Innuendo (Jan 22, 2015)

My philosophy of photography: Shoot more, earn more.

Simple stuff.


----------



## Alexr25 (Jan 22, 2015)

My philosophy is to always look at the date of the thread you are responding to. THIS THREAD IS ALMOST 9 YEARS OLD!!!


----------



## KmH (Jan 22, 2015)

Seems maybe a now banned and deleted spammer dug up some old dried out bones.


----------



## raventepes (Jan 26, 2015)

I have a couple philosophies regarding photography. 

First of all is a no-brainer: 
        "Get it right in-camera"

Photoshop and other media is there for tweaks, but the more you get right when you press your shutter button, the better. It takes a lot of post processing work out of the equation. For typical workflow, I strive to just have to convert from RAW and sharpen a bit with maybe a couple tweeks to the output (using Levels). 

The next one is pretty simple:
          "Photograph emotion"

Photography should convey an emotional response, weather it be something for the photographer him or herself, or to family and friends, and even the general public. This rings true no matter what you're photographing, even if it's a shoe or watch. In product photography, images should have a "I want this" message. While I know they have their place, even studio portraits should have some kind of emotional response, though I know that they often seem fairly robotic in nature. Non-typical portraits are where I love to be, weather it be in-studio, or on location, especially working on wedding portraits. 

Natural photography, weather you're shooting any kind of 'scape, or animals or birds, should bring you to the place and time where you took the picture, and have a sense of awe to them. I strive to compose and capture stunning images that make both myself, and other people wish they had been there to see what I saw through my lens. The same is often true for photojournalism. Take them to that place, weather they would want to be there, or not. Give viewers a sense of what's happening. 

Put my two philosophies together, and you get my general mindset when I'm behind my camera. 

My name, by the way, is Eddy Calhoun.


----------



## Buckster (Jan 26, 2015)

I guess my philosophy of photography is best summed up: "Have fun with it."

Enjoy it in any way that makes you HAPPY.  Shoot whatever kinds of subjects you like.  Explore whatever genres you like.  Shoot film or digital or both.  Edit to the moon and back if you want to, or not at all if that's your bag instead.  Worry less about what others like and prefer and advise, unless what they like and prefer and advise is what you like and prefer as well.

There are plenty of guidelines that you'll get from others along the way regarding what and how and why and when and where THEY think you should do something, but the only REAL rules and limitations are the ones you place on yourself, and that's entirely your decision to do so or not; To limit yourself what others want you to do, or be more carefree and adventurous in your exploration of the medium.

In the end, if you can't find fun, enjoyment, happiness in it - put it behind you and find something else that fulfills you instead.


----------



## Mr. Innuendo (Jan 29, 2015)

Alexr25 said:


> My philosophy is to always look at the date of the thread you are responding to. THIS THREAD IS ALMOST 9 YEARS OLD!!!



Huh, so it is.

But does that somehow mean that the topic is no longer valid? Apparently a couple other people decided it was worthy of comment, so what's the BFD?

Yeah, I don't always look at dates. If a topic interests me, and it's a good discussion point, I'll reply.

If you don't like that, well, that's something you'll just have to work through.


----------



## bribrius (Jan 29, 2015)

i don't care about getting through to a audience. I often don't care about pre visualization. Although i have my moments of semi artistic genius my general sense of it is that it is mostly bullshit. My minds "eye" i would rather turn off in most cases and see things for what they actually are. 

simple.

when i was real little i watched the world outside through a window.
i got a little older and i watched it from out in the yard.
i got a little older again and i watched it go by from the sidewalk.
i got a little older again and i managed to see it in different towns and states.
i got a little older again and i managed to see it outside my country.

The principle purpose of my photography, beyond "family photos".  Is still sitting on that sidewalk or looking out that window as a little boy watching the world go by. And taking a photograph of it.  Reality fascinates me.  while i do some artistic/landscape sort of shots sometimes they really dont mean a damn thing to me.


----------



## Torus34 (Jan 29, 2015)

Another peek into what a photographer does is to contrast it with the work of a painter.  The painter begins with a blank canvas.  He/she then adds to the canvas until he/she's added just enough.  The photographer begins with a view of a big piece of the world and subtracts until what remains is ... just enough.

It's assumed that both the painter and the photographer are attempting to produce a work of some value; that is, a work which 'says' something.  It's perfectly OK with me if that statement's 'Gee, isn't this beautiful?'  Not all of us wish to, or can, plumb the depths of which the medium is capable.


----------



## photoguy99 (Jan 29, 2015)

There's no law that says reality cannot be art, cannot be beautiful, cannot be interesting, cannot be universal. Many of the best photographs are several of these things all at once.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jan 29, 2015)

"A photograph is worth a thousand dollars plus expenses"

I personally believe I'm recording a memory for someone else.  I'm not in the picture. I remember where where they were all shot, but the person in the picture will remember everything about why.

Scott


----------



## Gary A. (Jan 29, 2015)

Shoot, shoot again and when you think you're done for the day ... shoot some more.


----------



## greybeard (Jan 30, 2015)

If it looks good, it is good.


----------

