bob parrish Offline Image Upload: Off
|
p.1 #1 · Impressions about "Impressions" | |
I started lurking here about a year or so ago after getting the bug to start shooting again. I used to shoot quite a bit 25 or more years ago. Once in awhile I even got published. I put it away after trying to make a living on photography alone. I found that my passion diminished with the need to make a buck. One night at about 3:00 in the morning, after finally lighting an espresso cart well enough to use the shot in a brochure I realized that I was much happier taking portraits of people I found interesting and that taking pictures of “things” was making me unhappy.
That was the last picture I took for years. I sold all of my gear and bought a point and shoot to document my daughters growing up and was content.
About a year and a half ago I got the bug again, invested moderately in some gear and am happily shooting away when I get the opportunity and find people I find interesting and willing to be my subject.
I’m having a great time.
I’m having a great time here too. I’ve had to re-learn how to shoot, how to see light, how to try and remember the myriad of little details that end up in a picture. I’ve had to learn the ways of digital, (well sort of, I’m still struggling) and I’ve had to try and learn how to properly expose and develop a digital negative. This forum has been an invaluable resource. There are, on any given day, a veritable smorgasbord of excellent images to see, read about, and learn from.
More than anything else, I am enjoying the “Impressions” threads that Steadyhand has started. I feel they are important because they include an essential element for the viewing experience. Context.
I believe portraiture is dependent on context in order to grasp the goal of the photographer and to know if that goal was achieved. In other words, as Steady has asked so many times, “What is the intent of the image?” Knowing the intent lets the viewer participate more fully when viewing the image. Was the intent achieved? I think that sometimes the “intent” is achieved magnificently even with images that are technically, marginal at best.
Here is an example:
I took this picture a few months ago of a couple here at the restaurant. It’s out of focus. It’s so noisy that you can see only enough detail to figure out what it is. The color balance is crappy. From a technical point of view it’s a disaster. I quickly printed a 4x6 copy and gave it to their daughter. She has it framed and hanging in her home.

Here’s the story.
The couple are in their mid eighties. Neither is doing very well. The lady has been in a wheelchair for the past 4 years and her husband’s health is failing as well. The have been married for almost 60 years. Several times that night as I visited the table I noticed that they were always holding hands so I asked if I could take their picture.
The gave me a big smile and the picture above is the result.
Okay, now you know the context. Does knowing the context make the picture different? Better? Worse?
I know for sure that a lot of the stellar advertising images we see would not be seen as quite so stellar if it were not for the context of the ad. I think the same holds true more often than not in portraiture.
A big thank you for anybody that read all of this.
This is a great forum.
Bob
|