Let’s begin with a CAVEAT: This is entry is NOT intended to be a commentary on the aesthetic quality of the picture-maker’s work. Rather, it is about the manner in which he worked.
I RECENTLY CAME ACROSS A BLOG WITH AN ENTRY titled “The Anatomy Of A Photographic Failure” wherein the author suggests that “showing our failures can be just as important as showing our successful images” cuz “Failures can be used to teach effectively.” an idea that I have no problem with … keeping in mind, of course, that there’s no success like failure but failure is no success at all.
In any event, my take on the entry is that while the author points out a whole host of technique / technical failures with his pictures resulting in that, in his words, “…. they just don’t look pleasing at all to me.”
A statement to which I say, ”No shit Sherlock.”
I mean, how the hell can one expect to respond to a picture making opportunity with spontaneity and feeling when one’s mind is flooded with thoughts technical. To wit ….
I had the Fujifilm X100VI and the wide angle conversion lens, effectively giving me a 28mm field of view. Wider would have been better for some shots. But the 28mm was all I had with me … It was extremely bright outside and relatively poorly lit inside so I know that making a single exposure toward the front of the restaurant would be pushing the dynamic range of the sensor about as far as practical—maybe too far. So, I set bracketing to 5 photos, 1 stop apart. …. I shot handheld, aperture priority with Auto ISO. I used both f/5.6 and f/8. A wider aperture would have been better to reduce the ISO but at the distances I was photographing getting most everything in focus required a deeper depth of field. The interior photos were exposed at ISOs from 250-8000. Also, I set the camera for “Natural Live View” to simulate an optical viewfinder so as to have the best representation of actual dynamic range and best exposure rather than have it artificially modified by a film simulation. I use the Natural Live View feature extensively in all my cameras that have this kind of feature as I get a much better idea of highlight clipping and best exposure settings.
iMo, working within the framework of this mode of thought is akin to trying to master a dance step without listening to the music. So, if there’s a failure to be noted in this “teaching” experience, it is about what not to do–an idea not mentioned in the author’s entry. Or, to quote Edward Weston:
“To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
A quote in which Weston was strongly implying that artistic vision should feel natural and instinctive, not forced by rigid formulas / techniques, i.e., an artist should focus on seeing the subject strongly and clearly rather than worrying about strict technical guidelines and techniques.
iMo, if one wishes to avoid the “failures” experienced by the author, the lesson to be learned here is not as the author suggests in his entry summary;
“I should have been more prolific with my bracketed shots to ensure a higher level of success in capturing my intended images. Additionally, instead of five exposures, 1 stop apart, I could have tried three exposures 2 stops apart …. to raise my chance of success.”
WRONG. Apparently, the author thinks, as is common amongst many “serious” amateurs, that more and “better” techniques–and dare is write, more and “better” gear–is the path to more picture making success. Ya know, going deeper down the rabbit hole of technique / gear on the road to nowhere. Whereas, iMo+experience, keeping it simple–both gear and an open, receptive mind–is the way to go.
(aesthetic) ADDENDUM: in his entry the author asserts that “Shooting through the scratched plexiglass was a failed experiment.” I disagree. To my eye and sensibilities–disregarding the lousy blend of the bracketing technique–this is a wonderful picture. Or, with proper processing–forget the blending crap–it could be a very visually interesting picture that could hold my attention for a considerable amount of time. And, it’s the “distraction” of the marred plexiglass that is one of the visual highlights that helps separate this picture from mundane documentation–it gives the picture a sense of reality and character. Hell, I might even hang it on my wall.
