Do you ever go through cycles of comfort and then discomfort with what you know — or think you know? The last few weeks have thrown me for a bit of a loop.
I attribute this in part to the opportunity to shoot with a partner the last while, something which for me is normally a solitary experience. It’s more than the company in shooting however, it’s also in the discussions afterwards. The debrief, the successes, the failures. It’s forcing me to look at my experiences (my photographs) differently. Having to explain them to someone else forces me to put into words what I was feeling, thinking, and experiencing when I captured the image. And that has had a big effect on the images I am selecting and how I am treating them.
Very recently I was discussing part of my workflow with a colleague. Explaining that normally after I return from a day of shooting I promptly put the images files away and do my best not to touch them again for several weeks. The logic being that having the experiences so fresh in my head some how clouds objective judgement when selecting keepers. That when I look at the image I’m not actually seeing the pixels on the screen but instead am revisiting the much more vivid memories in my head.
I am very seriously starting to rethink this now. I’m reading a book by David duChemin. In it he offers a new take on the traditional view of what can and should be done to an image post capture. He speaks of Vision and Voice. He presents the idea that the point of a photograph shouldn’t be to represent the scene with pixel by pixel accuracy, but rather it should ultimately convey the photographers experience in being there, his or her vision. Something which can sometimes be quite different from what the camera initially captures.
The picture above, in it’s finished state, is not an accurate representation of the image I pulled off my memory card a few days ago. But I do believe it “accurately” conveys the mood of the situation I stood in, that evening just before sunset. It represents my experience of the place. The monolithic nature of the rocks. Glaciation. Change on a scale of time and force difficult to conceive. The relative insignificance of the supposed main attraction, the lighthouse. To call it the truth or a lie I leave to you but I’m pretty sure this is how I’m going to approach things going forward.
More on David duChemin here.