"What's the whole point of taking pictures?"

Sometimes it's nothing more than just having fun faffing about with a camera for its own sake, and taking pictures is the perfect excuse to do so.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
So do I.

What I don't , is why I see non related to specific Leica M11- subforum thread like this.
I have noticed it at LUF as well.

Is it due to addressing it to specific, Leica M owners ¿
Click to expand...
You are right, maybe a mod could move it somewhere more logical.
It ended up here as I responded to a posting on this forum.
 
I'm a 'visual person' (confirmed by a exercise I had to undertake over two days a long time ago - I could have saved them the effort as I already knew) so I enjoy hunting for compositions as I observe my surroundings. Many I leave well alone but some I record as I see fit. I like the 'reality' photographs portray (ignore digital imagery, its not photography).
 
Listening to what other people say can be an enriching experience.
Thank you, guys. And a girl?
 
This is not a rare question :), but worth to be answered again and again.

Garry Winograd has answer for it which is famous quote of his.
I'm on the same side on this one.
Plus, I think, he really liked the process most. Not just seeing how it looks like to be photographed.
I'm also on same page. And I on same page with Winogrand to take pictures with M, it is easy and pleasure.

But. As I have mentioned before for same question. Born in USSR, it is gone, Russia keeps on changing dramatically (several times since 1985), Canada where I spend twenty years is not the same country anymore. Here is no Christmas concerts at schools anymore, for example.
And now I'm in Belgium.
I came in 2023 November and they started to destroy industrial buildings. I really appreciated it, they were obviously wafting for me to photograph it before it is gone. And Liege tram v2 disaster. Could be done more sufficient and faster, but they knew I'm coming to photograph it. So they made it as dramatic as possible.

These days, it makes sense to photograph things, live, traditions, architecture which you see, but often they are not here for long, anymore.
 
I was born in 1955.

Owning a Television was still a luxury. Listening to the radio and reading books was the norm. There was one more special treat in our house and that was looking at photo albums. In our family we had a few photo albums that we looked at over and over again. We looked at them so much that my mother had to constantly remount the photos on the pages. My father had a Kodak Brownie camera; a mysterious black box that we would hold with reverence. My father wasn’t an artistic person but in those days taking family pictures wasn’t about creativity, it was an obligation.

I didn’t own a camera until I was in my early twenties. There was no passing down of the camera from father-to-son ritual (we weren't that kind of father & son), I was in the Navy on the other side of the world from my parents when I bought a Konica T3 SLR and started taking pictures… to send home for my mother to include in the family photo album. I felt that this was my obligation.

Somewhere along the way the feeling of obligation turned into a feeling of artistic creativity. It was a long journey from then to now. My approach to photography has changed a lot over the years. Now my parents are gone, and I'm a retiree that goes out almost everyday to try and create pictures that are interesting, compelling, nicely composed, and… well the kind of images that would look good in a family photo album that future generations would enjoy looking at.

Other than that, I have no idea why I’m addicted to photography.

All the best,
Mike
 
It’s a great question but I haven’t got the foggiest rational explanation for the reason. All I can say is that I’m taking less now so maybe the addiction is better controlled, and it’s doing wonders for controlling GAS.
PS I’m glad I’m not doing photography for a living, what we call being a professional.
 
Last edited:
AndyCapp said:
How I read this: Learning to see and sharing your point of view with people who resonate.
I have never understood the "having something to say" part. Could you elaborate on what it means for you?
Click to expand...

It's more that we are only complete in the eyes of the 'other'. I can make a photo (staged, arranged, awaited) or I can take a photo (snapped in the right place at the right time) and in both cases, my expression is only complete in the eye of the Other who will view it. I'm not great at explaining this - but I recommend Totality and Infinity by Emmanuel Levinas.

Having something to say is just the soul-searching of my photography. We use our voice to speak, or pen/keyboard to write words, structured with grammar to create sentences that convey meaning, an opinion, a question etc. With photography I'd like to say something with the framing (what I include), the composition (how I 'stage' what's in the frame), the light play, showing/freezing motion and so on. All that is vocabulary and grammar - I'd like it to have meaning, to say something.

It's dense at best, sorry ! :)
 
nightlight said:
"My expression is only complete in the eye of the Other who will view it."
Click to expand...
You might not believe it, but I do see what you mean. Information becomes meaningful only if it is decoded and resynthesized by the recipient.
It is a process. Most humans find pleasure in deciphering visual hints into something real, which might be why impressionists have such an enthusiastic following.
Am I completely wrong when I hear that you want to bring order into chaos with your vision?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That was me who asked that silly question of Mr Capp. It wasn't really meant to be serious or snarky or intellectually deep.

Anyone here old enough to remember Harry Nilsson and his album and/or the movie "The Point"? It was about Oblio the child born pointless in a world of pointy-headed people. I was kinda thinking of that at the time--the circular nature of making a point of something pointless.

But, as Uncle Harry told us, you don't have to have a point to have a point. Confused?

My point of photography is pretty much to verify my vision of the things I see. Most recently I haven't been very successful at this. Like JohnWolf said above, I'm also in an existential crisis--I'm dried up of fresh vision and motivation. I'll get over it eventually. At any rate, I take pictures of what looks interesting to see if it's as interesting as I think it is. (And, again, round and round we go.)
 
Retro-Grouch said:
But what is "fun"? Another rabbit-hole question! ;)
Click to expand...

Not at all. But what is fun for you may not be fun for me. Some folks like to play golf, some do not. Some sail, some do not. We each define our own "fun" and that is our right as individuals. Some folks like to take pictures and some do not. This has become so overly coplicated. I enjoy taking photographs so I do it. Simple, isn't it? If I did not enjoy taking photographs I would not. .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top