A picture not taken

R

Roger Hicks

Mentor
Local time
6:07 AM
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
23,920
How often have you seen something that would make a meaningful photograph, at least to you, and then consciously decided not to take it, because the memory would be worth more than the photograph? Or (perhaps) because you weren't sure you could get the picture you really wanted?

To use a somewhat pretentious metaphor, taking a picture is a bit like Schroedinger's Cat: the picture collapses the waveform, and shows you exactly what is happening. Until you open the box/ take the picture, the possibilities are far wider.

Are pictures inferior to memories? If so, why do we take them?

There's a (free) essay about this at https://www.patreon.com/rogerandfrances . You don't have to read it in order to answer the questions, but you might find that it gives you some ideas. Sorry about the structure of the Patreon site but it doesn't take long to navigate and right now (Thursday 19th April) it's the newest piece there.

Those who object to my linking to free material on my various sites are advised simply not to click on the link. As I say, you don't need to, just to think about/ answer the questions given above.

Cheers,

R.
 
I don't photograph to memorialize memories... I let my wife do that and I'm content with her snaps. I'm only interested in photography as art personally.
 
jsrockit said:
I don't photograph to memorialize memories... I let my wife do that and I'm content with her snaps. I'm only interested in photography as art personally.
Click to expand...
Indeed. But photography is not the only art. And sometimes, "art" is not worth the film it's recorded on.

By the latter, I'm not saying that there's any absolute standard for "art". I'm just suggesting that sometimes, letting an idea ferment in our memories can be worth more than taking a picture. That's where the "art" of photography can be well served by not taking a picture; by learning without shooting. As I say, a picture would have "collapsed the waveform".

If I wanted an "art" version of the image described in the essay, I think I'd pretty much have to reconstruct it with a professional model, or at least with a model who knew she was being photographed; and the "reconstruction" would owe at least as much to what I describe in the essay as to what was there that afternoon. In fact, it might be quite an interesting short series to construct; but probably more hassle than it's worth.

Cheers,

R.
 
The times I have decided against a photo have typically been out of a sense that taking one at that particular moment would not be respectful. Nothing to do with whether to memorialize or the worthiness of the envisioned photo as art.
 
MCTuomey said:
The times I have decided against a photo have typically been out of a sense that taking one at that particular moment would not be respectful. Nothing to do with whether to memorialize or the worthiness of the envisioned photo as art.
Click to expand...
Dear Mike,

Yes, another good reason. And one that was far from irrelevant in the word-picture described.

A further thought. Do you find that you have become more respectful/ sensitive as you have grown older? I certainly have. I don't think I've photographed a tramp since my 20s (though "the homeless" today are not the same as the "tramps" of 40 years ago). But the girl in the picture I didn't take was probably 11, with the vast majority (one hopes) of her life in front of her. There are clearly different kinds of respect or sensibility.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Are pictures inferior to memories? If so, why do we take them?
Click to expand...

If anything, I trust my pictures more than i trust my memory. My memory tends to idealise or play down something i heard/saw/experienced depending on how i feel, a picture is more unambiguous, once fixed on paper it is what it is. I would not not take a picture out of fear of not matching my fantasy about it (although i might be disappointed if it is less of what i expected it to be).
 
I often not photograph everything memorizable. I memorize strange things and often.
Then I was teen my relative told me what I look around like I'm taking the pictures...
I often not take photos, but drawn into observation. I have camera on me, ready, but I'm so drawn in observation...

I never sure if I could get the picture I really wanted. Some memorable things I observe require my close presence to get the picture I really wanted. Like 20mm lens (which I don't even have) at one meter distance.
Those who are able to do it this are recognized as successful street and documentary photographers.

To summarize, many of the memorizable and meanful things I see are not taken by me, because I'm astonished with observation or I'm not confident to get close.


For inner side, with digital image taking I become very dedicated to take family moments. Before this, we did it on video, but film was few rolls per year.
Film only era for me was 99% of taking it into memory, too lazy to take it on film :).
I never learned film photography because process was to cumbersome to me. Only in 2012 I finally did, because I learned with digital what ISO, aperture and shutter speed are...
 
p.giannakis said:
If anything, I trust my pictures more than i trust my memory. My memory tends to idealise or play down something i heard/saw/experienced depending on how i feel, a picture is more unambiguous, once fixed on paper it is what it is. I would not not take a picture out of fear of not matching my fantasy about it (although i might be disappointed if it is less of what i expected it to be).
Click to expand...
Dear Pan,

Indeed. There are many reasons. Or are they excuses? And how do we disentangle them? That's why I wanted as many reactions as possible. Thanks.

Cheers,

R.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I often not photograph everything memorizable. I memorize strange things and often.
. . .
Click to expand...
Exactly. Should we all do this more often? And, of course, what is "memorizable"? How do we memorize things? Why? Are we as honest with ourselves as you appear to be in your post? There are always more questions than answers; except, perhaps, for those that are scared of both questions and answers.

Cheers,

R.
 
Lately I find myself choosing to be a participant rather than the observer of my life. Not sure if this is due to where I find myself in this journey now that I am experiencing some significant health issues, (currently awaiting a liver transplant). This has rearranged my priorities & altered my perspective. Facing your mortality can be very sobering yet driven by this I have found a new freedom of expression. I find that I embrace the opportunity of sharing in the moment whether be a simple conversation or my efforts to capture these on film...
 
When I don't take pictures it's usually because of my slothfulness.

But I don't do photos for memory's sake, although many times a photo will stir up memories associated with the moment, subject or place. I like creating art even if no one else other than myself might ever appreciate it. Mainly I'm just muddling through, using a camera to gain some sense of accomplishment while I do so.
 
Two things. First, I used to photograph motor racing. There is a huge market for "crash pics" in motor racing. I wouldn't shoot them. The idea of making money off of someone's pain and suffering, and possibly death, really rubbed me the wrong way.

Second, I definitely photograph certain things to memorialize them, for myself. Grew up in a weird situation where as a child parents all around me were dying, including one of my own. By the time I was 13, the mom next door had died, the mom across the street had died, the dad across the street had died, and my own father had died. In a strange way, a part of photography for me has always been trying to hang on to things, particularly people.

So there you go.

Best,
-Tim
 
I read your story and enjoyed it, and you make a good point. I like my snapshots, but I also like my shots that are really just ego builders.
 
Roger Hicks said:
How often have you seen something that would make a meaningful photograph, at least to you, and then consciously decided not to take it, because the memory would be worth more than the photograph? Or (perhaps) because you weren't sure you could get the picture you really wanted?
Click to expand...
No to the first question. I can't say the thought ever crossed my mind. Yes to the second question. If I can't get the photograph I want, I don't take it. Why would I?
 
ptpdprinter said:
No to the first question; yes to the second.
Click to expand...

Been there: done that; or perhaps, failed to do that, or chosen to do that. The question is this (and it is far from simple): why do we take, or not take, pictures? Yes and no may suffice for the forum; but I at least find it hard not to think about why we give those answers. Hence the essay.

Cheers,

R.
 
Timmyjoe said:
Two things. First, I used to photograph motor racing. There is a huge market for "crash pics" in motor racing. I wouldn't shoot them. The idea of making money off of someone's pain and suffering, and possibly death, really rubbed me the wrong way.

Second, I definitely photograph certain things to memorialize them, for myself. Grew up in a weird situation where as a child parents all around me were dying, including one of my own. By the time I was 13, the mom next door had died, the mom across the street had died, the dad across the street had died, and my own father had died. In a strange way, a part of photography for me has always been trying to hang on to things, particularly people.

So there you go.

Best,
-Tim
Click to expand...
Dear Tim,

Thank you. This is an important point that I addressed only obliquely in the essay. My own childhood and adolescence was ceaseless change. How far do I try to "freeze" things with photography?

Cheers,

R.
 
What I believe is meaningful and what I photograph naturally has changed over the years. Today what I feel to be meaningful includes a much large range of subjects, situations, etc. and in a twist I tend to be more selective about what ends up on film.

Memory seemingly being at the whim of advanced age maybe it's not surprising that I now tend to photograph images that resonate with some aspect of my youth and/or themes that I photographed when I was younger. Sometimes repeating what I remember about what I liked...

Within an ethical framework I can't think of a subject that I wouldn't photograph, but there are some situations where I wouldn't share the photo or share it selectively.
 
To mynikonF2 and dogman: sorry, it's well gone midnight. I'm too tired to reply to everyone, even though your points are well worthy of exploration.

Cheers,

R.
 
I deeply regret not photographing some of the events in my life or my loved ones because I didn't want to disturb the "flow" of the event or I because I wasn't familiar enough with the camera to get a shot off in a timely way. (Just writing the later says something about the number of times I have switched camera systems.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top