What do you want to say with the photo?

"Story - The picture has a weak message and therefore seems a bit pointless or it's confusing and therefore hard to understand what it means. What do you want to say with the photo?”

I pulled the above quote off of onexposure.net’s “rejection guidelines” (recent thread). I’ve seen different variations of this – but I think they are basically the same.

This is one of those formulas or rules I struggle to grasp. Do those of you striving for the level of artist in your photography have a story or message in mind when taking a photo? Are you surprised that onexposure has this as one of their guidelines? Or is this an obvious criterion to you? What sorts of stories might a photo tell? What can a photo say?

I have wanted to ask this question for a long time – but it is a difficult one to formulate.



--
Don't worry about making a mistake - - as long as you learn from it.

I try to go for aesthetically pleasing, no stories really.
But sometimes I string a series together for a theme (does that qualify?)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin
so many flowers, so little time sigh
the 'Art' of Aperture: a mini tutorial
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=23460691
http://www.rootminus1.com/freepics/thumbnails.php?album=68
http://www.rootminus1.com/freepics/index.php?cat=10032
http://s33.photobucket.com/albums/d58/theronfamily/

I suppose that it’s possible for a photo to tell a story but darned if I know why this is stated as a criterion for inclusion/rejection by an artistic site. It sounds to me like this is one of those things that judges or reviewers can use to reject something out of hand without having to take the time to do the hard work of explaining why they don’t like the image. “Sorry, I don’t see a story here. Bonk! Rejected!” While I am reasonably certain that some photographer may say something like “Wow! This baby is really going to tell a story” BEFORE she snaps the shutter, I best that the great, great majority don’t. If a photo tells a story it does so retrospectively as a tagline added by someone to something already completed. To the extent a photo packs some type of punch -- emotionally, visually, or even technically – then it is a good picture and “tells a story.” A poor photo does not tell a story because it is a dull photo, not because it doesn’t tell a story; there’s no need to compound rejection.

Here are two photos of mine. The first is positively awful but it tells as much or as little of a story as the second. Now maybe you feel that the second tells a story but that’s because it is a stronger image and you invest your emotions into it when you look at it. Believe it or not, I thought a lot about the first one and carefully planned the shot, which is part of an ambitious project I am working on. I could (and still can) provide an elaborate story for the photo but that doesn’t make it any better. The second photo on the other hand was simply, well was simply shot. A good photo will always say something – a poor one never does.

1. 1

1. 2

I’m sure that you have followed the thread by jkjond in this forum.

dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=28216688

In many ways the issue you raise here is similar to the one discussed there. The search for the “rule” or “formulae” or “guidelines” that will lead to better picture taking is likely to be frustrating or, more likely, counter productive. It seems that you have added, “must tell a story” to “rule or thirds”, etc. on your photographic checklist. The weight of all of these rules is going to crush you girl! Rather than obsess about rules, spend the time taking as many photos as you can (they are really cheap -- this is why digital cameras are so wonderful). Another suggestion (and one mentioned in the jkjond thread) is to back away from reading about photography some and indulge in a bit of Zen! Maybe, to an unknown but great extent, good photographs do not need to be understood or planned, they just are.

--



Please visit my black & white gallery of early work at http://billm.zenfolio.com/p1994685/


My galleries: http://billm.zenfolio.com/

“There is no abstract art. You must always start with something. Afterward you can remove all traces of reality.” – Pablo Picasso (1881-1973)

"I don't have anything to say in any picture. My only interest in photography is to see what something looks like as a photograph. I have no preconceptions."
-Garry Winogrand
He was a pretty good photographer, no?

I think it's bulls--t. I don't like having my pictures held to some higher artistic quest or "vision." Hopefully they look awesome, inspire some kind of feeling, show you something in a new way (or show you something you don't see every day), or maybe they're forgettable and we move on. This "rule" is what happens every time you try to create objective standards to measure something subjective.

Jeri_ said:

"Story - The picture has a weak message and therefore seems a bit
pointless or it's confusing and therefore hard to understand what it
means. What do you want to say with the photo?”

I pulled the above quote off of onexposure.net’s “rejection
guidelines” (recent thread). I’ve seen different variations of this
– but I think they are basically the same.

This is one of those formulas or rules I struggle to grasp. Do those
of you striving for the level of artist in your photography have a
story or message in mind when taking a photo? Are you surprised that
onexposure has this as one of their guidelines? Or is this an
obvious criterion to you? What sorts of stories might a photo tell?
What can a photo say?

I have wanted to ask this question for a long time – but it is a
difficult one to formulate.



--
Don't worry about making a mistake - - as long as you learn from it.

Click to expand...

Dr Bill said:

To the
extent a photo packs some type of punch -- emotionally, visually, or
even technically – then it is a good picture and “tells a story.” A
poor photo does not tell a story because it is a dull photo, not
because it doesn’t tell a story; there’s no need to compound
rejection.

Click to expand...

Agree. We shoot something, maybe we saw a nice situation, we try to get it freezed into a still image. We are succesful, or not. Stories are a consequence, not a condition. And some great images don't tell any story, they are just great images.

I'm a true believer in practice, in all senses. To play the piano well you don't start with the Apassionata, but with book of Anna Magdalena Bach. Same here, begin by shooting simple things well, get exposure right. Focus and the best composition you can think of. Pratcice changing exposure values quickly, and also practice using focus points manually. This is a precondition, IMO, to great photography, at least on a consistent basis.

Dr Bill425415 said:

Another suggestion (and one mentioned in
the jkjond thread) is to back away from reading about photography
some and indulge in a bit of Zen! Maybe, to an unknown but great
extent, good photographs do not need to be understood or planned,
they just are.

Click to expand...

I have a couple of Haiku books which I carry around. Short japanese poetry is something close to photography. Zen is about subleties, good art is also about that. Developing a sense for that will always help.

--
Regards, Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/11435304@N04

Story, sometimes the components of a shot will tell a story, but not a requirement for me.

Point of interest, this is what i tend to consider, sometimes you see a nice scene and just shoot, but on review it is all over the place, which leads to a quick look and an mmmm. so try and think about what attracts you to a scene / shot and compose so that you highlight that part of the shot.

I think this is what many shots lack, or they have so many that the shot is too busy / confusing.

--
Gerry,
http://gerryd.smugmug.com/ discount code on homepage

Dr Bill said:

Another suggestion (and one mentioned in
the jkjond thread) is to back away from reading about photography
some and indulge in a bit of Zen! Maybe, to an unknown but great
extent, good photographs do not need to be understood or planned,
they just are.

Click to expand...

Yup, I'd say Dr Bill makes a lot of good points here, and I particularly like his summing up.

I would need to go out and examine my motives to try to give any meaningful answer to this one. Much as I like a photo with a story or a message I think my real motivation is spontaneity. I like to go out with one lens and react to things when I see them. I'm capturing relationships between elements, but not looking for a story, maybe a mood.

What a photographer or artist says, and what a viewer hears are two different things. I know I read things into images which I doubt were intended - and I know I am deaf to an awful lot. Rundadar is excellent at picking up emotions which I don't possess.

But as Dr Bill says - rules of composition plus the baggage of storytelling - drop it all, free yourself of all the burdens and just go out there an react. Ask yourself what interests you in a subject and look for an optimum angle to express it without getting bogged down with subplots and all that.

The other approach is to get a quest, become an expressive artist who is trying to change the world, but don't expect everyone to understand what you are trying to say.

'I sometimes feel that I have nothing to say and I want to communicate this' Damien Hirst

I'll add my 2c to it.

But then, on a second thought, I don't have much to add to what Dr. Bill (and Renato and John and Eric) already wrote...

My only advice would be - forget the rules, you'll acquire your own rules with practice. They will be YOUR rules and so would be really useful.

As for the 'story' - it's not a GOAL (doesn't work!). It's a RESULT. A result of allowing your thoughts and emotions to get into your photo's (no need to do anything 'special' for that either, just don't restrict yourself emotionally).

And, one other thing. CONSCIOUS effort does wonders. In any field.

You raise some truly interesting questions on this often rather technical forum. Great!
--
Cheers,

Alex Glickman

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rundadar/
http://rundadar.smugmug.com

rundadar said:

And, one other thing. CONSCIOUS effort does wonders. In any field.

Click to expand...

I've been thinking about this one (consciously).

I don't think the person who takes my photos is the same person as the one who displays them.

I'm not sure if I should add this next line - where I agree that conscious effort does wonders in any field, it is how you direct the conscious that makes the difference. Misdirected conscious effort is counter productive.

Go an listen to 'I'm free' by The Who.

Member said:

I'm not sure if I should add this next line - where I agree that
conscious effort does wonders in any field, it is how you direct the
conscious that makes the difference.

Click to expand...

Member said:

Misdirected conscious effort is counter productive.

Click to expand...

"Misdirected conscious effort" is an oxymoron. Or at least it is in the context of my personal definition of the word 'conscious'. BEEING conscious is a very difficult thing, of course, but when one is - the effort can't be misdirected. Your consciousness simply won't allow it.

In the wise words of a friend of mine: "deep sh*t, that!"

Member said:

Go an listen to 'I'm free' by The Who.

Click to expand...

By the who?! Anyways - consciousness + integrity = freedom.

--
Cheers,

Alex Glickman

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rundadar/
http://rundadar.smugmug.com

rundadar said:

rundadar said:

I'm not sure if I should add this next line - where I agree that
conscious effort does wonders in any field, it is how you direct the
conscious that makes the difference.

Click to expand...

rundadar said:

Misdirected conscious effort is counter productive.

Click to expand...

"Misdirected conscious effort" is an oxymoron. Or at least it is in
the context of my personal definition of the word 'conscious'.

Click to expand...

Now if we all argued on the strengths of our personal definitions we'd be in for a long day (see various other threads in this forum).

However, I have looked up your personal definition and have to hand it to you.

rundadar said:

BEEING
conscious is a very difficult thing, of course, but when one is - the
effort can't be misdirected. Your consciousness simply won't allow it.

In the wise words of a friend of mine: "deep sh*t, that!"

Click to expand...

A wise man/woman/animal/spirit

rundadar said:

rundadar said:

Go an listen to 'I'm free' by The Who.

Click to expand...

By the who?! Anyways - consciousness + integrity = freedom.

--
Cheers,

Alex Glickman

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rundadar/
http://rundadar.smugmug.com

Click to expand...

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/leechypics/

Make your own mind up - there are no rules in this game.

For me it's not so much the telling of a story that is important but rather having the freedom and range of emotional feeling and expression that allows you to express your feelings in a photograph.

For me as a typical middle aged 'give-nothing-away-inbusiness' male (I'm 47 this week this was and is the single biggest barrier to developing my photography further.

Ian
http://ianbramham.aminus3.com/
http://photo.net/photos/ian.bramham

Jeri_ said:

"Story - The picture has a weak message and therefore seems a bit
pointless or it's confusing and therefore hard to understand what it
means. What do you want to say with the photo?”

Click to expand...

I read so many books on photography that mention that same phrase and sometimes I still have no clue of what the author means. To me a photograph is an artistic representation of what I perceive as beauty. It doesn't have to say anything. What of abstract art ? Does it really say something ? Perhaps not but I can still appreciate it.

I'll grant that photographs that stir my emotions are the most powerful but most of the time a photograph does not "talk" to me. I like it because I find it beautiful.

--
http://www.pbase.com/michelfleury

There is a major exception to what I have said and ironically it is my argument divided by negative one: food and product photography are both carefully planned, choreographed and executed to tell a story.

--



Please visit my black & white gallery of early work at http://billm.zenfolio.com/p1994685/


My galleries: http://billm.zenfolio.com/

“There is no abstract art. You must always start with something. Afterward you can remove all traces of reality.” – Pablo Picasso (1881-1973)

I would like to thank everyone for responding. I think I am frustrating some of you with my questions and concerns. I don’t mean to do that – you have all been so nice and very helpful. I think perhaps a good deal of what I struggle with is second nature to many of you. I suspect that a lot of that comes from experience – which I can earn. I worry a good deal of it comes from something more that I will for ever lack.

We often discuss the difference between a snap shot and (what is the correct term here? I’ll call it art) art. There are many differences, but I think that one is going out with the goal of producing something that has a message. Anyone can pick up a camera and record their family’s events. But an artist records so much more. Soooo – if I find myself with a few hours this Saturday to head out with my camera – do I head to an area I “think” may produce some nice shots? There is a beautiful valley that is often used for filming commercials because it is so picturesque. So, I can surely head to that area. Then what? Drive around until I see something that I “think” might make a nice shot? And then try to breathe some life into it?

It sounds like most of you just head out and take pictures of what ever catches your interest while out. I think you then apply your individually honed talents in capturing the shot. That’s probably a good place to start. There is a particular fence and gate in this valley that has always caught my attention. It is unique. Perhaps trying to capture this fence/gate in a way that forces the viewer to appreciate its uniqueness might be a fun exercise. Am I over thinking this? Probably…

I’ve had my camera for a couple of months now and very few of my photos have my family in them – none include my pets. I think that is very telling.

--
Don't worry about making a mistake - - as long as you learn from it.

Don't worry about making a mistake - - even if you don't learn from it.

I'm coming to the conclusion that you think too much. You need to just get out there and start pressing buttons. Start to find out what works for you. Start to explore the possibilities.

Do you know there is a law about not photographing your family? You have to do it. You don't have to post any, you don't even have to pp any, but you do need to photograph them.

Get out there an photograph that fence - photograph clouds, anything you like and lots you don't like - just get out there and do it.

I'm not going to comment on any more of your posts until I see some evidence. How about that?

One thing you got dead right - not photographing pets. I can appreciate that.

It's both very simple and very difficult at the same time... YOU KNOW what touches you emotionally (or perhaps intellectually). In other words, suppose you could 'magically' produce any kind of photo/photos at will. Then, those photos would be photos of...? Nature? The Fence? Fire-fighters? Ruined buildings? Sunsets? Smiling people? Crying babies?... Well - YOU know the answer.

Now, all you need to do is go where those photos 'live' and take them. That's the difficult part. It won't work at first, it will be frustrating, your emotion that you were experiencing when photographing those things/people/events etc. won't show... But then it will get better. And better. And better...

Nothing artificial about it. Nothing objective. No rules. Pure YOU.

That's all there IS to it.

Good luck.
--
Cheers,

Alex Glickman

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rundadar/
http://rundadar.smugmug.com

rundadar said:

As for the 'story' - it's not a GOAL (doesn't work!). It's a RESULT.

Click to expand...

This just clicked in my head and a light bulb switched on.
Excellent statemtent. So simple, yet so genius.
--

--

Conscious effort:

I like that. Part of it is my "practice it!", which prepares one to deliver when the opportunity shows up.

But it goes much beyond that, for it includes the relevant idea of going out with some idea of waht to do (even if it turns out completely different from expectations).

But John also talkes from another aspect of art: the unexpected, the sensibility to see what one never thought was there, the creative insight at the spur of the moment.

So, my summa of this: conscious effort + creative insight.

(my English is below my thoughts here, sorry for that, hope you two help with the proper words)
--
Regards, Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/11435304@N04