Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/11/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Dan Cardish wrote: <<You talk about the reflexes needed for "real documentary photojournalism". What does that have to do with anything? Every photographic field has specialized requirements. A wedding photographer requires social skills that the vast majority of photographers don't possess. Does that mean that wedding photography is "much more important and impressive than portrature"? Of course not. Nor is the converse true, by the way. A landscape photographer doesn't even have to say anything to his subject. He just has to stick his camera up at the right time and snap the shutter. If it doesn't come out right, he only has to come back the next day, and try it again. I guess that makes Ansel Adam's work unimportant and unimpressive.>> <<Environmental portraits are obviously extremely difficult to do. Look at how the environmental portraits of someone of the stature of HCB were so thoroughly trashed on the LUG just a month or two ago. If he can't get it right, what hope is there for the rest of us? >> I'm not sure whether to play with the words fact and opinion here. I do think that Dan's point is essentially valid. The issue here is which requires more skill, is more difficult, harder to pull off, whatever similar insertion one refers to... The above is more of a defense of photography in its various applications and not necessarily referring to 'environmental' portraits' If anything its an argument against any one 'specialty' requiring more practice and skill. I shoot streets, because they're everywhere and so is my camera. I shoot 'scenics' because, well it's hard not to! Whatever it is it is a snapshot with no setup. Often people assume that a photo I've taken took time which is usually not the case. I'd hate to classify my photography as it wouldn't be very coherent, but it's street photography if anything. I'd also hate to pat myself on the back-but I don't consider any of it difficult at all. I'm usually surprised that it works (the gear wouldn't apply here). Others may, at the end of the day have less (or more of course) appealing/interesting shots. This person may be a wedding photographer or studio portrait (...I'm not sure I even understand what 'environmental portraiture' is! I've taken portraits in the environment! I said hey...smile! that's posed) photographer and although I don't find this stuff fun I can say without doubt that I will avoid this stuff at all costs. If I'd do a wedding, I'd get sued. Give me umbrellas and I will take pictures of them. So it's not more difficult or more important to be a street guy/gal - imagine if weddings had no photographers! Or all celebrities portraits with noctilux! It's not my thing and I'd be caught defending the guy without the tripod shooting spontaneously. It's easier for me as well so it really does come down to opinions. And its not primarily a matter of 'training' (that advertising is more 'complex'...) it's something you can do well or not so well. Practice doesn't make perfect, as one is always practicing and is never perfect. One's photography can just as easily;y go downhill.