[Leica] Damn... what did Dorothea mean? - was Lenswork

[Jim Hemenway <jim@hemenway.com>]

Hello Dante:

I interpret her remark to mean that if we go do something as mundane as
going to a drugstore, instead of standing on a corner, (that is, go do
anything!) then we'll have a better chance of shooting more interesting
pictures. 

Maybe she was trying to tell him nicely that his pictures back then
weren't interesting enough.  We don't know what his pictures, (those
which he showed her back then) looked like... were they just the
snapshots of a novice photographer?  

For example, I remember taking pictures of things that had interesting
elements, (to me anyway) when I began photography in my teens, (1950s). 
I lived in the city and took pictures of buses, pieces of rope, stones,
cars parked in front of homes, trees, details of the tire treads on a
truck, etc. I now know that these pictures were terrible in terms of
composition, but at the time I was just documenting things that I saw. I
was mesmerized by the ability to capture details of things onto film.

These old pictures of mine didn't have any "point of departure" for
anyone who viewed them.  Nobody who looked at them saw anything of
value, just snapshots of "things."  I see this type of picture generated
a lot by beginning photographers... but not all beginning photogs.

>>>Everybody simply assumed that Dorothea Lange's advice was from the point of view of the photographer - when taking the picture - perhaps even Gibson did. <<<

Perhaps...  But it doesn't matter, because in the time since, he has
produced some great photographs which work well for the viewer.

I don't think that it's the point of view of the photographer so much as
a point of view, (or point of departure) provided by the photographer
for the viewer... in order for the viewer to understand the
photographer's vision or statement.

I think that we all have a feeling for those of us on the LUG who
produce the best pictures. Some of these Luggers post every week.  Look
at the ones that you like and find the "point of departure." Then let
your eyes travel around the picture until you return to the starting
point.

I submit that the pictures which garner the most praise are those which
have, (among other things) a strong point of departure and return.

Try this with a photo that you don't like all that much. There's a good
chance that you'll find that if there is a point of departure, that most
of the time your eyes will travel off of the photo to one of the edges
of the picture... that it'll seem awkward for your eyes to then travel
back to the starting point.

But what do I know?   I wasn't there.

Jim - http://www.hemenway.com



DFangon@aol.com wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim.
> 
> Thank you very much for your post.  You may have solved the puzzle for me.
> Everybody simply assumed that Dorothea Lange's advice was from the point of
> view of the photographer - when taking the picture - perhaps even Gibson did.
>  What you are saying is that the "point of departure" is in the photograph
> itself, perhaps even from the viewer's point of view, not the photographer's.
> 
> But, and this is a big but, how do you reconcile your thesis with Ms. Lange's
> own explanation of what she meant by "point of departure?"  In the Lenswork
> Gibson interview, he asked Ms. Lange what she meant and her cryptic answer
> was: "  Well, if you go down to the drugstore to buy toothpaste, the
> possibility of encountering a serious event is far greater than if you just
> stand on the street corner waiting for something to happen."
> 
> Dante
> 
> In a message dated 11/11/02 4:56:55 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> Jim@hemenway.com writes:
> 
> << I've been reading this thread and differ with most.
> 
>  I think that she meant that the photographer didn't have a good place in
>  his photograph(s) for the viewer to begin looking at the picture in
>  hand.
> 
>  Look at any great photo or painting and find the element that draws your
>  eye first.  Then let your eyes travel around the picture until you've
>  finished seeing everything.  You should end up at the first element.
> 
>  Now, find some pictures, (we all have a few) which don't seem to "look
>  right." I submit that in pictures with a poor composition, that there
>  isn't a single element which draws your eye first... a point of
>  departure for the viewer to use to look at the rest of the picture. I
>  see a lot of split compositions in some folk's PAWS, and because of the
>  split, one doesn't have a good point of departure.
> 
>  Also, another common problem is the one where because of a "loose"
>  composition, the viewer's eyes don't complete the circuit and instead
>  exit the picture at one of the edges without returning to the the
>  starting element, that is, the point of departure. >>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html