Oh, my friends. I knew that last post might rile some folks up. I also thought that the takeaway might get lost because the second I mention anything about online photographers, or YouTube photographers, or film hipsters, people seem to lose the plot by either defending these folks or condemning these folks, etc. This post was not about film hipsters. This post, as I mentioned at the beginning and the end, was about those who are attempting to break into the professional market by showing their work at reviews or contests. Film hipsters are doing what they do, sell their hipsterness to the masses.
They are not attempting to be professional photographers.
If you want to shoot film and talk about film, as I mentioned before, go for it. Nothing wrong with it. HOWEVER, if you are leading your artist statement, or the conversation, with “I’m a film photographer,” you are doing yourself a disservice. NOBODY at professional level cares one tiny bit that you chose to use film. NOBODY. In fact, it makes you look like you lost the plot on your own work.
Finally, as I mentioned before, I look at hundreds of portfolios a year. Hundreds. No exaggeration. This trend of talking analog is so prevalent now I felt I needed to say something to those who think they might want to submit to a review or contest. Your technical information, unless it DIRECTLY adds to the story due to some hyper-specific technical reason that is hyper-specifically tied to the process, is simply is not worth mentioning. Same for tintype, cyanotype, etc. There are so many people doing alternative process you could argue it’s no longer alternative.
Let the work speak for itself. In fact, you better hope it speaks for itself because a lot of judges won’t take the time to ready your artist statement, especially when two sentences in the artist statement is so artist-statement-like the reviewer has no idea what it means. They will move on quickly and you better hope the work, even at contact sheet level, sings. Otherwise, you have maybe thirty seconds before you end up on the junk pile.
And don’t blame a judge for spending so little time. People who look at images for a living know what works and what doesn’t, and often in a matter of seconds. Again, this is the difference between a professional and a nonprofessional. Remember, professional editors exist for a reason. They can take a good body of work and drill down to make it a great body of work.
Comments 7
“Let the work speak for itself.” Ditto.
I was at the grand opening for an exhibition I had a minor role in supporting. There were 49 pieces on the walls of a local community center, no specific theme, an eclectic set of images from a wide range of backgrounds and time behind a camera, mostly non-professional, but all alumni from the the last 4 years of a university photography program.
At the grand opening there had to be around 80+ people who passed through the community center. I continually made the rounds that evening, helping answer questions, pointing out where artist’s pieces were, explaining how the “people’s choice” voting worked, and doing a lot of schmoozing. Some of the program alumni were there but many of the people in attendance were not alumni.
I occasionally would hear some questions about some of the pieces. How did they get that painterly look? What is a metal print? Is the artist here? Can you point him/her out? What does NFS mean? Where’s the bathroom in this place?
And most of the comments were more insightful than any you would see online. “That image was haunting; I really felt like I was in the room with her.” “I really like this because [fill in the blank].” “I love the lighting in this; I wish I was there to witness it.” “I just keep coming back to this one over and over; its just pulls me right in. I really want to meet who did this.” By the comments you would rightly guess that these were not art collectors. They were friends and family of some of the alumni but at least as many people who found out about the exhibition and wanted to see what it was about.
Yet for the two and a half hours I was there not once did anyone inquire about the camera or lens might have been used, whether film or digital. All the comments and discussions were about the images themselves, not about how they were made. Most of all they talked about how they felt when they looked at an image. It was a powerful reminder that generalizations about the depth of the general public’s appreciation for art is often misplaced.
But back on topic, like you have often said: all the gear talk, including film v. digital, is for people comparing the size of their, um, following.
Online there is mostly just empty likes, fleeting trends, one trick ponies and fragile egos. And little or no originality… who has time for that when you’re chasing the latest trend?
Author
Oh yes, civilians don’t think about photography like we do. Most of the time, humbling. You talk to them about gear or anything needless and they are GONE. Most of the time they are gone when it comes to the images too.
I think, the moment a professional or a would-be pro photographer starts mentioning about process, gear, clothes, etc., he/she pulls the focus towards himself/herself. This is when the story loses its value (unless it is an artist driven project, as you frequently mention, and which has most of its value to other creatives only). If the story means nothing to you, why work on that and talk about process. You can work on a pencil on a desk at home with some led lights and talk about process. There maybe tons of techniques but no story at all. But, specifically documentary photographers, we tend to put some light on few issues, stories, culture, etc, where the story is of utmost importance to us, where we want to TELL something to the masses, open their eyes and mind.
I would be fascinated by a project which tells the story of something/someone so unique and specific, yet mostly unheard of. For example, the project on uyghurs by David Butow. It will immediately take all my focus and concentration, and it doesn’t matter if it is done on wet plates, pinholes, slrs or mirrorlesss, digital, film or pen illustrations. Yes, I will look into the method used (me being a fellow creative, but that’s after I have given all my attention to the story. It will be way down below the list. Even I would be more interested in the designer, publisher, font psychology, etc.)
That’s my take. I might be wrong though and maybe I should post 15 seconds reel 5 times a day with hashtags and then post 5 stories of my reel.
You know, I went to an art gallery the other day and looked at a bunch of paintings. Every painting had a little card beside it that stated ,as well as the artist’s name and title of the work, phrases like “oil on linen,” acrylic on gesso, “egg tempra on linen and panel,” “water colour,” and most curious of all “mxed media.”
The I went into the room with photographs. They too had little cards beside them, but they all said the same thing: “Dan Milnor says just look at the image, don’t worry about that other stuff.”
What pen and paper did Hemingway write all his novels with?
Now that’s my kind of “peeps” photo, documenting the dream. I’m old, I don’t have the time or patience to mess with film anymore, and people who want to yammer on about process, whatever it is, bore me beyond belief.
I just saw a great exhibit of student work and none of the kids commented about the medium they used. It made no difference. You could easily see who made good work. No discussion of process.
At work I wouldn’t hire a film photographer so there’s no competitive advantage there either unless I needed a wet collodion image of my CEO for some odd reason.
So I concur with you that using film as a crutch to give your work a certain specialness is foolish. You can’t hide behind process if the work is mediocre.
I shoot film but mostly because I seem to be incapable of learning a new method. Plus there’s a certain pleasure (or sense of crushing disappointment) when you pull a film from a dev tank. It doesn’t make the images inherently special. It’s about me and my comfort with a way of making images. Still… shooting nine MF rolls with a model this week adds up…