Another common e-mail from beginning photographers:
"I live in (fill in the blank). It is just so boring here. I wish that I lived in New York like you so that I could capture all the excitement of the city."
My initial reaction to this is that if you can't find anything interesting to photograph where you are - you won't find it anywhere else. This goes along the lines of the end of the Wizard of Oz, everything was always there before you at home.
If you live in a small town - then photograph the people or places around you. Do it as best you can. Do it better than anyone ever did.
I guess I could be all wet about this - maybe there are places that are just so visually boring that no one could be inspired by them. But you've spent 16 years of your life in this place. You know it so well. Even if all you do is capture your complete alienation from the landscape - that would be something - wouldn't it?
What do you think?
7 comments:
You should send the kid to Emory's site...
Matt - good idea.
I received this e-mail just after I returned from another Bronx trip. I'm always finding new things there (new to me anyway).
I found the old music store where I used to rent my trombone while I was in junior high. It had moved several times - further and further from Fordham road but the sign said: Bronen's Since 1915. There was a neon guitar sign in the window but the store had moved again - where I don't know. Or maybe this was it's final resting place.
Barrett, the other line which is often used with beginning writers is: write about what you know.
Which may be an old saw, but I also think is good advice.
When I wrote this entry, I was wondering if someone would write back and say - I live in so-and-so and I tell you - you just can't make a decent photograph in this place.
I had some weird vision of someone sending in a photo of a completely flat landscape devoid of detail. Devoid of features.
I do think there are some areas such as suburbs where it may be esp. difficult - but then I remembered seeing (and I don't remember who did it) - shots of urban sprawl and suburbs which I enjoyed.
For once I disagree. I grew up in a small country town in Tennessee, began photography there in 1950. Of course good pictures can be taken anywhere, but it also soon becomes repititious. Even now when I return to visit family, I cannot see anything more than the ordinary to shoot. Yes, there are things which are gone now that I wish that I'd taken, but it would just be nostalgia for me, not really interesting photography. There ARE boring places to live, David. I can feel for the kid.
PS, what is Emory's site?
Bill - good. I was hoping to hear from someone who disagreed.
www.BillEmory.com
I too lived in a place I considered boring. Small town in the great Hoosier state (30,000 people maybe).
Now I live in a much larger city in California and I sometimes get bored here myself. But I agree with the majority's view. Who said you had to take pictures outside? Set up a small studio in your bedroom or something. Or try taking pictures of the people you eat with.
Anyway, this sort of thing happens to me all the time. The equivalent of writer's block. When I get this way, I go out and try to pratice something I'm not very good at and I don't worry about the subject. If your working on your ability to meter well then who cares what your shooting? Ever taken pictures of star trails (some towns are great for this and big cities are not as they tend to have huge amounts of light pollution)?
I can't remember the name of the book but there's a photo coffee table book that has nothing but boring post cards inside. Every image is boring. And each looks like it was taken in small towns across the US. Do something like this. Document the boredom; turn it into an advantage for yourself. There are things in your home town that people in the big city just do not have access to.
Hi Dave,
I felt this way for over 20 years - but now I don't. Here's how I wrote about it in my photo blog 2 years ago:
I was an avid photographer from the time I graduated from high school in 1967 to about 1980 or 1981, when I got married, moved to our first house, and started raising a family. From that point until about two years ago, I took lots of pictures, but I had stopped being a photographer. All my "real" cameras had been by then sold, and I became a typical dad snapshooter, chasing my kids with a Canon Sure-Shot and Kodacolor II (... not that there's anything wrong with that!)
Looking back, I realize that for all but a few of those years during the '60s and '70s, I lived in or near Manhattan. Photographically, it was like the proverbial kid in a candy store. That city is running over with interesting things to photograph! I didn't have to work or sweat, it was all around me.
Even better, for seven of those years, I worked for an international division of General Electric, and got to travel all over the world. Even to some places I'd never heard of before, like Brunei. Of course, my cameras came with me, and I got lots of good photos. It was like shooting fish in a barrel.
But then the suburbs, marriage, kids ... very important and rewarding, but visually interesting? Obviously, I thought not.
But then, in late 2001, I started to think about, to ache about, returning to being a photographer. It was really hard to start again, especially with the "what is there worthwhile to photograph" attitude I'd harbored for over twenty years.
It took the better part of a year, but slowly, I began to see interesting images around me. Now, I see images everywhere.
I've started taking my camera along to work a few days a week. The lighting in the morning and late afternoon is great these days. Sometimes I'll get an idea beforehand, based on something I've been seeing during my commute, and sometimes, I'll just notice scenes along the way.
I realize now that you need to grow where you're planted. Another day, a decent image or two, right in suburbia. Life is good!
Post a Comment