There is something that most photographers must surely know, intuitively, but which we often seem to lose sight of when choosing pictures to compete, exhibit, or sell.
Context.
Pictures destined for publication in a book, magazine or newspaper can usually count on a supporting framework of words. That could be a lengthy article or maybe just a caption, but usually the viewer is getting more than a purely visual clue as to what the picture is about, how or why it was taken, and why it has significance.
Similarly, pictures intended to circulate among a closed group; family, friends or maybe a club or society will most likely have the benefit of sufficient shared knowledge to give them contextual support…. this is Fred returning from a long journey, this is me on top of Ben Nevis, this is Sally winning such and such a competition, this is our new pet cat, or whatever.
Conversely, there are times and situations, such as a competition or an exhibition, where the picture has to stand entirely on its own intrinsic merits, or lack of them.
Let us take the example given above of the cat picture. In this more objective domain, the critical viewer will be ignorant of, and indifferent to, the fact that this might be the most loved and cherished cat in history.. Similarly, there is no a priori knowledge as to whether the creature is affectionate or homicidal in its disposition. A small part of their assessment may be based upon whether the subject is an exceptionally handsome or a grossly ugly cat, but that is the best you can hope for.
Overwhelmingly the judgement will be made on technical and (to some extent) aesthetic grounds. Is the picture sharp? Well printed? Well composed? Is the background suitable and free from distractions?
Thus the judge, exhibition visitor or putative purchaser is using an entirely different matrix of value judgements to those of the person who created the image. (The views of the cat, as sitter, are immaterial to this discussion.)
At some level, we all know these things. It only requires a moment’s objective thought to realise that what invests the photograph with value or merit in the mind of the person who took it has only a tentative connection with the value judgements likely to be made by a dispassionate third party.
What are the sources of this emotional baggage? There is the photographer’s personal relationship with the person, place or object portrayed, there is the difficulty associated with getting the photograph; the long wait in a bird hide on a cold day, the expensive flight to the exotic location, the strenuous walk into the mountains, the money invested in the equipment used…..the list goes on.
Imagine, then the disappointment, maybe even the anger, if someone’s opinion is expressed in such terms as “This is just another record shot of Mount Everest”, or “That is a spectacularly ugly baby and its left ear isn’t quite sharp”, or “That volcanic eruption is a bit small in the frame, maybe a different viewpoint should have been chosen”.
So what is the point I am making here?
Simply that, as amateurs, the main joy in taking photographs is (or ought to be) the pleasure it gives us and we should not to get too obsessive about what others think of our choice of subject or of our technical ability. However, when choosing which photos (if any) to expose to the larger and sometimes crueller world of public exhibition or competition, you maybe need to step outside of your own frame of reference and…hard as it maybe…think about your picture as a discrete object, with no emotional charge attaching to it. Does it still pass muster in those terms?
mikesfoto 