Confused about art

I was talking to my cycling buddy as we took a break from the ride. I had read an interview with some photographers, one of which was Kevin Abosch. He of the expensive potato picture. We wondered how that massive price had come about. What made it worth so much? We talked about art in general. I guess I just don't get it. Art, when it's painted, or sculptured tends to mean a one off. So I can see how the value, especially over time can grow. 

I am at a lose though to see how some modern art is so highly valued. 

Again it is a one off, even if the piece is produced again. It's not going to be exactly the same. But I don't understand what it is most of the time. Or what it's trying to say. 

It appears to me at least part of it's value is who the artist is, not the piece itself. 

Once a group of people collect the artists work, they buy everything. Why? Bragging rights, a show of wealth, or a way of demonstrating they are part of the group who understand in a way others are just not capable of?

Then I come to art photography. Again this is just my opinion. 

When you buy a piece of photographic art. It can easily be reproduced. Just printed again. I'm not saying because it is a photograph, it can't be art and highly prized though. It's just not unique in the same way.

I tend to shoot pictures that are either personal to me or the subject. Or that satisfy a requirement. So not really art in itself. Although I hope some of them would be seen as artistic. 

Maybe I'm just too literal a thinker. It has to be obvious. And that's my failing, not the artist's problem.

Here is the potato in question.

Pic: Kevin Abosch

Quote from Peta Pixel, I think, illustrates why I am confused about art. “Kevin likes potatoes because they, like people are all different yet immediately identifiable as being essentially of the same species,” “He has photographed many potatoes. This one is one of his favorites.”

What do you think? What am I missing?

For more of my work, go to my Facebook page.

and 

website

Celebrity portrait photographers

I have long wondered why some big name photographers are so revered.  I'm talking about the ones who have photographed famous people. And have become celebrities themselves. The pictures I have seen, in my opinion, aren't that good. The typical one is square on to the subject. Harsh or at the very least unflattering lighting. And worst of all are the ones in which the subject just looks totally disinterested.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not bitter that they are doing well, and I'm not.

Maybe it's me. I don't get modern art either. For me when the piece has the word installation in the description. Alarm bells start to ring. If I have to read an A4 sized explanation, to understand what it means I'm lost.

I was reading an interview with a famous celebrity photographer. The pictures accompanying the piece were as I expected. A series of passport style pictures. None engaged me or caused me to pause on them. Then I read this answer to a question; "Whether people are comfortably at ease is not something I've ever been interested in." And then it hit me; the reason I hadn't connected with the pictures. The subjects didn't look like they wanted to be there. There was no connection with the photographer, so no connection with me, the viewer. Even worse the eyes were dead. I know the saying the eyes are the windows to the soul. Now I could see what that saying meant.
It doesn't just have to be when the subject is looking at the camera. There were pictures in the article when they were looking away, but they still looked dead. There was no spark.

So why is it that celebrities and the media insist that these photographers are sometimes the only ones they will work with?

I always try to connect with the person I'm photographing. Be as relaxed as possible. Because that is what I want the viewer of my photographs to feel. My most favourite photographs have got this. To me at least.

I watched Sky Arts Master of Photography. Hoping for some insight into professional photography. There was to be a famous photographer each week to mentor and help the contestants. And successful photographers for judges. I was a little disappointed. The contestants seemed to have little idea about what to deliver. And the guest mentors were either ignored or weren't very helpful. The best episode was with Jason Bell. I thought what he said was the most helpful to the contestants, and to me. Looking at his work, he is the one I connect with and understand the most.
Even the judges seemed at times to be at a loss as to what to say to the contestants. Maybe if the judges had produced some work, to show at the end to illustrate what they had expected. It would have been more constructive. I'm not sure I would have done any better, and if they had been professional photographers, on a paid assignment. They might have done a bit more research and given themselves more time to understand the brief.

I have read a few photography books to try to improve my photography. The authors have been successful photographers. But I nearly always finished the books feeling a little flat.

Some just talked about the famous people they had photographed and the great places they had been. The included pictures were in the same vain as I have been talking about. And some were dry technical how-tos.

Because for me it's about a connection to the subject, these books didn't help me much.

Then I read Gregory Heisler's 50 Portraits. In it he talks about why he used a particular camera, lens and lighting. Not in a dry, purely technical way. But why the strengths of his choice fitted the mood or location. He also talked about why he liked the particular picture. I don't think it was meant to be an instructional book. I found this one of the most helpful photography tutorial I have read. It is also something I go back to frequently.

For more of my work, go to my Facebook page.

and 

website

G.A.S Gear Acquisition Syndrome

I read a lot from photographers, hobbyists like me mostly, asking about an upgrade of equipment. "What should I get next?", "will this new piece of equipment improve my photography?".

Often the replies given question the need for the upgrade, what about your current equipment is limiting you? What will this new piece of equipment give you that you need?

Generally there is a struggle to answer these questions.

A brief history of my photography might help to illustrate. And to show I'm not immune to G.A.S.

My wife bought me a Kodak point and shoot digital camera. It reawakened my interest in photography. It was great to be able to see the pictures straight away. Print it at home, or print just the pictures I wanted, not the whole roll.

But is was limited and didn't give me the control I wanted, it didn't allow for off camera flash, it was slow, and battery life was appalling.

When I looked for a replacement I knew a DSLR would resolve these issues. An upgrade was a sensible move. But which one? I read lots of reviews. This allowed me to understand and list the features I was most interested in. Searching on ebay I found a Nikon D70. By todays standards some would say a poor camera. But not to me. I bought an inexpensive secondhand telephoto zoom. And did mostly motorsport photography. A friend does track day photography and I helped out on a few occasions. The lens I had wasn't fast enough, and there was a little bit of lens envy. So I bought a more expensive secondhand lens, that when new would have been considered a pro lens.

This combination served me well. I printed 20x30 inch from the 6mp sensor. And rarely wished I had better than the 2.5 fps it was capable of. I did borrow 2DX and thought briefly that this was what I needed. But that feeling past before I bought one.

Then G.A.S struck. I convinced myself that I was being held back by the poor low light performance of the D70. This got me to a D90. In the meantime I had bought lenses that I only used a few times. After, again convincing myself that I needed they could provide, .

Today I flirt with buying a full frame DSLR or even a medium format camera. I can't justify it. But it doesn't stop me adding them to my ebay watch list.

The manufacturers feed this cycle. It seems cameras, lenses etc are being replaced with newer, better versions. Each one suggesting that your present equipment is now not up to the job.

It's not just cameras. How often have you bought a new television lately? In the days of CRT's, once you had a television that was it until it broke. Even then there was a local repair shop.
We were told an HD flat screen was all that we would ever need for unbelievable picture quality. Now we are constantly told that the latest technology, curved, 4k etc is even more unbelievable than before.

How often have you fallen foul of G.A.S with technology?

For more of my work, go to my Facebook page.

and 

website

Changing season

Autumn is here. It doesn't seem like summer was around for very long.

As I left the house I noticed an extra chill in the air. One that started to numb my fingers as the speed built up on the first decent. It's still t-shirt and shorts weather though. But for how much longer?

I was cycling on my own this morning. So I chose somewhere I hadn't visited for a while. Godstone Green.

I took the pictures above and sat chilling out. The ride there only has one major climb. The ride home was much harder. Shortly after leaving Godstone there is a long hard climb. The ride back to Woldingham after this climb is a rolling lane through the woods. After that it's a bit more urban to Whyteleafe. One more hard climb up Burntwood Lane and I'm nearly home. Just under 16 miles. Not a big distance but I'm home in time to start a busy day.

For more of my work, go to my Facebook page.

and 

website

Farm house shoot

Deciding to take advantage of the good August weather I organised a shoot with a model I hadn't work with before, but had wanted to. And what looked like an interesting location. A farm house in Essex.

In truth there wasn't the number of interesting buildings I had hoped for. But there was enough variety and Stephanie was great, very easy to get on with, and she knew the style of pictures I was after.

I planed a relaxed boho style shoot. Some of the pictures do have that, looking into the distance, or in deep thought look. But hopefully it's not over done and still natural looking. Why not leave a comment with your thoughts.

We started in the barn. It had overhead fluorescent lighting. But I don't think the different colour temp compared to the speedlight I used as a main light is apparent. I think it might had added a little more warmth to the background. The straw is an interesting material, I played around with the position of the light so I didn't get any hot spots, and the shadows were in the right place.

The lighting had to look natural, as if it was streaming in through the barn door. And pick up Stephanie's features. She has great cheekbones that I wanted to show.

The next location was the steps up to a treehouse. The area was in the shade. A good thing because the sun was still high in the sky with little cloud cover to diffuse it. We experimented with sitting and standing poses. I moved the light to see where it was at it's most natural looking.

Again I couldn't have asked for a better set of pictures. It just flowed with both of us chatting and making suggestions about posing and positioning.

Maybe we could have shot in the treehouse, but I didn't know how secure it was. And I would have needed a way to be at the same level, but some distance for it. This would have needed more pre planning and preparation. Not really possible with a location so far from home. I normally like to visit a place first. Have a plan of the interesting areas.

The last area that yielded more great shots was the farmhouse's front door. It was shielded from direct sunlight, the red walls contrasted with Stephanie's clothing and the weather beaten door just finished the look off perfectly.

A very productive two hours. I came away with pictures I really like, more ideas about posing and lighting. And someone I hope to work with again.

I think also a style that can be seen through all my shoots. Please let me know what you think.

For more of my work, go to my Facebook page.

and 

website

Copyright

I read a lot about picture copyright on forums. It got me thinking. I shoot mostly for myself. Occasionally I am asked to provide some family portraits. And then last month a model asked me to provide new pictures for her. Xandria

But I didn't think about mentioning copyright. Should I? I collaborated with Xandria. As the photographer it is presumed I own the copyright to the pictures we produced. But she contributed as much as me, so should it be shared?
If she becomes famous, could I sell the pictures? I'm guessing they would have a value. What if she made money from them; should I expect a share?

Personally, I wouldn't sell the pictures, I wouldn't give them away either. And I would expect Xandria to consult me if she had any new plans. But I wouldn't become obsessed about it.

The forums I mentioned earlier, are mostly populated by amateurs like me. The difference between some of them and me is the amount of effort they put into worrying about copyright. What is the model they worked with going to do with the pictures, are they going to alter them? Some are incredibly obsessive.

If it was a paid shoot, the digital files weren't shared with them, but the model downloaded them and is using them for promotion. That is wrong. Maybe it would be worth taking further. I'm just not sure how far though.

Don't get me wrong. Copyright is very important. Some famous brands have used pictures taken from the internet for advertising. Getty are being sued for licensing and distributing pictures given by the photographer to the Library of Congress for public use. Why should a profit be made or money saved by using someone's work for free, or selling rights to work you don't own?

If you are paid to produce a photograph you should be able to control how it's used. And paid accordingly. For advertising and editorial work certainly. The company paying you has a need and an expectation that your work will help them. They can put a monetary value on it.

I'm not so sure if you are a wedding or portrait photographer that you should be overly concerned about how the pictures are used after you hand them over, either printed, on a USB stick or allowed download from a website. You were paid to produce personal pictures. How you would enforce any restrictions you may have put on their use? If it were me I would price the packages to ensure I could make a living. Am I wrong, nieve? Please feel free leave a comment.

For more of my work, go to my Facebook page.

and 

website