I want to critically review m knowledge, learn new things, forget stuff I learned the wrong way.
That’s why I am looking for a book that makes me think again, with a “questions you what you have learned” kind of style. Is there any?
edit: About photography of course
2 Likes
Hi,
Disclaimer: It’s just a point of view, nothing definitive.
Why one book? About photography, but which aspect? Shooting, developing, aesthetics, selecting the best images, publishing?
There are so many angles to approach it from, so many different issues. Most often, authors don’t seem to focus on mistakes or questions.
Correcting what you have learned is an interesting idea. But have you already done an initial analysis of what you think are mistakes?
Most of the several hundred photography books I own are author books, which show their images, sometimes accompanied by their ideas, their research style, what they thought of their work. I have learned a lot from them.
Technical books focus on fundamental issues: composition, theoretical and aesthetic questions, film then digital development.
Living in France, I haven’t had access to the best-known works in other countries or continents.
See if the books by Michael Freeman and Harald Mante meet your expectations.
2 Likes
Yeah, more about technique, which settings to use when. I mean I think I know plenty about it but I’d love to challenge my believes sometimes. To be fair, most books I find very boring and hard to read because either they tell me something I already know, know better, don’t like the style of teaching or am not really interested in the main topic. So I am quite hard to please. Only a few books I really liked but I wanted to get some ideas what others read or have read.
The photographer’s eye by Michael Freeman is actually still on the reading pile.
2 Likes
I would recommend a website, Fortepan. It is a collection of (mostly B&W) photos, by amateurs and some professionals (mostly photojournalists). They basically scan negatives people throw away or find in the attic. They have curated collections.
I like browsing it because it reminds me about the basics: photography is not about gear, but composition. Get the basics right, and that’s what matters.
Look at this one with fencers. It is from 1937. It is grainy, and blurred when people moved (I think film in these days had ISO equivalent of 10–20). But it captures a very dynamic moment.
I also like this site because a lot of the image are taken by people like us, devoted amateurs. Photography was a middle-class hobby back in those days, development was not cheap, you had to think before pressing that shutter button. So I am sure they previsualized a lot, and had to have a good eye not only for composition, but light too. This is a skill I want to learn.
3 Likes
thanks, really nice!
1 Like
This is actually similar to a suggestion I was going to make - I have (somewhere) a book first published in the 50s or 60s, by the Praktica camera manufacturer. It’s part user guide, part inspiration and rather unexpectedly I found it a joy to leaf through. Lots of plates of example photos, even (shock!) colour ones!
I found it very refreshing to look at our hobby from the eyes of that era - so much that we take for granted was unheard of then.
Edit: I think this is it but unfortunately not available on Open Library
2 Likes
Focal Encyclopedia of Photography.
I browsed for many, many hours through this treasure-trove.
This edition was what was on my father’s shelf - his was in somewhat better condition.
This book taught me not just what (I can do) but why (I might choose to do it).
4 Likes
I would say that unless your technique is inadequate to communicate your intentions and artistic vision, then there is nothing you are doing “wrong” per se. However, I am sure that even the most technically skilled photographers can still learn new things and ways to improve, especially when you add in the arts of post-processing, printing, and publishing to the web. I think a goal of improvement–in service to your artistic vision–rather than right vs wrong is a more useful outlook here and in any of the arts.
As a complement to your study of technique, I think a very fruitful approach would entail study the works of the masters and non-masters alike to see what they are doing and what inspiration you may find. (Do you admire any photographs that were created by employing a “wrong” technique?). Arguably, all the technique in the world is useless unless it is motivated by an underlying vision or goal.
As an example, I greatly appreciate the work of Eugène Atget, and would highly recommend any of the books with commentary by John Szarkowski. A good amount of Atget’s work can be said to have employed “wrong” technique, including shooting into the light, resulting in strong backlighting, halation, and loss of detail. I wonder how many digital pixel peepers would look at his magnificent photos of Le Nôtre’s parks (Versailles, Saint Cloud, Parc de Sceaux, etc.) and scream about blown highlights while missing the artistic vision of these photos. Like so much in the arts, the “right” and “wrong” we have been taught are best considered tools, general guidelines to be broken when the occasion arises.
4 Likes