Absolutely, I feel the same. A photograph can carry its own presence, and sometimes a story only shifts the way we look at it, not the image itself. The appreciation is already there in the seeing.
A good photograph should not need a story or narrative. It might change with a narrative, but it does not take away from appreciating what is in front of you; the photograph.
well, there always will be a debate about photos & words combined.
first of all, what you feel when you are capturing the image is not what the viewer feels when is looking at the image. do you have a need to explain that or you don't care about the viewer feeling?
secondly, explaining the meaning/feeling of an images, pushes the viewer to see what you are seeing and that is not right either.
it was only yesterday when i showed a photo to my editor and straight away i got "is that a bird?" to each i replied "are you ok?". than with a little doodle the bird was showed to me and i was"???how did you see that?". so, as photographer do we want to "interfere" with the viewers imagination?
my approach to this (when i don't use words - see 80% of "what i've seen today" series) is: when i show a photo, one can see whatever one wants and understand whatever one can.
Thanks for this. I really resonate with what you wrote.
I agree that what we feel while making a photograph is never the same as what someone else feels while looking at it. And I don’t think it needs to be. That gap is part of the beauty.
For me, the question isn’t whether to guide the viewer or not, but whether the photograph can stand on its own, without me shaping their interpretation. Lately, I feel less inclined to interfere — maybe because explaining is a second-hand activity, and I don’t want to take away that freshness of seeing, either from the viewer or from myself.
Your example with the editor is perfect. People will always project something unexpected onto an image. And maybe that’s exactly why I’m stepping away from explanations — I prefer leaving that room open rather than narrowing it.
By the way, I really enjoy your “What I Found Today” series. In a way, almost everything I do could fall into that category;)
I agree that words are not necessary. However, I actually feel the opposite from you. I want to write more and feel inspired more to combine photography with writing.
I don’t think there is a right or wrong. To me it is all a way of expression, it’s poetry.
I think sharing images without any words can be very nice and calming.
Thank you, and I love that you feel that way. I don’t think there’s a right or wrong either. Some phases invite writing, some invite silence, and both can be forms of expression.
For me, the impulse has shifted toward less explanation, but I also completely understand the desire to combine words and images.
In the end, it’s all about following the impulse of the moment. Sometimes that’s a sentence, sometimes a photograph, sometimes both, sometimes neither.
“The impulse to write has faded, and I’ve been trying to understand why. It doesn’t feel like writer’s block. It feels more like a natural loss of interest in turning experience into language.”
I get it, 100%, Davor. I can’t work out if we (ok, I) move past the initial excitement of something, or if the motivation to write simply has peaks and troughs. Writing has felt harder since passing the 2 year mark on Substack, so I fully understand your need to adapt.
Yes, it feels harder, but not in a sense that I sit and don’t know what to write. I simply don’t have desire to write at the moment. That’s probably similar to you. It will be interesting to see what will happen next. Maybe we’ll start with poetry:)
There are many ways of telling - pantomime is without words, and so are many sculptures, paintings, and, indeed, photos.
But Substack is a fast medium where you need to tie your audience to some imaginary threads, catch them in you web of multimedia, or else, they’ll be gone again before you can spell to “short-term memory”.
Words written is such a thread. Or you could sing a song, or play the guitar - or add many photos to your story, hoping that at least one or two will become more than a fractional moment to your audience.
To bring them a full moment to enjoy, add some bells and whistles.
But if you aim for being that overlooked stereotype of artist, the one who’ll find recognition only after his death, then you should proceed without words ;)
Another approach, that you did previously: add somebody else’s words - into a dualist story for your audience to try finding connections in.
To start with, apologies for the late reply. I read your message earlier, but couldn’t respond properly at the time, so I postponed it — and then had to track it down later, knowing I had left something unanswered.
I do understand that Substack is a medium with certain expectations, and I’ll try to meet them by putting out what I genuinely feel is the best of me. What that is, and in which form - that is something I will decide based on inspiration.:)
Personally, I enjoy the behind the scenes “making of a photograph” but then I also like documentaries so take that for whatever it’s worth
When you want to write more, there will be plenty of us to enjoy your words and your photographs but the important thing for now is to do what fills you…or at least that’s what I tell myself
Absolutely, I feel the same. A photograph can carry its own presence, and sometimes a story only shifts the way we look at it, not the image itself. The appreciation is already there in the seeing.
A good photograph should not need a story or narrative. It might change with a narrative, but it does not take away from appreciating what is in front of you; the photograph.
well, there always will be a debate about photos & words combined.
first of all, what you feel when you are capturing the image is not what the viewer feels when is looking at the image. do you have a need to explain that or you don't care about the viewer feeling?
secondly, explaining the meaning/feeling of an images, pushes the viewer to see what you are seeing and that is not right either.
it was only yesterday when i showed a photo to my editor and straight away i got "is that a bird?" to each i replied "are you ok?". than with a little doodle the bird was showed to me and i was"???how did you see that?". so, as photographer do we want to "interfere" with the viewers imagination?
my approach to this (when i don't use words - see 80% of "what i've seen today" series) is: when i show a photo, one can see whatever one wants and understand whatever one can.
Thanks for this. I really resonate with what you wrote.
I agree that what we feel while making a photograph is never the same as what someone else feels while looking at it. And I don’t think it needs to be. That gap is part of the beauty.
For me, the question isn’t whether to guide the viewer or not, but whether the photograph can stand on its own, without me shaping their interpretation. Lately, I feel less inclined to interfere — maybe because explaining is a second-hand activity, and I don’t want to take away that freshness of seeing, either from the viewer or from myself.
Your example with the editor is perfect. People will always project something unexpected onto an image. And maybe that’s exactly why I’m stepping away from explanations — I prefer leaving that room open rather than narrowing it.
By the way, I really enjoy your “What I Found Today” series. In a way, almost everything I do could fall into that category;)
Love the minimal photographs.
I agree that words are not necessary. However, I actually feel the opposite from you. I want to write more and feel inspired more to combine photography with writing.
I don’t think there is a right or wrong. To me it is all a way of expression, it’s poetry.
I think sharing images without any words can be very nice and calming.
Thank you, and I love that you feel that way. I don’t think there’s a right or wrong either. Some phases invite writing, some invite silence, and both can be forms of expression.
For me, the impulse has shifted toward less explanation, but I also completely understand the desire to combine words and images.
In the end, it’s all about following the impulse of the moment. Sometimes that’s a sentence, sometimes a photograph, sometimes both, sometimes neither.
“The impulse to write has faded, and I’ve been trying to understand why. It doesn’t feel like writer’s block. It feels more like a natural loss of interest in turning experience into language.”
I get it, 100%, Davor. I can’t work out if we (ok, I) move past the initial excitement of something, or if the motivation to write simply has peaks and troughs. Writing has felt harder since passing the 2 year mark on Substack, so I fully understand your need to adapt.
Yes, it feels harder, but not in a sense that I sit and don’t know what to write. I simply don’t have desire to write at the moment. That’s probably similar to you. It will be interesting to see what will happen next. Maybe we’ll start with poetry:)
There are many ways of telling - pantomime is without words, and so are many sculptures, paintings, and, indeed, photos.
But Substack is a fast medium where you need to tie your audience to some imaginary threads, catch them in you web of multimedia, or else, they’ll be gone again before you can spell to “short-term memory”.
Words written is such a thread. Or you could sing a song, or play the guitar - or add many photos to your story, hoping that at least one or two will become more than a fractional moment to your audience.
To bring them a full moment to enjoy, add some bells and whistles.
But if you aim for being that overlooked stereotype of artist, the one who’ll find recognition only after his death, then you should proceed without words ;)
Another approach, that you did previously: add somebody else’s words - into a dualist story for your audience to try finding connections in.
To start with, apologies for the late reply. I read your message earlier, but couldn’t respond properly at the time, so I postponed it — and then had to track it down later, knowing I had left something unanswered.
I do understand that Substack is a medium with certain expectations, and I’ll try to meet them by putting out what I genuinely feel is the best of me. What that is, and in which form - that is something I will decide based on inspiration.:)
Of course – that's what is really needed. Your inspiration, when and how it appears.
You say so much with your photographs already.
Personally, I enjoy the behind the scenes “making of a photograph” but then I also like documentaries so take that for whatever it’s worth
When you want to write more, there will be plenty of us to enjoy your words and your photographs but the important thing for now is to do what fills you…or at least that’s what I tell myself
Thanks, Chris for reading and commenting. Do what fills you… how could we do something else? I also tell that to myself.
Indeed
Thank you for this. I'm experiencing something similar, and I haven't analyzed why. I'm letting it be whatever it is in the moment.
That’s the best way - whatever is in the moment.
I hear ya Davor. You certainly don’t need words for your photography, it speaks for itself. 💖
Thans a lot, Jo-Ann. I’m glad it does for you😉
Make the viewers think and make their own story, especially with the abstract work that you do. Great idea Davor!
That’s it. Thanks, Xavi🤗
I’m happy to just “see” what you have to share of your creative output.
(And your word well will likely fill again.)
Thanks a lot, Kewtie;)