Clay vs. Concrete
by Mark ~ July 25th, 2009. Filed under: artistry, creativity, nature photography, wildflowers, wonder.
Water lily
We have so many options available to us these days in processing our photographs it can be overwhelming at times. We can follow the straight documentary approach, veer a bit left, a bit right, or even turn around 180 degrees and head in another direction. For me, following the same path day after day gets boring – too automatic. Sometimes I think my days in shooting slide film were simpler, but realize I often used the slide as a brick wall. The definition of what this image is supposed to be is right there on the light table – go no further. Concrete.
Then I think back to the teachings of Ansel Adams, where he wasn’t using direct positive film, and the processing of the negative to the print was much more like the pliable nature of getting a RAW image file to where you want it to be. A mushy pile of clay.
I often wonder about the problems that arise though when you have too many tools to mold the clay. Which one do I pick today? It can be overwhelming. They are all good – all of them will take me down a path that will lead to an image I am happy with. Along the way perhaps we discard some old tools in favor of new ones.
I suppose balance is the keyword here. I hate roadblocks to creativity. I also hate being overwhelmed with too many options. A little clay in some places, but use concrete in others. Too many options are a good example why so many photographers settle into a routine that works for them. A lot of options are also a good example of the diversity we see today in photography. The future of photography is more than ever like that mushy pile of clay.
July 25th, 2009 at
Though not for everyone, I took a step back into film. I really like digital, but something was just calling me to go back. I guess it’s because I had too many tools to choose from, so I went back to one camera, one lens, one type of film, and one type of developer. Film, honestly, is no simpler in terms of workflow. It’s probably a little bit more complex, but, for now, I’m enjoying my little nostalgic trip.
I think that any time that we do something repeatedly, like you said, it gets boring. We seek new tools, or perhaps different tools, in order to spark that little creative muse.
[Reply]
July 26th, 2009 at
Creativity is knowing which tool to pick at the time. Sometimes all a block needs is a challenging kick in the pants; like taking a different lens than you would normally use to shoot something.
[Reply]
July 26th, 2009 at
I followed your film trip Paul. I think you were shooting negative film right?Digital raw has so many similarities.
Roberta-if I only had a kick in the pants device! On second thought, I would probably be pretty sore by now.
[Reply]
July 27th, 2009 at
Thought-provoking post, Mark. I actually thought along those lines a couple of times this past weekend. The first time was in relationship to shooting. Over the course of the weekend I went with bold realism, motion blur abstracts, Zen-like fog images and IR imaging. The second was last evening as I finally got around to adding Topaz Adjust to the quiver – and tool to do some different things. As I was loading it, I was thinking – is this too much? Should I just keep it simple?
[Reply]
July 27th, 2009 at
I agree with edvatza; very thought-provoking post. I struggle with the idea of keeping my imagery simple and my processing simple yet still taking advantage of technology. But then tools and technique advance so rapidly these days I feel like I have to play catch-up to stay current and in the “know”. The challenge is finding a balance in simplicity while not falling out of touch with advancements. This could actually apply to my life in general.
[Reply]
July 27th, 2009 at
You have touched a nerve with this post. Personally, I vacillate between being frustrated that my budget prevents my experimenting with all the tempting plug-ins and being grateful for same. Even with CS3, I find myself struggling with multiple processing decisions. I often wonder if I am making “improvements” that end up obscuring the story, rather than clarifying it.
The notion of clay or concrete works for me. It’s a useful way to think about these image-processing questions.
[Reply]
July 28th, 2009 at
I have to keep it as simple as possible, if I get too many tools my tiny brain would melt down
[Reply]
July 30th, 2009 at
I am not one to do a lot of post processing. I take more of an “organic” approach. Even though I shoot digital and have completely abandoned film I still like the image to be as organic as possible. I use Lightroom 2 and CS2. I don’t have a bunch of plug-ins, I’ve only got one actually…Noiseware Pro, which I find I don’t use much especially with the D700. Noiseware Pro does a nice gentle subtle smoothing of the skin in portraits which I like. I do have my own presets in Lightroom 2 and recorded actions in CS2 which I use to speed the process along. I think the most extreme thing I do is the occasional “Orton” technique which I have as a recorded action in CS2. I prefer time with the camera not the computer. In the past few weeks I’ve actually been using Lightroom 2 exclusively bypassing photoshop altogether. Like Bernie…my brain cannot handle that stuff.
[Reply]
July 31st, 2009 at
I agree with Bernie. I think you often can over complicate the issue by having access to too many tools. Often only minor changes are required to present the pefect shot.
[Reply]
August 3rd, 2009 at
[...] Continued here: Graf Nature Photography | Notes from the woods » Clay vs. Concrete [...]
August 6th, 2009 at
Great article Mark with subsequent interesting comments and discussion. I like to keep things simple but I also like the options of a couple of different tools to spark the creativity and innovative approach every now and then. Quite a contradiction right there I guees. Basically I like the idea of ‘listening to the image’ and then picking your tools based on what the image tells you. In many ways this probably also depend on your mood on the day. Ultimately, like you say, we all tend to settle with a one or two or three routines and then occasionally go off the path to try something new when we feel like it.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at
Use of the word, “tools” is apt, Mark, in my view. As a boy growing up, both my dad and my grandpa had workshops full of tools. I have inherited much of them today. Many of them are not used very often (some have simply been replaced by new methods and technologies). I still have them, and there is comfort in knowing they are in the cabinet if I get the desire or have the need to use them.
Mostly, I use a few trusted tools. My camera bag is much the same.
[Reply]