In the past, as I’ve been prone to overindulging on photo-apps. But I’ve reformed my ways. Really. A bit. Sort of. Can you just stand in the light a bit better, please?
I used to be a camera app junkie. I regularly walked around with half a dozen camera apps on my phone – each of which did one or two things particularly well. I had two apps just for black-and-white work (one in square format, one in 3:2), another app just for awkward lighting situations, one for…well, you get the idea. I regularly downloaded new camera apps just to see what they could do, and discarded them ruthlessly
I’m in camera app recovery now. I only have two apps on my phone – one sophisticated app that gives me a lot of control over exposure, and one app that I’ve simplified in such a way that I can toggle between colour and B&W (both in square format). I shoot almost exclusively with the simplified app. All the photographs in this post were shot with the same app.
A few folks have asked me why I bother to shoot in B&W when I could just shoot in colour, then process the image as black-and-white. It’s a valid question. After all, a digital image in colour contains a lot more information than a B&W image, and the use of colour filters in post processing gives you more control over the final image. It would be smarter to shoot in colour.
But I don’t. There has to be some sort of decision-making process that takes place in my head – some sort of algorithm firing in my brain, evaluating the scene and arriving at a decision. But it doesn’t feel like there’s much thought involved at all. I usually know if I’ll be shooting colour or B&W when I pull the phone out of my pocket.
I also tend to photograph a lot of stuff that’s not obviously photo-worthy (if there is such a thing as photo-worthy), partly because I often find a photograph of a thing to be more interesting and appealing than the thing itself. Sometimes the entire point of a photo is in the act of photographing, not the thing being photographed. If that makes sense. Sometimes the point of a photo is in the decision of what to include in the frame and what to exclude.
As I wrote that, a thought occurred to me. Over the last several years, I’ve made my living dealing with narratives in one form or another. Now I walk around shooting photos that tend to be narrative-resistant. When you get down to the bone, a photograph isn’t anything but an arrangement of light on a surface. There’s no inherent narrative content. No matter what people say, a single photograph doesn’t tell a story. It can’t tell a story. Any narrative that might emerge comes from the viewer, not the photograph.
I don’t recall who said all photographs are self-portraits. One of those photographers from the 1930s and ’40s, I’m sure – the ones who did the grunt work of turning the craft into an art form. It’s a great line, partly because it’s artsy bullshit and partly because it’s got a fuzzy kernel of truth. There’s a decision made behind every photograph. Every single one. And that decision reveals something about who you are.
Maybe you’re the sort of person who photographs kids at a birthday party, maybe you’re the sort of person who is passionate about photographing life on the street, maybe you’re the sort of person who is attracted by the arrangement of weeds growing along a drainage ditch. You might even be all the sort of person who does all three.
I had a point to make when I started writing this. I’ve totally forgotten what that point was. I suppose if the point was important, I’d have remembered it. This is what happens when you think about photography instead of doing photography. You might learn something new; you might also lose the point.