Martha, in between brain surgeries

greenspun.com : LUSENET : People Photography : One Thread

Martha, in between brain surgeries, May 2000.



-- Josh Wand (josh@joshwand.com), October 19, 2000

Answers

...looking to find out just how much information I need to add to make these images stand out on their own... part of a series at http://www.photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl? presentation_id=14965.

-- Josh Wand (josh@joshwand.com), October 19, 2000.

This is one of the most poignant portraits I have ever seen. So straight, so unembellished, so honorable. How have you come to this?... t

I needed so badly to see this image tonight, please tell Martha I will think well of her, and often.

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), October 19, 2000.


I don't think you need the heartstring-tugging label. The photo is powerful enough on its own, and has that sense of grace and empathy that I love in all my favourite portraits. Congratulations.

-- Struan Gray (struan.gray@sljus.lu.se), October 20, 2000.

The title is bare necessities information. It informs without constraining the imagination. To leave this image untitled would be almost mis-informing.

After seeing this portrait last night, I wondered about the date of exposure, and what had come before, and what might have happened after and what might yet come to be. It made me want to know, it made me care... t

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), October 20, 2000.


Buddy, I've been looking at your site. You got the touch, dude, if you're only 19, you totally rule. Follow your eye, trust it, it's good. Here's a few things-

Don't show the ones that aren't lit right, are too dark, or have nothing in focus. (Maybe its your scanner, but you've got a few of these.) Maybe you've figured this out already. I keep these almost-theres in a "sketchbook", I look at them often for ideas, but i don't show them like they were finished. Some people on this list think technical failures are artistic, and maybe they're right, but you've got other work to do than spending time defending that position.

This one for example doesn't look sharp, and it should. The print probably is. Every time you scan you should run the sharpening command on whatever program you're using before you save the file....

You don't have to add any information to these images to make them stand out- they're doing that already. An image should work without a caption- Like songwriters who spend a half an hour introducing a three minute song- let the song explain itself- if it's good it will. You almost can't get around not having captions, but keep them short and in the background....

I just read a biography of Diane Arbus by a woman named Patricia Boswell. There were many insights into what makes a photographer an artist in this book. One of them was (paraphrased): "In great portraits, there is a moment of connection, or transference between the photographer and the model that is visible in the photograph..."

You've got this going on all over the place. Don't look back...



-- Chris Yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), October 20, 2000.


Scanned on a $45 budget flatbed. Some of the unsharp ones are due to the fact that I was using my hand as a shutter. The shutter problem is solved (this one I used a Packard), and eventually I'll get the negs scanned commercially. Also, take into account the DOF of a 300mm lens on 4x5.

With regard to captions-- some of the feedback I get is that my images don't always stand on their own-- that more information is needed. I partially disagree about images working without captions; I can think of numerous examples where the caption absolutely makes the picture (some of Avedon's American West series images come to mine).

I think that it's not just the image that speaks to the viewer, but often the entire presentation: is it large or small, in what context is the image presented (a crowded gallery or your bedroom computer screen), what images immediately precede and follow it, the frame/mat, any previous information you have about the photographer, and, indeed, the caption-- all these factor into how much and what kind of impact a photograph can have. That said, the image *is* the most important part of the equation, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum.

Do you think the image above would have had the same impact had the caption not accompanied it? This is an honest question, not a rhetorical one.

-- Josh Wand (josh@joshwand.com), October 20, 2000.


mine == mind...

boy, LUSENET sure does need a preview function...

-- Josh Wand (josh@joshwand.com), October 20, 2000.


I absolutely think it would stand on its own, especially if the print is better technically than the scan. It could just be called "Martha". Let the viewer bring the meaning, man... it's worth a try-

-- Chris Yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), October 20, 2000.

A little more- >Do you think the image above would have had the same impact had the caption not accompanied it?

I think you mean the same intensity of impact. It would not have had the same impact because we would not know she was dealing with a serious medical problem. I think it would have had a different impact but just as real and as intense- and you would be responsible for it, not the fact of her brain surgery. When you bring her surgery into it, the focus goes to her as a person and as a story, and you start talking about "how is she now?" and "how's she taking it?" and the picture is, well, less considered. I mean, this captions OK, but I think you should keep them minimal. I think "story-captions" are cheating, even when Avedon does it. Probably especially when Avedon does it.

One thing about young artists who are good is that sometimes they don't know how good they are. Trust me, you're good without the help.

-- Chris Yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), October 20, 2000.


I like some of the dark ones, particularly Kristen S. and Julia W. I think they are very strong, just as this one is.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), October 20, 2000.


This is a beautiful and powerful portrait that portrays warmth and a deep sense of caring and sweetness in your subject, title notwithstanding. I am immediately taken with her eyes and the sense of calmness. It may actually be therapeutic to simply gaze into this photograph! I hope you are proud of this nice work, and I wish her the happiest outcome.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), October 20, 2000.

"Q. Do you think the image above would have had the same impact had the caption not accompanied it?"

A. "To leave this image untitled would be almost mis-informing."

It doesn't matter a rat's ass that this image is not sharp, except to another photographer. This image is not detail dependant. Her expression of experience is incredibly eloquent (take that Mr- Alliteration Gray!) and any softness from subject motion that may be evident (I didn't notice) only enhances my vicariously granted knowledge of who she is, and what she may be feeling. Unsure, perhaps a little clouded and living simultaneously in her past and future, and not so much the "now". Unsharp? So what? Less? Not!

As for Chris's suggestion to "Let the viewer bring the meaning, man.." what message might a veiwer bring, that could have the impact of this "title", that carry such importance to her, yet actually changes our lives so little. A uniquely solitary experience that we observe, from so far outside her life.

Hold your hand up to bifurcate her face, and see the duality of her life...t

p.s. Hey!... is is dated! That's all I need.

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), October 20, 2000.


this is indeed a lovely piece of work, for which technical excellence is the least important factor. the most striking feature of the image is its utter lack of artifice. btw, t meyer: your perception of the "duality" was very moving. it is the precise reason why the picture needs no title.

-- wayne harrison (wayno@netmcr.com), October 22, 2000.

A good caption can add meaning and greater significance to a great image, a good caption can do little to save a mediocre image. This image is truly honest, wonderful, and powerful without artifice. It reminds me of a quote from a movie "I must not fear. Fear is the mind- killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me." Paul Atredies in Dune

As for the technical comments, well from my humble perspective there is NOTHING you could have done to make this image any better, I'll leave it at that. A work of art is completed when your mind is satiated, not when you run out of material.

-- Altaf Shaikh (bshaikh@nyc.rr.com), October 28, 2000.


Your subject popped into my head as I was recently pondering other things. One of these days I may have to endure brain surgery to remove a colloid cyst, and I have a friend whose wife just had some different kind of brain surgery, and she is fully recovered. But the point of my post is that your photograph here has a lot of power and staying effect to remain in my memory after viewing it some time ago. I think there's a lot in this photograph that transcends most people's impressions or expectations of what photography really is, or what it can be. Thank you, Josh.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), November 11, 2000.


I've been wanting to respond in more length to this, but Real Life keeps interfering with my internet surfing and has stopped me getting beyond the factual and easy in my photo.net dabblings.

I'm sure part of the reason I like this so much is that it feels honest. She has that look of chronic worry which, sadly, most of us have at one time or another seen on the faces of friends, relatives or collegues, if not in the mirror. It is a very different look from the usual nerves and awkwardnesses which bubble up when 'real' people are put in front of a camera. There is a clear feeling of genuine angst.

Tom seems to think I was being flippant in my first response, but I was really just answering the question. The film-holder marks and feathered edges says this isn't just a 'straight' presentation of an honest portrait, but is the product of a photographer thinking about how to present an image, and prepared to use props which are mostly appreciated only by other photographers. As such, it is not inappropriate to go beyond the raw empathy stirred up by the photo, and think explicitly about its presentation.

First, this doesn't have to be a portrait of Martha at a particular time of her life. It is strong enough to stand as a depiction of gnawing concern in general, and then the title reduces the potential range of responses of the viewer. I also get an annoying feel that I'm being told how I should respond emotionally, when the image simply doesn't need it.

One of the rewarding things about photography is how different people can love the same image for different reasons, and allowing this one to resonate with those who have seen or experienced this emotion, whatever its cause, would make it more of a universal photo and less of a frozen moment in one specific life. In this line, I don't actually care if Martha is a model - it doesn't detract from the power of the photo.

I also, and this is a personal thing, strongly dislike the way that well-meaning society aids a serious disease in taking over a person's whole life. Catharsis is an undoubted boon, but it's very easy for people to become nothing more than a symbol for an illness. The important thing in this photo for people who don't know Martha is that she is deeply worried, the cause of that worry is secondary.

I hope this doesn't sound callous or snide. Thanks Josh for an image which goes well beyond the ordinary.

-- Struan Gray (struan.gray@sljus.lu.se), December 04, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ