This is probably the most basic question you could possibly ask a photographer, but I find myself not sure of the answer at times. Sometimes I even leave the camera home as it can become a distraction. I was interested in seeing what motivates others to spend their hard earned money on equipment,film, and processing and all the free time they use up on photography, darkroom, and at places like this forum.

I often take pictures to record images of family, friends, and events that mean something to me--very "Kodak",I know.

I also get some kind of creative satisfaction from framing a small part of the world in a pleasing way to share with others, whether it be a landscape, an abstract, or a portrait. I really enjoy getting a great image of something otherwise "very ordinary" that you would normally just walk right past.

I recently have been doing a lot of portraits of children, and it has given me a greater insight into kids and how different they see themselves and the world than I do as an adult. I love trying to capture that exact second an expression comes forth that really is their "signature look".

I must also admit, sometimes I take pictures of a particualar subject just to see how damn sharp that 50mm Summicron or Micro Nikkor is!

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), December 11, 2001

Answers

There's nothing wrong w/the "Kodak" philosophy. Aside from being an aid to personal & family memories & sentiments, our photos & snaps serve a historical purpose--I've always been fascinated by looking @ old photographs of exotic & bygone eras (like the 1970s!) & I hope that, one day, my pictures of life @ the turn of the century will hold some interest for future viewers.

Like you, I sometimes also take photographs almost as an excuse to use items from my camera & lens collection. In that sense, photography serves as a substitute for target shooting & other firearms-related pastimes I used to enjoy (I now live in the city)--a pretext to get out of the apartment & engage the outside world, if only indirectly through an old metal & glass contraption.

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), December 11, 2001.

Andrew, maybe this is the best question here of all time! I myself take pictures for only two reasons: (1) because I have a new M6 and at certain times a new lens (which ever one, who cares...?) and want to "get to know these versions", and (2) I want to /I need to /I try to record something that might not otherwise have ever been recorded. Isn't that so logical? Whether it is my equipment or my family, or what I see all day is really a big difference, but... I still don't know know why I am here. I guess that isn't much of an answer to your good question. Thanks for asking it.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), December 11, 2001.

I take pictures to capture moments in life as reminders of its passage. Sometimes to tell a story. I sometimes shot for other people's needs when I did photography for pay, but no longer.

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), December 11, 2001.

Twofold. Now hte main reason I photograph is to record the life I live. A lot of family, but also a lot of shooting in cafes (where I spend a lot of time), of local musicians (and the venues they play in, also because I spend a lot of time in these places), and the area I live in. As well I do a lot of 'arty' stuff, mostly nudes (www.bodyscapes.ca). I feel that the first is by far the most important (and fulfilling). The 'Kodak Moments' as mentioned earlier are what future generations are going to have to judge and remember us by........

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), December 11, 2001.

Like many, to sort of document my life for some reason I don't really understand. Also to put some sort of artistic/creative input into my life. Sometimes I do wonder why I bother when you see the pile of slides and shots I have - what the hell do I do with them all and who is it for? I guess this is the same question as why we are alive. What is the purpose of it all?

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), December 11, 2001.

People photography is most of what I do, as I find it to be the most fascinating subject. But also, I like patterns in nature, or color for color's sake. I like film (B&W and Color) - negatives or positives, and I love looking at them over a light table, rejoicing in the subject matter, tonality, vibrant colors, sharpness, and composition. I enjoy photography for myself. I have purposefully kept it a hobby, not a profession, because it is something I want as a creative outlet for passion itself, not for the income it could provide - although I greatly admire those that are able to make a living from their art and or their craft.

-- David (pagedt@chartertn.net), December 11, 2001.

When I started as a teenager in the early seventies, I took many pictures of building sites for my father and his colleagues - architects and civil engineers. I also took pictures to record images of family and friends on print film, and to share my travels experiences in slide shows. I still use the same M3 that taught me how to photograph!

As a university student, I assisted a wedding photographer, learned developing, printing and using studio lighting. That was the time when I experimented a lot with SLRs, shooting abstracts, macro and landscapes as a distraction from the daily formal portrait work. In retrospective, none of these photographs has any artistic value. I took pictures for the sake of taking pictures, aiming at technical perfection. My critics said that they were lifeless, since I never included people in my compositions.

I once happened to meet two professional fashion models and learned how to make good portraits. Yes, it is the subject that counts!!! Since then, I shared photography with others, adding some great model shots to my portfolio and slide shows. Since travelling and portrait photography established me as a recognised good photographer among my friends, I took pictures as a means for communication.

Married to a jeweller, I helped my wife and her colleagues to photograph their collections regularly, turning my hobby into business. I still sell around 100-200 pictures a year for commercial use (ads, invitation cards, gallery posters, brochures and magazines). Though I am paid for that, I do it mainly for fun and because it's an old habit :-)

I also do lots of people photography and travel very frequently. When I come back from remote or less remote parts of the world, my slide shows support the stories I tell. I admit that I prefer to record the less unpleasant part of the cities I visit. A friend of mine, born in Birmingham (UK), thought that his hometown was one of the ugliest places in England, until he saw my pleasing presentation of 40 pictures, which convinced him that Birmingham can be very interesting indeed. He could not believe that such places existed in reality. Maybe I photograph to show and reveal something that other are unable to see?

Now I have two children of 7 and 9 years and mainly take pictures for my own "creative satisfaction" and my friends' pleasure. Technical perfection is not required when doing portraits of children, their parents are happy when they look good. Yesterday I distributed 125 reprints of pictures I had recently taken at two events, a performance of my daughter's ballet school and a childrens party. I didn't charge anything, maybe I just shoot for recognition.

As you see, I have no definite answer to the original question. I take pictures for many many reasons. But they can be summarized as a means to express myself and to share my view of the world with my family and friends.

-- George (gdgianni@aol.com), December 11, 2001.

Photos make good company. They are constant. They are there. There is a stabilizing effect in them. Time isn't slipping away any longer, people aren't. At times they become significant. The good ones. A truth behind the truth shows up. A mood, a hidden secret, personality. Photographs help me to remember. And sometimes they just help me to grasp what surrounds me, by shaping it. Most of all, though, I guess that I photograph to better know myself.

Thanks, Andrew.

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), December 11, 2001.

Good question, Andrew.

Primarily for the memories. I take pictures to a) capture events, b) capture moments with family and friends, c) document travel, and d) test new equipment. I get pleasure from using top quality photographic equipment to produce a desired end product. Perhaps there is still a little bit of the child in me that marvels at the creation of an image. I hope that I never lose it. LB

-- Luther Berry (lberrytx@aol.com), December 11, 2001.

To look for perfection, to remeber, for gaining something, but even in this last one there are, at the very bottom, the first two reasons. So, why man (der Mensch) looks for perfection? Or try to remember? To shot photos is a true religious expression, is a faith and is a way by which we looks for God.

-- joseph pelizza (breglumasi@hotmail.com), December 11, 2001.

<<>>

Sorry!

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), December 11, 2001.

Certain aboriginal groups still regard photographs as having magical qualities. I'm with them. After all these years, magic is the best word I can think of to describe what happens when I use this light- tight little box with its glass eye to steal the image of something and take it home with me. Another photographer [Frank? Friedlander?] once said that he photographed things just to see how they would look in a photograph. I like that. My photographs are small, rarely larger than 4x6 or 6x9. They were once much larger when I photographed with an RB67 and spent most of my camera time trying to emulate Brett Weston. Such a waste of film and paper! Now, I take my "keepers" and cut window mattes for them and then store them away in plastic shoe boxes. Every now and then, I take a box full and look at them just to see if it's still magic. And then I put them away. The only photographs I have framed and hanging are of my wife's grand- daughters. Good looking kids.

John

-- John Myers (mymacv@aol.com), December 11, 2001.

Cameras are great toys (especially Leicas) and I love to play!

-- Hil (hegomez@aol.com), December 11, 2001.

I think every well rounded person should have some artistic outlet. I can't draw, paint or sculpt, so I photograph. This might sound corny, but while the results are important and I love to look at the slides on the light table, I enjoy the problem solving and thought process during the actual shoot even more. How can I shoot this much photographed thing and make it look different? Twenty years ago, I'd have been happy just to emulate postcards from places I was visiting, but now I look at the card shops to see how NOT to photograph the landmarks.

I have subsequently taken up guitar, and I am at that "postcard" phase now. I can't wait until emulation is boring and innovation is my thrill in this endeavor.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), December 11, 2001.

It is funny that you pose this question now. I take pictures to remember things, to improve, to get closer to people, and because I hope that somehow I can share something I love with others. A quick (promise) story about a project I am working on. About 6 months ago a friend who owns a restaurant asked me to take a quick shot of him for a magazine. I did and then I shot the rest of the roll in the restaurant. I went back that afternoon and one of the cooks asked if she could see the pictures. After viewing some of them she asked if she could have one. When I said sure, she began to cry. It turns out that she is from El Salvador, sends all of her money home, has no family here, and what we all throw away in film, prints, etc. is rare to them because they are so poor. The other day, I went in and she was crying because she was remembering when she was a little girl and her father would take her to the fields to work without food, water, or coffee (important to her for some reason) because they were so poor. I am doing an album of the restaurant and all of the people she works with whom she now refers to as her family.

All of us are lucky to have expensive toys, and mostly the ability to make something meaningful for someone who cannot do so themselves. I have also taken pictures of a homeless guy and an artist painted him in a really neat painting -- he now has some more self respect and he even dresses better! Of course, he still asks for money every time I see him. :)

-- Peter Brock (p.j.brock@worldnet.att.net), December 11, 2001.

Because if I didn't have some acceptable outlet for my voyeuristic tendencies I might wind up in jail! :o)

Seriously, I've been a people-watcher all my life, and much of my photography is simply an extension of that. Perhaps that's why the 135mm Tele-Elemerit (with eyes) is one of my absolute favorite lenses. I know of no other lens which offers a close-up view with such a feeling of secretiveness.

-- Dave Jenkins (djphoto@vol.com), December 11, 2001.

Mostly I love cameras and lenses, but to keep my wife from having me committed I have to load them up and shoot every now and then.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), December 11, 2001.

I don't think the answers above has covered up 100% of your intention/need to photograph. If your are to record life, why you need to keep lenses of the same focal length, a few camera bodies.....tons of equipment? To most of us (at least to me), we have hard earned the money and we've got to be rewarded. Somebody go out to have fine food or wine, some buy expensive cars or watches, enjoy their lifes one way or the other. Some, like me, enjoy looking at good photographs, buy good cameras with the hope to making good photographs and to enjoy the process of taking photographs. Except those professional photographers who make their living by shooting photos, we all are amateurs and photographing is just our hobby - quite an expensive hobby though!

-- tom tong (tom.tong@ckh.com.hk), December 11, 2001.

I am slowly accumulating all known photographic equipment on Earth. When I finally have it all, and you all want some back, I'll finally make my fortune. Better hold on to your Leica!

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), December 11, 2001.

Scientists tell us that about half the material that is supposed to be in the universe, is missing. Apparently some of them are quite concerned about this. I keep meaning to write to them, to reassure them that it's not missing. It's all in my darkroom.

I almost did what a few others did--answer the wrong question by telling why I have so many cameras. OK, the question was why do we take pictures. Actually, for me, it would be unthinkable not to. Out of the question. Part of my identity. Something I have to do. A lot of the meaning is in the doing of it. Engaging in the process. Of course, the finished product counts, too. Once I come up with something I like, it'll hang on the wall for years, and gives me pleasure every time I pass by it. It is my image, as seen, photographed, and printed, by me. No one else's will look exactly like mine. It's one of the important ways I experience the world.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), December 11, 2001.

I can't draw.

-- Chuck Albertson (chucko@siteconnect.com), December 11, 2001.

What makes you think I actually take pictures? I keep telling you, chicks dig Leicas. I wear 'em as jewelry.

In truth, I take pictures because a) I relate to people better when photographing them (it helps account for the staring), b) it makes hanging out in bars and cafes, at parties, and on the street a productive venture, c) it satisfies my need to create drama, and d) I get nervous and uncomfortable if I go very long without doing it.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), December 12, 2001.

I can draw, and do that too, sometimes while out taking pictures, sometimes of the same things I have photographed. Both are about seeing the world, for me, and seeing it slowly, even though the depression of the shutter is much faster than sitting and drawing. If I draw from a photo I have taken it is another way of seeing the scene, and I am still astonished at how much more there is to see than at first. By doing photography my drawing is benefitted, by drawing my photography is.

Both are pure pleasure. Both are about light. Pencils are cheaper, and lighter, but I'm not giving up one for the other.

-- Margaret (fitz@neptune.fr), December 12, 2001.

Lutz' reponse reminds me of the role of photographs in the great movie, Blade Runner. The replicants carried photos around with them, to have memories, in an attempt to become human. I recall a really neat essay in Alien Zone, ed. Annette Kuhn, by Giuliana Bruno, that analyzed the movie from this standpoint (as a prof. once told me, only Europeans can get away with interesting, scholarly work on pop culture).

I often think of looking a photos as a way to get know someone, whether they're potraits of that person, or of those close to him/her. There is something about photos that places a person or a place in history, into some kind of context. It's like a visual diary, and there is so much to re-viewing photos long ago taken.

Perhaps I take photos in an attempt to create those visual artifacts, sign posts along the psyche's highways.

-- Tse-Sung (tsesung@yahoo.com), December 12, 2001.

One thing I like most about taking pictures is to freeze myself a situation which is going to change sooner or later. Architecture before the war. Landscape before housing development. Youth before it is old. Some things in life won't ever get replaced.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), December 12, 2001.

As a pupil, about 10 yrs. old I took photographs of my teachers and my classmates with an old AGFA-box. Nobody else used a camera that day and I still feel the thrill and the exitement which occured, when I turned up with these tiny b/w photos a week later. Suddenly I felt like a small artist and an important businessman at the same time because even the teachers orderd my photographs.

About 100,000 negs. later this feeling still does exist. The AGFA-box changed to a LEICA and there is (almost) no business anymore. I take all those photos as my personal diary and love it to go through my enlaged keeper-photographs and submit one or the other to a photocontest.

Beautiful question, Andrew. There is much more which could be said to this ...

Best wishes

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), December 12, 2001.

Just occurred to me: another thing I like most about taking pictures is the fact that this has to do with a truly mechanical type of thing. Above all, the M family! (C'mon, forget my TTL's battery, 'eh!) Having gone through life where pocket calculators came, PCs came, internet came etc etc etc, there is almost nothing around these days which isn't a high-end part of electronics. But (at least for me) there's something absolutely special or maybe even historical about fooling around with our photo toys.

Andrew, thanks again for asking the whole question. Sure don't know why I never thought of it myself!

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), December 12, 2001.

For me when I photograph, something very special is happening, it feels almost spritual. It makes me whole.

-- Mick Turner (mnturner@bigpond.com), December 12, 2001.

Andrew:

Thanks very much for this.

Answer: Because I can. (Beware of the onslaught of psychobabble).

When in highschool, I was never part of "The Gang" so I thought if I took pictures the other kids (i.e. girls)would want to see them and come to me for something. I did and so did they.

Still, the motivation is the gratification when someone likes a picture and says so.

There is the blend of Art and Technology that just about matches my left/right brain combo, and I get a kick out of being somewhewre without having to really participate. Also, being seen to do so, say in front of an audience, up close etc still works on the old gratification receptors.

Admittedly there is also a bit of the old "How will people know I am, if I don't have?" going on-hence a good part of the way I justify Leica stuff.

"Because I can" is not unlike others who say "Because I can't draw". Whatever talents I was given come to the surface in making photos and the science/art of B&W printing. My creative writing is OK but not great, as is musicmaking, so this comes out as the most successful.

The best reason is: "I like to". The next best is: "Why Not?"

I also have 4 kids and 2 grandsons so there is a very practical reason as well, although the older ones quickly tire of being asked to model all the time.

The sense of achievement is GREAT when a print comes out of the soup that I am proud of and I judge if it is great or not.

Thanks agian for the oportunity for some reflection.

All the best to you and all the Leic spirited folks on this forum.

I am off to the mountains of Central China to work for for a week and will likely be incommunicado until I get back to Toronto on the 23 rd for the season, so Greetings to all for Peace Serenity and fulfillment in the next year.

cheers

-- RICHARD ILOMAKI (richardjx@hotmail.com), December 12, 2001.

The same to you Dear Richard, and please bring some good photos from central china; and take a safety way until return, best of luck.

Andrew, want to thank you for such a sensitive question, probably many of us have felt related to others coment to Andrew´s question, I have and it has made me feel so close to all of you, in some way, thank´s all.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), December 12, 2001.

Just wanted to thank everyone for the honest replies. When it occured to me to post this question, I had a feeling that many lovers of photography would have similar motivation for their desire to record the world around them. I can say after reading the responses, I can relate to just about all of them-which is no big surprise. Someone mentioned a side line to this question, which is what the heck do you actually do with all the hundreds and thousands of images you have taken. I blow some up and hang them around the house, my wife's office at work, or give them as gifts. Others go in family albums and my "greatest hits" portfolio. Most sit in a drawer or box, and some go straight into the "editing can".I even manage to scan a few and post them from time to time. Thanks again-Andy

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), December 12, 2001.

because I can.

-- Haim Toeg (haim_toeg@bmc.com), December 12, 2001.

Photography for me is a religious experience and shooting Leica glass is heavenly. :) I think that being a photographer is similar to a "priest" or shaman who can connect to Heavenly Father/God symbol etc. in terms of the Joseph Campbell experience. For me, shooting is like a religious rite something which is methodical and yet freeing at the same time. Plus it's catharsis at its best.

Of course, after the Sept. 11 tragedies, I realize how tenuous and ephemeral life has become. For me, photographs will be excavated after everything else will be destroyed or undermined. So for me, photography is also an archaelogical experience, a way of capturing the historicity of life before the candle waxes out.

Amen, Alfie

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), December 12, 2001.

Additional thoughts:

I'm glad this forum's gotten back to its feet. Or minds.

Richard, I would also love to see pix of Central China (where is that, really, Wuhan, Eastern Tibet...?)

Lutz sent me a photo in response to an earlier post of mine, and I thought to share some what I replied to him. As others have stated, I think of photography as a means of recording. It's interesting b/c up to now, we have imputed upon photography the idea that it is a competent (and, pre-Photoshop, completely credible) form of documentation. But documentation is itself an expressive act. So ultimately, as others have noted, perhaps we all photograph for various forms of expression. "This moment is just how I recall it. This is what I thought was funny/sad/ironic/beautiful/serene/ devastating. Why? Just because that's who I am." It's interesting b/ c I think now that many memories are indeed augmented, if not entirely rewritten by photos. "Is that scene how it really was, or is that just how I recall the slide that mom took of it..."

Tse-Sung

PS- The post-911 world was mentioned-- a tangent: thousands of negatives housed in the WTC seem to have been lost (including a huge collection on the Kennedys). After the fires in the Oakland Hills in the SF Bay Area a decade ago, my friends and I were thinking how we would protect our most prized possessions. We all thought of our negatives and slides, and how best to keep them. Separate, in a fire proof container? Near the door to grab on the way out if need be? Should we scan them into cyberspace? Or, if we lose them, can we live with the fact that they'll be in that part in our minds with thousands of other scenes unrecorded, unphotographed? The loss of photos, esp. of people, reminds me of the loss of the artifact or subject itself (like the statues of Bamiam, for instance.)

-- Tse-Sung (tsesung@yahoo.com), December 12, 2001.

This is a question that has been on my mind too and I really am learning from this thread. My reasons for taking pictures have evolved.

For me, photography has become my personal journal. I don't enjoy keeping a written diary but I love capturing images as I go through life. And the pictures I enjoy are the ones that aren't at all posed. The moment I learn a photo has been posed my interest in it lessens substantially. I love pictures that show an aspect of life. I think it is impossible to know which images one will value most in the future.

I keep thinking I should pick a topic and go create a photographic essay. But what I enjoy most is living a life that interests me and capturing images that accurately record what I saw and as best as possible the emotions I felt.

I don't have the ability to do it as well as the great photographers but I am doing the best I can.

I also find that the more I shoot the less concerned I am with the equipment and the more I care about just capturing the moment. I am particular about optical quality and enjoy holding a well crafted piece of equipment in my hands so I prefer Leica.

But I have gone through periods where I didn't take many photos and would be pleased as punch to have pictures made with a drug store disposable or a p&s rather than nothing.

It is not only the memories. It is trying to capture something important about life in the chaos that surrounds us that keeps me shooting. My desire to capture such images, however, outstrips my ability. But I've decided taking many bad pictures is the price of a few great pictures.

Thank you for posting the question.

-- David Enzel (dhenzel@vei.net), December 12, 2001.

...I think that being a photographer is similar to a "priest" or shaman who can connect to Heavenly Father/God symbol etc.

Your assumptions are not shared by everyone: Even if one believes in a deity, who's to say it's male?

I saw an interview with Jerry Garcia many years ago and he was asked why he keeps writing songs and playing the guitar. He replied, "What else is there to do, man?"

Very few people, on their deathbed, say, "You know, the one thing I didn't do enough of in life is watch TV." Active creativity is far better than passive consumption. As a friend of mine once said, either you're buying someone else's fantasy or you're selling your own. I prefer the latter.

Peter Hughes Photography

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), December 12, 2001.

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), December 12, 2001.

I take pictures because I can't but take pictures.

-- Victor Randin (ved@enran.com.ua), December 13, 2001.

I take pictures because I can´t draw good and fast enough.

Good shooting

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), December 13, 2001.

I take pictures when I have a subject that interests me enough to keep me awake at nights thinking about it. At that point I have to go and photograph it. Then there's the awful haul of sorting, scanning, captioning and impaginating etc. Then after a bit I get interested in a new subject and start losing sleep all over again. It often takes a few months for a project to reach that degree of obsession, but when it does, I have to do something about it. I have a backlog right now of 3 or 4 projects that I want to do next year, maybe I'll manage to do 2 of them.

I suppose what that adds up to is that for me it's the subject that counts.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), December 13, 2001.

Hi, Andrew: I have questioned this to myself several times, specially when I first noticed the many alternative uses the money I have spent in film and processing could have had. I usually don't get too concerned about the cost of cameras, which is usually so much of a concern here, because I still remember and advertisement Olympus issued for their OM1 (I guess) many years ago in Playboy (forbiden material for me at that time . . .). They said something like: Do you think an OM1 is too expensive? Just put it this way: it is worth about the same than 100 rolls of film !!

But going back to the point: I make pictures because I enjoy putting attention to the beauty of the World I live in: I go all over my world constantly looking for photo items and aprising images the way different lenses would see them and the way they would look in colour and/or B&W and frequently imaging the best POV even if not accessible in reality. Thanks to that exercise, I live in a very beautiful and meaningful World and most human expresions are familiar for me and most human faces have some graphic beauty no matter what the overall look. Add to that the satisfaction that my friends, employees, students and relatives experience with a pleasant image of themselves (many times strenghtening some weak self steem like in my daughter Fernanda's case) and there is no doubt for me that I could hardly get the same satisfactions otherwise for the same investement in terms of time and money. In short: my whole life has been improved by my hobby; which is what hobbys are meant for, right ?

And then, on top of everything, now I "know" you all, friends.

For me, that is much more than enough, thanks God.

Cheers

-Iván

-- Iván Barrientos M (ingenieria@simltda.tie.cl), December 15, 2001.