Ever since digital photography came around I’ve felt a bit disillusioned as a photographer. Perhaps it wasn’t so much me that changed, but the fact that everyone around me suddenly had a camera too (ahem, even the non-photographers). Without the limits of a roll of film, I can shoot endlessly, but am not necessarily more satisfied with the results. In fact, I end up creating more work – uploading, sorting, organizing, editing, sharing – than before. Lately I’ve found myself taking too many overall shots that feel generic and touristy.
So after visiting the
Corcoran the other day with
Margaret (you’ll remember her from
this Boarding Pass) and seeing the work of
William Eggleston, I felt refreshed and re-inspired (I didn’t realize how long it had been since I’d been to a photo exhibition). Not only did I love his work, but seeing it with Margaret also helped open my eyes.
The first shot we come across, Margaret comments,
I love this photo, but I would crop it differently. We then proceed to pull up our hands close to our faces and use them as crop tools. The artist has made his selection, but we are not without our opinions. A few photos later we saw a shot that reminded us both of one her
dad had taken that stuck with us both. And then we pulled out a bit of our past from a class we both took in college called
The Culture and History of Still Photography. We channeled our inner
Roland Barthes finding the
studium – the meanings we can draw from the clues in the pictures – guessing about what was happening in the scenes past, and the
punctum – those small details not intentionally caught [or accidents] by the photographer which add significance – within the photographs. Then we pondered, were these photographs as charming back in the day (the ’60s) or do we see them differently today with a sense of nostalgia? Like this shot of the kitchen sink – it’s probably way cooler now than it was back then. Classic.
{image: William Eggleston, Memphis, 1975 dye transfer print Corcoran Gallery of Art, Washington DC}
Ever since digital photography came around I’ve felt a bit disillusioned as a photographer. Perhaps it wasn’t so much me that changed, but the fact that everyone around me suddenly had a camera too (ahem, even the non-photographers). Without the limits of a roll of film, I can shoot endlessly, but am not necessarily more satisfied with the results. In fact, I end up creating more work – uploading, sorting, organizing, editing, sharing – than before. Lately I’ve found myself taking too many overall shots that feel generic and touristy. 
Sage
August 19, 2009 at 3:47 pm //
Oh my goodness I must go. In my photography class where we had to shoot in the style of a photographer we admired I chose Eggleston. What a great post and wonderful blog!
Cate
August 19, 2009 at 4:04 pm //
Anne this is a really good post. I took a long time to convert to digital not because I’m a pro but I just wanted to get it right with film before becoming a lazy digital user. I tend to see things in black and white – Ansel Adams, and the unusual – Diane Arbor. Will I ever be at that level? I’m a realist.
MGVest
August 19, 2009 at 4:46 pm //
You’re a great museum buddy ;)
Travel Muse
August 19, 2009 at 8:10 pm //
I used to love visiting the Corcoran when I lived in D.C. I’m always surprised by how few people it attracts. Glad you featured it!
Sheren
August 20, 2009 at 2:39 am //
I just recently took photography more seriously by buying my first D-SLR and its been a lot harder than simply using a point and shoot. I must have taken over a 1000 pictures before I started to get some shots that I liked…I can’t imagine starting out as a film photographer!