Art Photography Now

I finally got around to reading it. Susan Bright starts off by ensuring peoples mentality is up to date among the opening pages with, "The digital revolution has impacted in ways that would have been unimaginable only a few years ago, causing some to ask not, 'Is this art?' but 'Is this photography?'" She is quite right in making that statement, I believe. The role of photography as evidence, has been well and truly blown out of the water.

The opening of this book effectively shows how photography, perceived perhaps as the ultimate record of truth, can be taken as a tool in so many different forms of representation and is perhaps as flexible as the artists brush. This opens new doors of thinking and breadths of image sculpture.

Unless the reader is familiar with the different periods and artistic movements, this introduction is going to be hard reading.

The rest of the book shapes up to be a difficult read also, taking the reader to challenge the psychology and philosophy of all aspects. As an example, she writes of Cindy Sherman, "Her work is not concerned with finding an essential core but with debunking it. Her work focuses on the postmodern belief that our identities are made up of multiple selves dished up and adopted in a series of performances and masquerades in order to fit in with how culture has defined and determined us." Personally, as someone who has experienced crossing societies gender roles, I can fully connect and understand this viewpoint and definition.

Furthermore, Susan also goes in to details like the effect that different kinds of camera have on the subject; a large format camera invoking a different subject response than the SLR. This boook certainly wastes no time in going off in to the serious depths of the human psyche and the investigation and interpretation of such.

After reading the book, however, I am left with more questions than were answered. I will still be asking myself the question, "I know it is a photograph, but is it art?"

Link to this post

Photography swalowed by the box shifter.

It used to be a wonderful medium. A journey of passion. Equipment used to last for ages and provide us with reliable results.

Now, the bean counters and the box shifting mentality has accompanied the rise of photographies popularity. No longer is kit as reliable as it was. The increase in picture taking has resulted in a rush to get equipment out to market and has ended up with such a mass manufacture drop in quality that has affected the entire range of the corporates. This has not necessarily been matched by a drop in price.

Even at the lower end of the market, product could be expected to run for a good number of years; but it seems that the short termism of chasing the ever larger profit margin combined with our desire for everything on the cheap, (lets get it straight, the consumer is just as guilty as the manufacturer; they simply provide what we want to buy at the price we want to pay) has wrecked the legacy of our camera equipment.

The only people surviving this mentality are the likes of Leica and Hasselblad, who are way out of the reach of most mortal pen pushers like me.

Personally, it looks like the best course of action is to keep my head down until something else captures the populations fascination and photography is left on the shelf as yesterdays fad; then ... perhaps ... the quality and passion will return.

Link to this post

LRPS entries

These are the pictures that I put forward for my LRPS assessment. Having viewed some of the portfolios in the example documentation, I believe that this one stands a reasonable chance. Maybe a few of the shots are out of the ordinary, but we'll see whether I cut the mustard as a photographer yet.

All adjustments from the image as it was taken, are included in brackets.

The first one is the orchid shot. Included as the first shot because it is relatively easy on the eye and also shows positioning; I was actually beneath the flower when I took this shot.

ORCHID - (very slightly cropped)


The technique of long delay is shown here; the shutter was open for some seconds while the waves came in and then out again over these rocks. The camera was on a tripod.

STONE GHOST - (as shot)


The sun and moon shot is, I hope, conveying more control as the camera settings are really ramped to get this shot in to direct sun light. The white clouds in a blue sky have all turned various shades of coffee brown. (if you're thinking of aping this kind of shot, PLEASE use live view.)

SUN AND MOON - (slightly cropped)


I had the advantage of being out with a pro-photographer friend when this shot of Portland Bill was taken. We arrived before sun rise, each selected our shooting positions and set to work. (the sunrise/set calculator was a great help in my decision on where to set up) This is a silhouette, but still has crisp detailing on the metal work on the lighthouse.

PORTLAND BILL - (minor dust removed)


After confirming that photo editing was an expected part of the LRPS, I decided to enter the Christchurch beach huts. In this picture, the detritus has been edited out (coffee cups, etc.) and the sky has actually been replaced. It is meant to convey lines and angles.

BEACH HUTS - (sky replaced and articles removed)


This is a very heavily cropped shot; the eye of an Australian Bearded Dragon. The crop resolution is 1:1 the presentation resolution and represents about ... oh, an eighth of the original picture.

OZZIE'S EYE - (heavily cropped)


The horses eye is difficult to explain. It seems to convey its own message. It was actually taken in the rain and poor light, so the depth of field is not the best, but the focus is sharp on the eye and I hope that this, together with the colouration and texture of the skin, carries this to good favour.

THOUGHTFUL HORSE - (a fly removed)


For the hell of it, I threw in some still life. Why, I'm not sure. I just did. A different and, hopefully, reasonably executed shot.

WHITE WINE - (as shot)


The guitar player was my one deliberate, "capture the moment," shot. True, some of the other shots like the horse and the dragons eye were also not easy to catch but neither were they that obvious. This shot has colour, sharpness and, "a moment." ... I hope.

"DECOYS" GUITARIST - (as shot)


The last shot is a rose and is meant to show aperture control as well as contrast selection. Most of the foliage was sufficiently behind it that I could get a good depth of field on the rose itself, but still throw the background out of focus.

ENGLISH ROSE - (as shot)


I won't have the results of my entry until the end of April, so I'm not holding my breath. We'll see what turns up.

Link to this post

Interfit unit fails again

Call me thick, but if I transport some lighting equipment for twenty minutes in a car, in a padded aluminium case, (that they live in anyway) then take them out and set them up, I would expect them to work. Wouldn't you? Well, after a year of operation, one of the Stellar X units failed. They had actually only been out of the house on two occasions prior. Plugged in, switched on, there was a muted beep, a muted pop and it died. The fuses were intact and a smell of burnt electronics came from the ventilation slots. I haven't got a clue what happened but it smelt an awful lot like blown capacitor.

I know these units aren't supposed to be of the kind of standard that some pros use in the field; (ie. in forests, golf courses, beaches, anywhere and everywhere you can heft a battery pack and heads) this isn't Elinchrom we're talking about here ... but the way that this is going, I'll be too scared to take the Interfit kit outside the house.

I'm actually writing this on the Sunday that this has happened. I've e-mailed Interfit so this will test their metal once more. By the time you are reading this, I'll have had some form of response from them. (No you won't, because I forgot to set the post time forward. You were meant to be reading about this on Thursday. Oops.) To be honest, the treatment I've had from Interfit to date has actually exceeded my expectations; but I've got a feeling that this will be a failure too far. Time will tell.

At least it is possible to take some form of picture with one operational light, but all in all it was a disappointing four hours shooting.

Link to this post

Stunningly inspirational

If you're stuck in a rut and can't afford big bugets for models, stylists and all that crap, then take a stunning leaf out of this book of toy photography and get stuck in to making big pictures of small subjects.

There are some really inventive shots in there that are well worthy of a visit to the toy store.

Link to this post

Why chase the distinctions?

Those who know me are aware that I am not a lover of competitions. It is a notorious and foregone conclusion that each judge has their own favourites and that disagreement between photographer and judge is a hideously common occurrance. So why go through the hassle?

For a start, I'm not up against anyone else here. I'm up against myself and a pannel; not a single judge but a number of people. There are three sets of standards and it is up to me to push myself to reach those goals. The full details are in PDF here. The LRPS I believe I can achieve with what I have already shot. It will take care to select the ten shots required, but I believe I can do it. After twenty years of shooting and the last three years being quite heavy on the photo production, I think that my current work shows that I have control of the camera and the main controls of photography...

• Presentation: Overall Impression of Portfolio


• Technique: Camera Work


• Technique: Technical Quality


• Seeing: Visual Awareness


• Thinking: Communication

The ARPS goes further and is where the focus shifts from technical competency and goes to creativity. This, I believe, I can also achieve once I apply myself to the requirements of the application. I also believe that some of the work I shot in the last two years already gives me a good starting point to compiling the fifteen images necessary. It is explained in the document as follows...

"The second level of The Society’s Distinctions is the Associateship - a significant step up from the Licentiateship. While in the Licentiateship we are looking for a basic competence and skill, to be successful at Associateship level you need to demonstrate a high standard of technical competence as well as provide evidence of creative ability and the development of a personal style. You also need to be able to show that you are in complete control of the technical aspects which allows you to produce quality which is entirely ‘fit for purpose’ i.e. it suits the subject."

FRPS, however, is a whole different ball game and requires a degree of excellence that I don't think I will be able to achieve for a considerable number of years; I just don't have a camera in my hands often enough to be able to reach this level. I might manage it by the time I retire; if I am lucky. This is what the document lists...

"The highest Distinction offered by The Society is the Fellowship, which is awarded for excellence and distinguished ability, combined with evidence of originality or freshness in approach. By definition, achieving the Fellowship involves a significant amount of time and effort, but it is a goal worth aiming for and it is attainable.

The award of a Fellowship confers a recognition that you are a photographer of considerable merit and expertise, and is an achievement of which to be very proud.

In order to be successful, it is essential that the technical quality of your submission for the Fellowship is excellent and, if the work is interpretive, then the quality should be appropriate to the subject and intent. The presentation of your submission should be to the highest possible standard.

The assessors are looking for outstanding work that may be pushing forward the boundaries of photography in the discipline concerned. They want to see individual work with a strong personal style and a maturity of vision, both in the individual image and the presentation as a whole. They also want to be convinced that you are seeing, thinking, and working as a photographer at the highest level."

So, for someone like me, who doesn't earn money from photography, doesn't have assignments, no one to please other than myself ... this gives me a goal; something to shoot for and although continued membership of the RPS will cost a decent chunk of money for someone like me, on top of the assessment charges, it will be a fair whack of dosh that could otherwise be spent on equipment ... but I think it will be worth it in the long run.

This is the kind of photography that I aspire to be creating. Some of these shots are really stunning, and I want to create things like this ... but I will only achieve these kinds of levels if there is a goal to chase.

Link to this post

Royal Photographic Society

I got back home and, true to their word, the documentation was waiting for me. Consisting of the Distinctions Handbook, a copy of the call for 2010 entries to the 153rd International Print Exhibition and a copy of the journal for November; volume 149 number 9 ... that's a considerable publishing history. Also fitting, perhaps, that The Queen is on the cover. Their web site is here.



The Distinctions Handbook details the three main awards, Licentiateship (LRPS), Associateship (ARPS) and Fellowship (FRPS). It details the full process; the only question I had afterwards was whether I had to be present at the assessment, to which I think the answer is, no. The first part is to ascertain a level of competence as a photographer. More on that when I hear back from my first application in a few months.

The journal itself contains a separate section entitled, "Membership Matters," and contained a few short articles by members and a few event details that I brushed over. The journals main body started with a Presidents Report and then launched in to articles; feeling just like a general photography magazine. The content, however, was primarily art based and didn't contain the plethora of how-to that fills the news stand magazines. It was pretty much art all the way. Yes, there was some equipment reviews but the pure mathematics of it was 56 pages of article against 10 pages of adverts (there were some sub-page adverts so I've handled the maths as best I could) which, at a membership of £93, assuming 12 issues per year, that comes down to just under 14p per article page.

I pluck an unread copy of the only general photographic magazine I'll read these days (Amateur Photographer) out of the "still to read" bin and calculate it out at ... 54 pages at an annual subscription of £91.80 ... well, that is less than 4p per article page as AP is a weekly, not a monthly.

However, membership of the RPS is more than just a magazine subscription. It is the right to carry the letters after your name for any distinction you earn while you are a member. It is also a society; I'm not sure of the full benefits yet, but I'll work that out in time. The journal itself is also of a higher print quality and written more as a journal should be, rather than a magazine; so the simple price comparison is only the simplest of yardsticks; we are talking apples and oranges here; but they are both hanging fruit.

If there was a bridge between the two, then Professional Photographer would be it, at a current offer of £25 for twelve issues, that is a magazine worth looking at for artistic information without the price tag. But back to the RPS...

If you are aware of your equipment options, know your photoshop/gimp processing and just want information on the artistic world of photography, then taking a look at the RPS should be on your to-do list. Also, if you are over 65 the membership drops to £68 while students are just £40. There are also other charges for overseas, disabled and family memberships, so check them out if they apply to you.

Link to this post