Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I'd say, Michiel, that with 23 years experience as a reporter, I have a pretty good idea of when people are being 'themselves' and when they aren't. The problem with this thread, which started out as an interesting discussion about the difficulties/realities of trying to work in a documentary mode, it's become more a discussion for a philosophy classroom than a photo class. Does the tree make a sound when it falls in the forest if there's no one there to hear it? Best B. D. On 1/13/08 4:06 PM, "Michiel Fokkema" <michiel.fokkema@wanadoo.nl> wrote: > But the problem is B.D., that you can not know how they behave when you > are not there! Therefore you can not know if they behave natural when yo > are there. > Off course, working with them for a longer period will shift them into > more natural behavior. > > Cheers, > > Michiel Fokkema > > B. D. Colen wrote: >> If I'm reading both you and Ted correctly, Tarek, you're arguing about >> quantum mechanics rather than about photography. >> >> I would agree with virtually everything you write here - although I do >> think >> there are times when people are truly unaware of a photographer's >> presence. >> The real issue, I would suggest, is not whether someone is "aware" of your >> presence on a metaphysical level, but whether that awareness alters their >> behavior. And both you and Ted - and I - see to agree that, if one is >> doing >> his or her job correctly, it does not. So the awareness is really >> irrelevant. >> >> Best, >> B. D. >> >> >> On 1/13/08 1:54 PM, "Tarek Charara" <tarek.charara@pix-that-stimulate.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Ted, >>> >>> may I humbly suggest that according to my experience (a third of a >>> century this year), the mere presence of someone, with or without a >>> camera, active or not, in a particular space just modifies that >>> space and the behaviour of the other beings in that space, to a >>> certain degree. (I'm having some difficulties expressing this, but >>> hope I'm clear enough). >>> I want to believe that my active, but very discrete presence with a >>> camera has no influence whatsoever on what is happening around me and >>> that people and things are just the way the would be without my >>> presence. How can I be sure? I can never be sure... >>> >>> It has been proven that the unconscious mind is aware of (and >>> memorizes) things the conscious mind didn't even notice. The body >>> acts according to these things nevertheless! Experiments in (quantum) >>> physics have shown that results can differ if someone is looking at >>> the experiment or not... Who am I to pretend that my presence has no >>> influence whatsoever? >>> >>> On the other hand, does it need to show in the picture? No. When your >>> subject is totally absorbed in whatever s/he is doing, the >>> photographer/journalist/reporter becomes less and less important and >>> the subjects seem more and more natural... >>> >>> You see Ted, I didn't say you were wrong, I said that "Believing the >>> subject could "forget" that the photographer is in the room or around >>> him taking pictures, is just wrong". There was nothing personal about >>> that. You may believe other things and this is ok with me. >>> >>> The subject can ignore the photographer. S/he can pretend the >>> photographer is not there and act naturally, my opinion is that if >>> the photographer had a "paparazzi approach" the subject's behaviour >>> would be different. And this even after weeks and weeks of living >>> with the subjects. >>> >>> All the best from the south of France! >>> >>> Tarek >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------- >>> Tarek Charara >>> <http://www.pix-that-stimulate.com> >>> >>> NO ARCHIVE >>> >>> >>> Le 13 janv. 08 ? 15:40, Ted Grant a ?crit : >>> >>>> Tarek Charara offered quite unmistakenly! >>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] When in doubt ask photographer >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> Ted,I think we are thinking this the other way around: it's not >>>>>> about the >>>> photographer, it's about wether the subject is concentrated or not >>>> on what >>>> he's doing. Believing the subject could "forget" that the >>>> photographer is in >>>> the room or around him taking pictures, is just wrong.<<< >>>> >>>> Excuse me? >>>> >>>> I don't know what the hell is wrong with some of you people when >>>> you are >>>> dealing with a photojournalist with over half century experience of >>>> working >>>> in the fashion we're discussing. Then have the audacity to tell me I'm >>>> WRONG!! :-( Get stuffed! >>>> >>>> I have nothing to gain by explaining to you exactly what these >>>> experiences >>>> are, but you people are the ones who are wrong! Damn it if I sound >>>> angry I >>>> bloody well am! >>>> >>>> When I explain to you of daily experience with published books to >>>> back it up >>>> not to mention the assignments, do not tell me I'm wrong! >>>> >>>>>>> The photographer can be ignored, but that doesn't mean that the >>>>>>> subject's >>>> unconscious mind isn't aware of his presence and/or that the >>>> photographer >>>> isn't altering the scene by his presence.<<< >>>> >>>> Look if you walk into a room and have 2 minutes to get some quick >>>> hit and >>>> miss snap you maybe right. >>>> >>>> But what appears to be happening here is, you are not listening nor >>>> do you >>>> understand the difference between a 2 minute hit and run compared >>>> to a 5 day >>>> or 5 weeks day after day shooting in the environment of the subject or >>>> subjects you're documenting. >>>> >>>> Your lack of understanding that it's possible to be there and not have >>>> absolutely any influence on the subject or subjects is in direct >>>> ratio to >>>> your inexperience! Certainly compared to a photojournalist of some >>>> merit in >>>> this field regardless of the subject and time. >>>> >>>> Thank you all for listening, but for crying out loud get with the >>>> program >>>> and listen to experience! >>>> >>>> Have a nice day! >>>> >>>> ted >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information