Tag Archives: Writing about photography

Uncategorized

Vintage Surf Images & The Power Of Grain

Every now and again the occasion arises to look back at images from the ’60s & ’70s. I recently found myself re-discovering old surfing magazines found in my attic, reviewing the (by today’s standards) low resolution vintage surf images printed in them and briefly being critical.

But these are powerful images, many for the time ‘state-of-the-art’, taken by skilled, and dedicated, photographers. Those photographers were working with equipment far less sophisticated than modern digital cameras.

My initial response was along the lines of ‘gosh the image/print quality was poor in those days’. However, I quickly rejected that view as I studied the pictures in more detail, considered the technology available and succumbed to the appeal of the grainy images. They are powerful on many levels – evoking the ocean way of life, reflecting the styles of the period, featuring some of the surfing ‘greats’ of the day, capturing the challenge and thrill of the wave and unleashing a fair amount of nostalgia.

It is, as so often commented, a fact that an image does not necessarily need to be technically perfect to leave a lasting impression.

(If there are any surf magazine collectors out there, these are mainly ‘Surfing’ and ‘Surfer’ issues from the early to mid ’70s. Reach out to me via my ‘Contact’ page if they are of interest.)

mfimage

Uncategorized

Does ‘Arty’ Language Make Better Images?

I’m probably in a minority on this one but I find myself increasingly troubled by what appears a trend towards the use of ever more ‘arty’ language to describe photographs, the rationale for photographic projects and creators’ areas of specialism.

How often these days do we see phraseology along the following lines?

‘… the project explores the complex interaction between perceived reality and lived experience, within an historical context, amongst a minority and little known community…’?

Is this really what the project set out to do? Is it post-rationalisation? Is it the belief that complex syntax and ‘big words’ somehow add importance to the work and elevate it to a higher level of achievement? Is it all part of a search for artistic recognition?

No doubt many will view such descriptions/explanations as central to conveying the photographic mission. Many others will appreciate the ‘arty’ language. There is, therefore, no right or wrong – but there will be different opinions.

The writing that communicates most effectively is invariably both concise and simple in structure. Personally, I prefer to look at an image and draw my own conclusions about the content. A picture is ‘worth a thousand words’ and all that, so give me a brief caption by all means but otherwise let the photograph tell the story.

mfimage