in response to some comments i've heard lately regarding the subject, i wanted to share some thoughts,,,
for the record, let me state that an image is never good or bad (successful or unsuccesful) solely because it has or doesn't have texture.
the use of texture is one of many darkroom tools (yup, i did say darkroom
we call images successful when their elemental ingredients work together to communicate something in a powerful, provocative or pleasing manner.
off the top of my head, here are list of other tools/image-ingredients that also can affect your image:
- your 'subject' and/or other objects in frame
- light, and things that make it (like suns, flashes and fireflies)
- use of color and/or selective toning (or the lack thereof)
- dodging and burning
- retouching/airbrushing
- spaghetti thrown at printed image (or monitor) from distance,,, (i know you're curious, and you're right: there's only one way to find out...)
to say that some ways of affecting your image are 'photography' and others aren't is a matter of semantics and perspective.
i prefer to bypass that whole mess, and go to the root of things:
i'm a communicator. i'm interested in communicating. no matter what tools i use, whether a strobe or an overlay macro image of an aardvark tongue, when it comes down to it, i am simply shaping the composition and therefore communication of my image.
some of my work *has* texture,,, none of my work is *about* texture. a key difference : )
some of the recent trendification in portrait and wedding photography is *about* texture, which is why some of it is not as successful as it could be, imho
ask steven spielberg if the girl in the red coat was a statement about spot coloring,,, i don't think so. he used it because it helped him achieve his vision,,, his communication. for me at least, it worked extremely well.
making powerful, provocative or pleasing images is not a trend. and whatever method you use to get there,,, you arrive : )
i have spent time exploring textures and other alternative post processes and have consequently become skilled at using them to help me communicate. many others can say the same of their ability with strobes or b&w or even with words for that matter. they're all ways of 'getting there'.
it seems antiproductive for people to argue about how this or that vehicle isn't the 'best' or 'real' way to get there,,, or even how long it will take before the vehicle someone is riding will be considered outdated. imagine if we worried about those kind of things before getting into our cars on the way to a wedding... "hmmm,,, when will this maserati be considered outdated?" (ok, ok, a guy can wish ; )
i think the same amount of energy invested towards your own journey would yield a much more satisfying & beneficial fruit. and what is 'your own journey'? of course, only you can know. as with buying a motor vehicle, research and try a few out,,, see what fits with your particular style, preferences and needs.
i think it's kind of funny that some people think of me as 'the texture guy', but i don't let it discourage or trap me. i'm not the vehichle i've been using, and i'll only use it as long as it helps me get where i'm going.
i think the people who connect with my work know that textures have nothing to do with it.
why do i use them then, you might ask? because i have found them to be a perfectly wonderful and useful tool for communicating, as perfectly valid as mastering a flash or video light. it's been exciting playing in an area i wasn't familar with, and i've enjoyed sharing my explorations with others.
i think movement is important.
it's not about the vehicle,,, it's about the journey. it's about communicating : ) i do my best to mind the vehicles, learning to use them to my advantage, but try not to let them become distractions or limitations for me. this has worked well for me.
much love friends,,,
jesh ; )
p.s. as i seem to be offending people with posts lately, let me please disclaim that it is not my intention to offend or belittle anyone's views or practices. do what works best for you, and only you can possibly know what that is : )
*
