"It's an ok shot that to be honest most folk with that camera and lens could take, sorry, but it's a bit catalogueish for me..."
I'm not going to dispute the 'most folk' bit (to a greater or lesser degree there's some truth in that point), but I want to pick up on his comment that the shot was 'a bit catalogueish'. A while ago, I probably wouldn't have taken the shot, and certainly wouldn't have processed it that way, but it was shot for the commission I mentioned yesterday. So, 'a bit catalogueish' is probably the style I should be going for.
Today's shot was also part of a commission, but the brief for that one was to produce something in my own style.
Anyway, as I mentioned, this got me thinking, particularly about what it means to me to be a photographer. And in this instance I think it's got something to do with drawing a distinction between fine art photography and other, perhaps more general forms of photography (both personal and commission based). Yesterday's shot, by no stretch of the imagination, could be classed as fine art photography, but I enjoyed taking it as much as any of my other images. It captured something of the carefree attitude or children, it's vibrant, and so on, but more importantly, it met the brief I was shooting to. In this case, it wasn't my own brief, but there's still a great deal of satisfaction in getting the shot you were after.
I guess that what I'm trying to say is that there are many different reasons I take photographs and what you see here is a record of those efforts. Some you'll like, some you won't, but chromasia is a record of that journey.
All of which is probably more of a ramble (no pun intended) than a coherent set of points, but I would be interested to hear your thoughts.
11.34am on 28/9/06|
EF 17-40 f/4L USM
33mm (53mm equiv.)