Lessons in photography: quality versus quantity

I am quite active on Photocrowd and I submit images into contests almost on a daily basis if I find the time. I am usually ranked somewhere in the Top 1000, sometimes I make it into the Top 500. Last year I also created some contests myself and acted as a community judge, but the new platform rules do not allow this option for non-paying members anymore. Nevertheless I still participate in the crowd rating, at least, again, if I find the time.

Something I have seen over and over again is, that people put very similar images into one and the same contest (or their galleries). They almost look identical, but the angle is a wee bit different or the image is cut in a slightly different way. Or they mix, some black & white, some color, but both of the exact same thing. The person entering these probably wants to increase the chance of winning or getting high-ranked, but from me you will get a quite different reaction. I will not even look at those shots for more than a second. For me the message is clear, the photographer himself can’t decide which of his works is the best and wants me to do his job. No thanks. If you do miss the patience and the eye to evaluate your work yourself, it is truly not worth my attention. That might sound harsh, but hey, I am not here to serve you strawberries, I want the reader to become a better photographer. Evaluating your own work is an important part of shooting better images.

Some people shoot two images, when others shoot a hundred. I usually take one or two, the shot I want and sometimes the “security shot”. Sometimes the second shot is a correctional shot, when I see I have made a mistake in shot number one. With just two choices, picking just one is easy for me in the end. But I can imagine it is a hell of a task when you shoot dozens of images of the same subject. If you think you really need all those shots, okay then, fine with me. But you need to take your time to decide which one is the best.

The contest situation is just an example. You can see the same phenomena in many photographer’s galleries on the internet. They do not display their best work, but their insecurity of chosing their best. They drop 100+ images on you within just one gallery, many shots showing almost the same. Image after image I have to look at the same thing. Well, I don’t have to, guess you can tell by now that I will be gone after the second shot. Unless, it is a completely different approach to the subject, that might actually intrigue me. Here are two examples. The second one was published in Infernus magazine (Portugal) a few years back. Both examples show two images of the same subject, but from a truly different perspective.

Palace Oberstein, Idar-Oberstein, Palatinate, Germany.

If those images wouldn’t be shown right next to each other, you would probably not realize at first sight that they do show the same subject. If you enter something like this into a contest, you don’t hear me complaing. Just don’t repeat yourself and don’t ask me to pick for you.

Castle ruin Bosselstein, Idar-Oberstein, Palatinate, Germany.

Another reason why you should always evaluate your work and just chose the best images to display is, people have a short attention span. If you flood their view with images, many of them not so interesting, they lose interest quickly and leave your gallery. And I’m not only talking about photographing the same subject over and over again, this sometimes also counts for galleries that contain images of the same area, but totally different subjects. If you think you shot many many  great images in one shooting, congratulations! Nevertheless I recommend to not serve them all at once, rather present them in small bundles. Make it special! You might argue that you’re only doing this for fun, but why publishing then? The moment you publish, you ask for critique, positive or negative. Most people will be too polite or too lazy to give you the later.

This is a lesson I had to learn myself. I did like to display complete shootings myself, until I realized that I would prefer to look at 3 very good images instead of finding those three amongst 30 other images. And lets face it, no one shoots 30+ great images in a row. Of course, there is always that one person who will like one of those less interesting shots the most, for various reasons, and praise it. But do you really want to be praised for a work when you’re not 100% content with it yourself? As a photographer/visual artist your name stands for the things you let people see. It is YOUR work. Choose the best, don’t be random, don’t let the audience pick. Showcase your best and be judged for that. I say, quality over quantity, always!

Visual impressions from KultHaus (exhibition & installation)

Here’s a little cut together of impressions from my exhibition & installation “KultHaus”, that took part this whitsun at Torhaus Dölitz. Upon my return home I focused on unpacking, while I also started to work on two new sculptures. I hope I will be able to write a more detailed review later, right now I am still enjoying the silence after those days filled with humans and their voices. Thank you to everyone who came to my help to make this exhibition & installation possible, and thank you to the audience for the many kind words!

 

KultHaus in the local press (German language)

“Neu ist in diesem Jahr die Veranstaltungsreihe „Kulthaus“ im Gewölbesaal des Torhaus Dölitz, die den Besuchern Leipzig als Kapitale der Geheimwissenschaften näher bringt. Dabei gibt es Seminare, Lesungen, Meditationen zu Magie, Okkultismus und Freimaurerei. Umrahmt wird das Ganze von einer heidnisch-magischen Kunstausstellung. (LVZ Leipzig)

No time for a translation right now, for more information, read this or click on the image below for the full event description (in German) on Facebook.

 

Fishing for compliments (original title “Der Menschenangler”)

This is definetely the oldest piece for the category “Introducing work pieces” and obviously not in line with my recent works. Nevertheless I still like the absurdity of it.

This photography dates back to the 80s, maybe 1987/88, when I was 14 or 15 years old. It is the oldest experimental photograph in my archive, taken with a small analog camera. It was shot at the shore of the island Sylt, far northwest of Germany, surrounded by the Northern Sea. I used to spend many summer holidays there in my childhood and youth. The red spot below the center of the image is actually my mother, wearing a hilarious fire-red raincoat, that always made my father ashamed to leave the house with her. He attached a lot of importance to seem like a truly conservative fellow, wearing something so fire-red seemed wicked to him and completely ruined the facade he liked to maintain.

As you see, I started taking photographs quite early in my life, but in the beginning, I didn’t own a single lens reflex camera, but one of those little black plastic boxes with one build-in lens, that only allowed point and shoot. It kept bugging me that I had not much influence on the resulting image this way, and I started experimenting with double exposures to do something more creative with the limited options I had. After shooting one image, I simply didn’t use the transport wheel, but shot another one first. Over the years, moving around a lot, I lost almost all negatives and images of those days. But this image somehow made it until today. Sadly, the negative is lost, too. The image displayed here is actually not a scan but a mobile snapshot of the original, so the quality is not very high.

Last summer, I entered this image into a contest on Photocrowd, called “Absurdist created completely in-camera“. While the crowd-rating put it on rank 79, the judge  of the contest picked it as a winner. The original German title “Der Menschenangler” would actually translate to “fishing for humans”, but “fishing for compliments” still seems to be a more proper translation.

Lessons in photography: RAW versus JPG

When you experiment with in-camera settings in black & white for instance, the raw-file will record ALL information for you, including the colors. Should you decide that black & white was a mistake for the motive, you can always go back to the original data. And vice versa, you can always convert a color file to black & white without losing image quality. (1) jpg black & white in-camera (2) corresponding raw file in color after post-processing and conversion to jpg (3) corresponding raw-file after post processing conversion to black & white and jpg.

I have stressed the idea of shooting raw-files rather than jpgs in my first article in the section “Lessons of photography” already. And you might have heard this over and over again from others as well, if you are still shooting jpg. I only see one advantage of the later, you simply don’t need so much hard drive space if you continue doing what you do. But this little advantage leads us to the main problem, to save storage by shooting jpg, your files are being compressed. Compression deletes useful information that you can collect using raw, it might even create artifacts on your images. And hard drive space has really become quite affordable (and fast, too!) these days, so why not use it?

Even when you’re not ready to dive into the world of post-processing, use the low prices of hard drive space and start storing raw-files. If you are really into photography tomorrow as well, I promise you, the day will come when you will be thankful for that decision. As mentioned before, most modern digital cameras support shooting both at the same time, raw & jpg, so for a while, you can easily go on with what you’re doing until you feel fit for another level. But seriously, start storing those damn files!

I will use an example from classical analog photography to illustrate the difference between raw-file and jpg better. The jpg-file is equivalent to the automatically (!) developed image of your analog shot. Imagine, after a machine developed your analog image, your negative gets lost. You will be stuck with the version of the image the machine created for you, forever. Here is your jpg!

The raw-file in comparison, is like the digital version of the negative, only without the inverted color scheme. With an analog negative, the outcome of the final image depends on your way of doing the development in the darkroom. Leaving it in the chemicals a few seconds longer to achieve a certain effect? That is, what your digital post-processing program is, a virtual version of your old darkroom. If you only photograph in jpg, you are giving the key to that darkroom to a machine. Does that sound smart to you? I hope not!

You might sigh again by the thought of learning post-processing. But here is the good news, you can’t destroy a raw-file with doing something wrong. The raw file will always contain ALL the information that you shot, no matter in how many ways you fuck it up while learning. You can always go back to the originally recorded camera settings and see the original “digital negative”. Your jpg on the contrary, loses quality EVERY TIME you open it, readjust it, save it. And lets be honest, you might see it as a disadvantage to need to process your raw-files, but do you really really never touch one of your jpgs for some minor adjustments after the shooting? Really? REALLY?

Last but not least a recommendation for your “virtual darkroom”. There are a lot of programs out there, to do post-processing. Maybe some came with your camera already, try it for a start! Many professionals count on Adobe Lightroom, which is absolutely a great program. Personally I prefer using the raw converter of Adobe Photoshop CC though, because simply I like everything in the same place and Photoshop is always my “weapon of choice” when it comes to digital visuals.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The image I used for the illustration of this article is available in the Ateliershop. Like most of my images it is limited to 23 copies and you can choose between two different photo papers, a silk matte paper and a metallic photo paper and two different sizes, 20×30 or 30x45cm. Just click on the image to go directly to the offer.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………..