Inspiration vs technique ?

2 min read

Deviation Actions

baroquedoll's avatar
By
Published:
1K Views
Academic photography rules often seems to me a bit narrow-minded.

An interesting example: if I take a picture where everything is in focus that's not a mistake on my part.

I am able to focus on one thing only, but the fact is that I DO want my work to be to focused on 2-3-4 things at the same time.

That's not impossible for human mind - as we can see both in everyday life and in intellectual works... do our eyes see only one colour or object at a time? Do we hear only one noise at a time?

I can't understand why SYNESTHESIA or multi-tasking should be considered so strange or improper for the photographic eye.

I will put into an extremism to let you understand better my thought: an obsession with technique often means no soul, no meaning in what we do.

Instead, what I go looking for in photography is a meaning or an idea.

Otherwise I would simply spend my time doing something else, something easier perhaps, like watching the TV.


Tell me what you think.

Hope you find this topic interesting.
© 2011 - 2024 baroquedoll
Comments8
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Sirius-sdz's avatar
well..seems like art is "anything" today. but there's still the question, what i consider _good_ art for myself. if its being done "through" you, not because of some external expectation, then it speaks to me. then its alive and i want to sink into it, inspires me as well. technique can help a lot delivering the message, but the image is lost without anything to tell, shallow, dead, boring. and i think, that putting the emphasis on technique really kills your work, limits the message/feeling in some works. these imperfect, rough, random parts within the image just feel alive, human to me.

well, says the guy with over 300 manipulated walls :D my other account is here [link] where i have my manips, drawings and such. textures became something more feeling-related to me, the more i created them.

for me - your works are "art" for me, they speak, have something to say, even to teach in some way. we're much smaller compared to the rich nature, world out there, yet behave in such an ignorant way, forgetting everything around us, self centered. its just overwhelming putting yourself aside and letting go.

what i learned: being a professional doesnt mean you're a good artist, more like someone who has to live because of the things he does. i cant imagine myself drawing something, that buys my food, flat. i think i'm really honored to be an amateur. which means doing art regardless of living through it, with a compassion, not with much profit from it. i dont have to fit the taste of costumers, i can listen to myself and express it in all the beautiful or ugly ways, whatever needs to be expressed.