Blogger's Lament.

After so many years of writing a blog I've come to realize that on the days I don't post something I feel a bit let down. A bit lazy. So there's almost always a certain feeling of duty to come up with a subject that's photographically relevant and still fun for me to write. As an adjunct to that, any time I post something about a lighting or photographic technique and don't accompany the copy with a photograph illustrating what I've written about, I feel like a fraud or a poseur. Sure, I could say that this post or that post is really about the writing but in truth it always seems to me that the photograph(s) and the written content should exist together as a symbiotic pairing.

I often read stuff written by others in which the writer trots out his or her qualifications or personal history, delivers some re-warmed stories about their prowess in the good old days and recounts his or her zealous hard work at the time, but comes up short on the photography which would have given credibility to the range of their experience and their expertise. The text is there. The bravado is in attendance. But the images which would constitute the proof have gone walkabout. At that point the copy requires many leaps of faith. And one wonders if each leap is worth the time and energy.

This is an image of Fadya. I like it because, a. I like Fadya. b. I like the way I got Fadya to look straight into the camera, which equals straight out to the viewer. c. The image works well in the square format. d. The skin tone in the black and white rendering looks exactly what I think the black and white should look like. And e. When I first posted it the image helped to visually explain a lighting technique that I wrote about in the same blog. The image was the proof of concept. The proof that we'd taken a step past theoretical to practical. To practice. 

Nearly every blogger I read suggests strongly that what they really care about is the art. The final photograph. The artful interpretation. But in many cases the only evidence of their process are nuts and bolts images of gear, the affiliate selling of which is their underlying goal. Close ups of USB-C connectors. Comparison shots of the sizes of two different cameras. A sexy shot of a lens. But no finished work. Nothing that one could remotely describe as the art they profess to want to talk about. 

Yeah, the closest most come is to show a book cover from a mainstream art photographer coupled with a shopping link. And therein lies my lament. With the exception of Andrew Molitor's blog (which is far too infrequently added to...) very few of my peers actually get beyond describing how they will choose their gear. They certain don't address why they photographed something or what compelled them to do it in the way that they said they did. And that's the disappointing aspect for me. 

I already know which lens to use, which camera works best, how to light a subject, how to set exposure but...I keep waiting to read about the "why." And that is the failing of most photo blogs for me. YMMV. 

Writers such as Thom Hogan are honest in their presentation. They let us know up front that the subject will be gear. That's helpful. And he's good at it. The majority seem to think we're here to enjoy the story of their existence. And most of them have....a pretty boring existence. Maybe that's why no photos are forthcoming...

Sharing the mundane for dollars....