the quiet ones
Earlier on I posted about missing good images because they get lost in the mountains that we shoot these days (broad generalisation acknowledged)…
Is there a way to reduce the volume, but not lose what’s important? Is there a way to know, in advance, what is important?
If I were to shoot less, would I miss the images that I end up liking most after the editing phase? Does feeling free to shoot as much as I like at the time help me produce the good stuff?
If I edit more strictly, would I miss the ones that I often find on a second pass of the raw files, or the ones that I initially just like (with a lowercase ‘l’) but follow on later to really grow on me?
I can go through my archives months and years later and find that the shots I was most pleased with/proud of at the time seem insubstantial now, and realise that some others sitting quietly in the sidelines – the ones I haven’t printed or put in my portfolio – have more weight than I’d ever have expected, had I not taken that later look. The crowds of thumbnails dazzle our eyes and our brains and it’s far too easy to be seduced by the simplest compositions or the prettiest colours when we’re doing our initial cull.
Ii suppose I’ll only be able to muse about this a certain amount before I’m actually out there shooting again and it’ll become part of what I’m doing ‘in the field’. I wonder if that will bring any insight? I won’t be thinking about it consciously… when I’m out there, I’m doing my thing and none of it is too well choreographed – but I think when I roll these ideas around in my brain when I’m not photographing, some of it sticks in my subconscious and comes into play whether I think about it at the time or not.
I suppose I’ll just have to see.