So, I decided to pitch something akin to street photography after all. I wasn’t necessarily attached to the idea, but it was the one I kept coming back to prior to it.

I think my pitch went pretty well. My idea is doing a street photography shoot of sorts but with a bit of a twist in it being heavily influenced by my observations of when I first moved to Melbourne; particularly those alien parts of the Melburnian subculture that seem to go unquestioned.

My biggest worry is that I will have a difficult time demonstrating some of these in photographical form, but I got some good feedback to address it.

I’m not necessarily sold on the idea being heavily engaging despite the good feedback from the class, but if I am to be honest with myself for a moment, balancing uni with the other parts of my life is already difficult enough as it is, so I doubt I will want to adjust my idea unless it is more streamlined and controlled (like I mentioned in an earlier reflection). 

I definitely enjoyed some of the other presentations. Some of the ideas were quite cool. I used to live in Coburg until quite recently, and Maggie’s planned photo series on it seemed quite fun and interesting and got me thinking about what mine might be missing. I also really enjoyed Jinli’s as a fan of using colour theory, and how she plans on complimenting a lot of it and making a gradual shift. I’ve been trying to mess with colour all semester (for a lot of failures across a few successes), so I liked the whole project’s idea and I definitely want to see how hers turns out.

That being said, both between the presentations and my own conversations with Jinli, I definitely feel like my photography is more based on stimulus of my environments than necessarily hunting them (whereas some people were clearly inspired to be given an excuse to take photos and had a plan in mind even before the assignment), and I wonder if that will affect my inspiration, motivation or end result. 

I felt like one of the only people in this class that sort of engaged with this week’s subject matter, to be honest. That isn’t necessarily the fault of anyone, just the stigma of AI photography and the nature and debate of authenticity.

But I think it is disingenuous to not believe that AI is here to stay, especially considering we have been projecting towards this future across science fiction for decades as “the future” of technology. You don’t need to be a fan of it (I certainly have my skepticisms), but to not be mindful of both its capabilities and its flaws will only be to your own detriment.

I thought the discussion of Amber Terranova’s ‘How AI Imagery is Shaking Photojournalism’ article quite interesting. I thought the term of promptography was quite an apt way to explain it while giving a difference between photography and AI-generated photography. Although a decent part of the discussion was whether or not we should view it as photography, not whether or not the form should exist, which I thought perhaps missed the point of AI capabilities and authenticity. Technology and traditions evolve, and photography shouldn’t be exempt, even if it becomes a sub-category.

My group had an interesting discussion to add to that regarding authorship and creativity. In Terranova’s article, she references Michael Christopher Brown’s AI photoseries that depicts the Cuban exodus that occurred in 2022. He highlights that actually taking photos of the exodus could have caused safety and logistical issues for people trying to emigrate from Cuba. This got me thinking about whether if the technology was invented earlier, how it could contribute to better information in eras such as the cold war (or conversely, lead to easier propaganda?).

My experimentations with it showed me it isn’t as straightforward as one would expect to get coherent, striking pieces like Michael C. Brown achieved, and whether or not you believe it to be photography (I think promptography is very much the way it should be spoken about, more like being a DJ to music than a songwriter is), I think it definitely requires a skillset that is more than meets the eye, and I definitely want to experiment with it more, whether as an editing process or as a canvas.

References:

Amber Terranova, ‘How AI Imagery is Shaking Photojournalism‘, Blind [online magazine], 26 April 2023.

I am struggling to determine an idea for this assignment. It is incredibly open-ended in terms of what you can do, but ironically that is feeling like my biggest hurdle in the early phase of development. It doesn’t give me any real inspiration on what to do. I’m also a big fan of street photography, and while that is something I’m leaning towards doing, I am somewhat at the mercy of my environment in some respects if I do, and I wonder if a controlled setting would be better for this assignment. But I love photographers like Vivian Maier and James Nachtwey and their incredible capture of the human element, and I want to get that sort of effect with the stylisation of an Arnaud Moro-esque type (like I’ve been experimenting with all semester – man every time I take photos I realise how talented he is). Now whether all those come together or not both conceptually and practically is a whole other discussion – my mantra this semester has been try doing things that you don’t think will work for the sake of experimentation, and push yourself in the form of trying what you find uncomfortable – so I definitely am not opposed to this going terribly, especially as my usual form of photography is just finding when inspiration strikes. I definitely do not usually “pre-plan” my shoots to this effect (more so just have a readiness to take them), so I am definitely curious if I end up happy or not with my product and find it authentic to myself creatively (as in, whether I am creatively satisfied or if it feels like a criteria list I am getting through).

With all that being said, if my environment ends up being poor and I go with street photography, I will endeavour to get something of substance; but truthfully, I think I definitely find it a bit of a weakness of mine when I try to take landscape photos that aren’t heavily stylised or lack a subject, so that too will be a learning experience.

Hopefully, this doesn’t end terribly!

PowerPoint:

https://rmiteduau.sharepoint.com/sites/UsesofPhotographyStudioSem22023/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?id=%2Fsites%2FUsesofPhotographyStudioSem22023%2FShared%20Documents%2FStudent%20ASSIGNMENT%20SUBMISSIONS%2FASSIGNMENT%202%2FHarper%20Tabb&viewid=8ebb2cb0-b671-4486-a5fd-5300b7f251ac

Blog posts:

https://www.mediafactory.org.au/harper-tabb/2023/08/30/uses-of-photography-week-4-harper-tabb/

https://www.mediafactory.org.au/harper-tabb/2023/08/30/uses-of-photography-week-5-harper-tabb/

https://www.mediafactory.org.au/harper-tabb/2023/08/30/uses-of-photography-week-6-reflection-assignment-2-harper-tabb/

Q: What were some key discoveries in this module in terms of your creative process?

Well, on a technical level, I would have loved another source of lighting. I love the low, neon-based lighting as an aesthetic (as I demonstrated in assignment 1), but I am beginning to realise they either had better artificial lighting capabilities in their cameras (my Canon 70D is showing its age), or a another source of it. Doing every experimentation under the sun, I still found myself physically having no possible way to get the desired effect and quality that I wanted, it was normally a compromise of one (which I suppose is, to some extent, the idea of the camera settings and the main trichotomy of aperture, shutter-speed and ISO usually, to some extent, demonstrate that is somewhat the essence of photography settings).

However, now I find myself having more questions. Because how do they, practically, ever get that effect in situations like the ones I was in? I couldn’t bring a light-box into an underground bar, and even if I did it definitely would not have been optimal or overtly portable. Thinking back to Arnaud Moro, who inspired me for assignment 1, I am somehow more amazed at how easily he achieves his effects. I would love to see his “bad” photos to cross-compare where I do things differently, because I found myself with a similar amount of lighting, but with a lot more difficulty in highlighting them or using them to gain the effects in the sort of stage-setting, backdrop-type of way he does it. He claims not to heavily edit his photos. That seems impossible to me currently (though exciting if true – I will learn how to get there!).

Q: What were two key learnings in terms of the experience of ‘collaborating’ with your ‘stranger’/participant?

I found myself asking My-Tien to take the lead and I sort of followed her around with whatever she found interesting/engaging. If there was anything particularly eventful or something she wanted, I told her to let me know and I’d take photos of it. This for the most part seemed to be a pretty good method for being in the right place at the right time, but some more that were candid could have made my collection a bit stronger I feel, as there are quite a few posed photos (though most of those are the ones involving Andrew, her partner).

I tried not to be too manipulative of my events, I wanted my photography to not be staged (unless the goal was to be staged, like the group photo). Though the night had a lot of photographs being taken in general so it wasn’t out of the realm of possibility to be asked to take a photo. Retrospectively, I’m not sure if that was the right call. I found myself being grateful when I captured a moment that was genuine, but it left me with limited opportunities. I think I possibly should have asked for greater direction from My-Tien about what she would find engaging, or what best highlighted what was important to her, which I guess, in hindsight, beyond Andrew and the bar, I’m not still necessarily sure what that is.

I love a good light-box.

I’m not sure what it is, but I feel a good neutral background, a light-box, and a decent camera really pulls out a person’s individual creative expression of themselves. Perhaps it is the fact it’s a photography equivalent of a canvas, or perhaps it’s a more controlled setting, I’m unsure.

The reason I mention this is because I really enjoyed this exercise (once I got it working, which was not only a temperamental nightmare, but turns out I did everything correctly and it just chose not to work for me, fantastic), and really enjoyed how different people prioritised different aspects. I was more heavily interested in shadows and angles, where others seemed to be more interested in detail and subjectivity.

Photos I took from the exercise

To use these photos as an example, my focus was more on composition of the parts I already had, than trying to add or adjust something. I loved the shadows coming from the bottom and under her chin in the first photo, and tried to use those shadows to highlight other features, more than trying to do it vice-versa (increasing light on those areas I did want to focus on). I actually hadn’t realised I thought in this way prior to this reflection.

The second photo sort of elaborates on my canvas point. I didn’t see anyone else attempt a Dutch-angle type of photo, but I did see side-ons and I was in several duo photos with Huang, which I hadn’t thought about either. I really liked it due to the way the monochrome filter highlighted the edges of Yascinta better, and the levels of shadows and light blended well throughout the photo.

I’m not able to use a light-box for my photos for Assignment 2, which I find a little devastating considering how nicely some of these turned out. I am eager to do this exercise again or something similar if given the opportunity, and use the lessons I learnt from it, because I want to try a lot more and expand my thinking.

I really enjoyed Finding Vivian Maier (Maloof & Siskel, 2013), and found her work very humbling. I have a lot of thoughts on it.

The first being her remarkable ability for attention to detail and composition. Some of her work is breathtaking. Gorgeous portraits, observational and street photography, her dedication to her craft I found genuinely incredible. Not just that she took so many and had such a keen eye, but also that, for the most part, she had no intent for anyone to see them but her self and a few others, is incredibly genuine and humbling. Not to say I necessarily take photos just for others to see them – I enjoy the cathartic creative fulfillment of taking them –  but ultimately never showing some of my work, especially at the quality to which she often produced, to me shows a whole new perspective on creativity and why we do the things we do. They don’t necessarily have to be to show our view of the world, but instead, help us understand our own view of it, and navigate the world around us.

The other thing I enjoyed about it was also the whole discovery of her journey. On the one hand, it was a gorgeous, investigative story of a woman who was never renowned as a photographer, which was cute in that there was a lot to uncover and how to navigate documentary stories that don’t know where they are necessarily leading, which is perhaps an experience I would have liked earlier in my career as a media practitioner, as it definitely would have helped shape previous attempts at documentary.

On the other hand, I thought it was a great example of how treasure and inspiration is everywhere, you just have to have a keen eye and a desire to find it. It doesn’t need to come from the well-known, the obvious or the brand new: it can come from whatever sparks in your eyes, and anything can be extraordinary.

References:

Finding Vivian Maier (2013) Directed by John Maloof & Charlie Siskel. [Documentary]. New York, NY: IFC Films.

Retrospectively, this may have been the first shoot I’ve ever done where I had an idea for what I wanted going into it. Not necessarily a one-to-one, but a general understanding for how I wanted my composition to look. I also actually hated this assessment.

To elaborate, I am not against pre-planning of any sort. Bringing cool lights you think may be helpful, different lenses, backgrounds, whatever it may be, can be a great way to spice up a shoot if you see something that strikes your inspiration. However, I cannot emphasise how consistently irritated I was that trying to replicate something took all the magic out of seeing the world through the lens of a camera. Of my five photos for this assignment, I’m arguably happy with two.

Let me work backwards here. I knew that my edits were going to need a lot of colour manipulation, as the neon style of Arnaud Moro contains a lot of contrasting neons. As a result, I knew I wanted to select photos from him that had relatively simple lighting structures where I would be able to try and recapture it with less roadblocks.

And, truthfully, that was probably a good call. There were a variety of reasons I couldn’t do some of his works (some are on film and re-shot on to create an effect, I don’t own a lighting company, the turnaround for this assessment was more or less a week and on the weekend I had an important event on, to name a few), but for the most part, I think the spirit of them was similar. I also remembered a previous student example in class we were shown was manipulated digitally to achieve the same effect on film, to mixed success, and felt I could probably also do something similar.

Now, the reason I hated the assessment:

I think a large portion of these photos are taken ‘in the moment’ (the decisive moment, if you will). Even the ones Moro takes that are two layers of film, he still takes the first set of film on a whim, with enough time to be able to consider what would look good as a canvas for them. This pre-planning aspect may have been fine if I had a whole month to hire everything I could ever need with all the space in the world to recreate it, but between a short turnaround, lack of resources and, above all, a creation that I was trying to just attempt to be like, rather than my own, caused several aspects to not come out as I hoped. In future, I am definitely going to use this type of prompt as inspiration, more than mimicry, as I definitely feel it took the magic out of both the process, and my photos.

However, one thing that was noteworthy was I found my editing process to be fairly effective. The edits themselves are so-so, and probably gave myself a difficult task with the photos I chose to be able to turn them into photos similar to the original, but I definitely felt efficient (which is not something I’ve always been able to say during my media career). I’d also say, when I started taking a little more creative liberty rather than sticking to a close original, I definitely felt my edits start to become better. Slide 4 on my PowerPoint was probably the biggest deviation, where I changed the colour tone entirely due to many conflicting blue hues in my image, and I think it came out much better as a result (though I’m still not entirely pleased with it, as the aesthetic of Moro’s image is totally evaporated even though the composition is incredibly similar).

Overall though, I think I just found that my biggest inspiration is going out into the world and trying to demonstrate my view for photography is through my interactions with the world more than it is pre-planned. I definitely feel limited or constricted when trying to find something as opposed to discovering it. However, it also probably demonstrated my pre-planning skills in pre-production are probably my weak link, and sometimes that shows up in the post-production in the form of the edit, where I have to use images I perhaps wouldn’t have needed to if I tried to consider how best to approach it as much as just what I needed from it. Prior to now, that hasn’t really come back to bite me, but if I find myself wanting to capture something in advance later and I only get one attempt, I should probably get better at it.

I was super interested to see what other people brought for their Pecha Kucha presentations. I picked someone on the easier side of being able to replicate their work easier for our mimesis assessment, Wes Ellis. However, I found myself super inspired by other people’s presentations, particularly ones that were low-light and neon-based, as I really enjoy playing around with illumination techniques and night-life photography. Jinli’s presentation particularly caught my eye, and I decided to deviate from my original plan and choose someone with a heavier focus on that style for my assessment. 

In the Tuesday exercise, taking one-hundred photos around the block, I tried to make a special emphasis on colour and settings, and deliberately manipulate settings with greater consideration for what I wished to achieve. This probably came out better in my weaknesses for photography: movement and shots that are blink-and-you’ll-miss-them types, because I was more acutely aware of how I was shooting. However, this probably let me down in the more stylised photos, because I was trying to shoot what I believe is ‘correct’ and what that environment calls for (as in, faster shutter speed in sports settings, for example), compared to what felt natural to me (leaving it on a slower shutter speed and controlling blur through playing with exposure). But I got some decent photos out of it, particularly when messing with the white balance and shutter speed; I found a 2900 white balance to be a whole new perspective for cityscapes I hadn’t considered, as it gave a gloomier, darker look, that challenged with Melbourne’s obsession for wearing black and our penchant for tall buildings, began to look at times quite uniform. The task was a good challenge, and even though I’ve been photographing for a long time, I definitely feel more in-tune with my camera and perhaps the capabilities (and limits) of it. It also makes me want to buy a mirrorless DSLR more than ever.