August 2020 - Jason Kittelberger Photography

The Definition of Fine Art Photography

I hate the words fine art photography and I think the main reason I hate those words is because I have no idea what they mean. The words seem so pretentious and grand, and defy any real definition.

A Snapshot vs. Fine Art

Some would argue that those words come from the need to differentiate snapshots and commercial photography from the kind of photography intended for museums and gallery walls. Others would say the words are meant to designate photography as some vital form of art, as if calling something art invariably makes it true.

I guess what bothers me is the infinitely wide range of photography that is declared as fine art. All that work doesn’t fit neatly into a little box and why should it? Still there seems to be some irresistible need to define it.

Knowing What You Want

I hear it often and every time I do it makes me cringe. It’s funny because the words are usually offered as some sort of high praise, but to me they’re nothing if not damning. But really, how often do you hear someone praised because they know exactly what they want?

Dead-enders still enamored with George W. Bush hold up his stubbornness and steadfast resolve as a of badge of honor. But it’s not only politicians and world leaders that remain true to their vision, it’s artists as well. I’ve seen second rate musicians praised for knowing exactly what sound they want the moment they step into the studio. And I’ve seen photographers and filmmakers lauded by cast and crew alike for knowing exactly what they want before the first frame is shot.

What’s Wrong with Being Wrong

I don’t get it. What’s the virtue in knowing exactly what you want? Don’t misunderstand, I’m not saying you shouldn’t have any kind of idea or vision in your head, but what’s wrong with adapting and changing that vision. Why is there a need to know exactly what you want before you even start? What’s wrong with being unsure? What’s wrong with being wrong?

Popularity is Overrated

Last night I found myself looking at pictures. I was browsing through books at first and then at various photography sites on the internet. It’s amazing to me how people seem to crave some sort of manufactured validity. Of course everyone wants their work to be liked and appreciated and I completely get that. I really do. But what I don’t understand are the photography sites with the ridiculous ratings and all the fawning comments. As if a rating on the internet is a measure of self-worth or a sign of relevance, or a vapid comment of faint praise is more valuable that a thoughtful criticism. Popularity is overrated.

I know in society we’re programmed this way. We’re assigned grades, given bonuses, and awarded stars. But really, what’s the point of rating a photograph? It almost seems that to some people, the grade is the point, and the actual work and creative process is simply a means to an end. It’s only the rating that matters and any negative reaction is a vicious attack on their character and their very being. How silly.

Portraits: Drawing Your Own Conclusions

It’s funny, because I guess everyone has their own idea of what they think a good portrait should be. Ask most parents and to them a good portrait is simply a picture that portrays their child in a flattering way. Ask a model and they’ll say a good portrait is one that makes them look beautiful and sexy. There’s nothing wrong with that. Every parent wants to see their child smile and every model wants to be seen in a flattering light.

What Makes a Good Portrait

But ask most portrait photographers what makes a good portrait, and I think the answer you’ll get is entirely different. I think most photographers would define a good portrait as one that reveals something about the subject. But what are most photographers really trying to reveal? From my point of view, when I look at the work of photographers who make this claim, their portraits are not so much about revealing character as they are about forcing the subject to be viewed a certain way. Some photographers try to compel some predefined emotion on the viewer. And that forced emotion is somehow idealized as revealing something important about the subject, as if that forced emotion shows character.

As far as I’ve concerned that’s bull. If everyone looks at a picture and sees the exact same thing and feels the exact same way, what exactly is being revealed? What is really there to see? After all, if everybody sees it how revealing can it be?

With my portraits, the most common criticism I hear is that my pictures are cold and emotionless. And I suppose they are when compared to what most people expect a portrait to be. And that’s fine if that’s what you see. I don’t really expect to please anyone except myself. I’m happy if I do, but I don’t mind the criticism if I don’t. In some ways I even see that criticism as a badge of honor.

Miss America & Ansel Adams

A while back there was a post over on Photrio that had been picked at like a boil. I think it got up to something like seventeen pages. The conversation took a bunch of twists and turns, but the basic premise had to do with Ansel Adams and why he’s so special. Or perhaps to put it a better way, why is he so popular with the public at large?

First of all, I think Ansel Adams deserves a lot of the admiration he receives in the photographic community (and probably some of the derision as well). But regardless of whether you like his work or not, he did a lot to promote photography and bring it to the forefront as a legitimate form of art. And on top of that, he spent a lot of time teaching, writing, and generally sharing his vast knowledge of photography with others. After all there is a technical side to photography, and while it may not be as important as the creative side, it is vital nonetheless.

I don’t think that many people would argue against the fact that Ansel Adams mastered the technical side of photography and was more than willing to share that knowledge with anyone who cared to listen. In my mind, that alone should be applauded, whether you’re a Zone System aficionado or not.

What’s Not to Like

But all that is beside the point. The real question is why is Ansel Adams so popular with the general public? In my mind that’s simple. Ansel Adams is easy. There is nothing to dislike about his work. It’s undeniably beautiful. Only Rush Limbaugh could hate a glowing picture of the pristine and grand western landscape as presented by Adams. Who can’t admire the spectacle that is Yosemite or the Sierra Nevada or Denali or a hundred other places Adams has photographed? His photography is gorgeous, and everyone from my 3 year-old son to my dead grandmother can see that. Of course it’s popular. Why wouldn’t it be? After all what’s not to like?

But in a way, his photography is like Miss America. Who can say honestly say that Miss America is not beautiful? You can’t. Just like an Ansel Adams photograph is the standard that defines the beauty that is the American West, Miss America practically defines female physical beauty. Like Moonrise Over Hernandez or Clearing Winter Storm, every Miss America is seemingly perfect. There’s nothing to argue with or object to.

Digital Photography Sucks

Well I guess sooner or later I had to make the obligatory rant against digital photography. Of course that assumes using a digital camera can actually be classified as photography. In my mind at least that’s a debatable premise. Digital photography sucks.

That aside, what really confounds me is that the primary reason people rave about digital photography is because it’s easier. Not because it’s better, but because it’s easier. In fact, digital photographers seem to spend an inordinate amount of time arguing that the quality of digital photography is nearly as good as film. Not better mind you, just nearly as good. And their fondest hope is that one day digital photography will actually be better than film.

An Easy Choice

But think about that for a minute. What does it say about a photographer who knowingly chooses an inferior tool simply because it’s easier?

I suppose that’s fine if you’re making homemade porn, shooting Sally’s first birthday, or even head shots to jump start your girlfriend’s acting career. And it’s probably okay if you’re shooting the next print ad for Yoo-hoo and you need a quick turnaround.