Kitchen, September 16th
So I’m dragging my heels processing the Sunday photos from Artsfest. While Saturday was mostly TTV with a bit of “normal” DSLR, Sunday was all DSLR and while there are a few gems in there it’s all a bit yawn. To me anyway. Nice enough images, a smattering of decent composition but, at the end of the day, nothing special. Too perfect, perhaps. Which opens that whole “perfect digital” conflab in my brain and it starts hurting. And it was notable, to me, how little feedback I was getting on them. The occasional comment, usually about the subject matter rather than the photos, but not much really.
So to clear the cobwebs I went through the TTV folder, worked through the bits and bobs I’ve been taking over the last fortnight that weren’t Artsfest specific and threw a bunch up on Flickr. All in all about an hour’s work for 11 photos. A little later and there’s a whole slew of comments and faves, all for the TTV.
This pleases me because I like the Through the Viewfinder technique. I think it has enormous potential and produces beautiful images. But, and this is the big thing, it’s actually really easy. You just point your contraption at something and click. Even if it’s not framed properly it still looks cool. The imperfections of the glass and the warped colours mean you can take good TTV shots pretty much with your eyes closed. (In fact, those long exposure shots taken at Artsfest, like one of my most popular photos ever, pretty much were taken with my eyes shut it was so dark.)
Of course that’s not to say it’s easy to take amazing TTV shots. Pushing the contraption to that next level is actually quite difficult, not to mention the challenge of building and modifying your kit (see various threads in the TTV group like this one). It’s just…
Look at it this way. If I point my expensive Nikon D70 at a tree a snap a photo then I’ve got a photo of a tree like any other photo of a tree. If I point my TTV contraption at the same tree from the same angle I’ve got a mini masterpiece.
This doesn’t worry me. I just find it interesting. If anything I’m coming full circle having started my photography with the shittiest of shitty digital cameras back in 2002. And like I said, basic TTV is easy but advanced TTV is another matter altogether. This also doesn’t mean I’m giving up on the D70. I just need to develop some way of fucking up the images it produces, either in Photoshop or when taking the photos themselves. Hmm. Filters…
I’d be interested in what you lot, particularly those who aren’t on Flickr, think of the TTV stuff. Do you think it’s a one-trick novelty that I’ll soon move on from? Or do you think it’s something more than that?
I’m going to vote for ‘Novelty’.
You could try moving in a more ‘artsy’ direction. http://www.alternity.co.uk/gallery.html
With your eye for the decayed urban environment you could maybe blend old historic pictures of Brum with modern pictures in a kind of ‘tale of two cities’ double exposure stylee? Just an idea :)
I think several people ran into similar problems with the artsfest gig. Its not that it wasnt full of interesting things (it was) just that it became increasingly apparent that I may not be able to take interesting photos of them. I decided to not even bother posting a lot of the artsfest stuff not because it was bad but just because other people in the group had done it far, far better (yourself included).
As far as the TTV stuff goes, I think its great and I dont think its a novelty just a stepping stone to something else. Perhaps you could build some more types of contraptions possibly involving mirrors, lenses out of OHPs, headlights (I would love to see a large thing that could take full landscapes rather than the tight square you use on TTV) and other semi transparent objects that will distort your image out of the “perfection” of digital.
As far as Photoshop goes I always prefer to destroy/distort/decay the image in camera or with a scanner (as Ive been experimenting with lately) and not with photoshop. Saying that Ive got a brilliant set of actions called “machine wash” that really mess stuff up if you want a copy?
Oh and check this guys work out, most of this (unbelivably) is digital…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dorukbayer/
Hmm I think that it’s a tight call. I like LOMO shots, but only the best ones. I guess it’s like anything that forms a ‘genre’ (or whatever you want to call it), the best examples will stand the test of time. The rest do seem to be… if not novelty, certainly “following a trend”.
To avoid it being novelty why don’t you license every single shot you take with the TTV jobby for LP cover art? Perfect covers, no cropping needed.
Seriously, I see dance and indie labels all day every day that would kill for artwork like that.
there’s nothing so interesting as imperfection
I wonder if you could do something like a cross between a pinhole camera and a digital camera?
Hmmm….
Take it to the next level… Through the Camera Obscura :)
know exactly what you mean, but don’t know what the answer is –
I think perhaps part of it is that the generally square and punchy look suits flickr – the thumbnails look great, other pic.s benefit more from being seen larger or as a print ….. its great to have ttv anyway.
kf – you can get pinhole lenses for digital cameras, or make one out of the body cap, something I want to do, but haven’t got round to yet …. but now you’ve reminded me.