Pixiq

Is there a trend toward technique over substance?

HDR has certainly affected our concept of what an image might look like and for many it has become the ultimate technique for creating a photograph.

I find myself somewhat perplexed with this scenario. Why would this be the ultimate method for creating images simply because it seems to produce the best tonal scale of anything previously developed? There is a problem in using any imaging method as an end-all means of making images.

Judging a photograph for color, grain or detail, or arguing about what camera was used, what lens was used or the software, has and will likely be a part of the discussion. It’s a bit like judging a book by its cover. The problem in this usually petty discourse is that the photographer and the viewer get sidetracked. The message gets lost in the details.

South Farmington Cemetery - New York © John Neel - HDR image

+ Enlarge Image

Will all images from here on have to meet the new criteria of HDR? Would this technique negate any previous photographic technique as inferior or unacceptable? Will the newer generation of image-makers assess the work of older photographers on whether they have successfully given the viewer a full tonal range? Is this technique going to be what all of our work has to follow in order to fit into the realm of photographic expression? If my work doesn't have detail in the shadows or if the light is washed out, does that negate my image? What if I want the shadows to be dark? What if I need to show that the light is bright? What if I feel the need to create a high contrast image to tell the story I am trying to convey to my viewers? What if I need to capture a fleeting moment, motion or imply a mood that requires a very low range of tones? Will the technique become the only thing evaluated? Will anyone look at the image to see what is in the photograph? Will they understand what was captured? Will they walk away with a new understanding of the work, the artist or themselves?

Or will they simply pass over the image because it does not meet their new expectations of the medium?

Big Snake - © John Neel Black and white film image

When I look at the work of the great photographic artists such as Gary Winogrand, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Robert Frank, Diane Arbus, Lee Friedlander, Gordon Parks, Brassai, William Eggleston, Josef Sudek, Minor White, Sally Mann, and hundreds of others who had no knowledge of modern computer techniques or have given us amazing images using their own vision and tools, I can't believe that they might be evaluated based solely on their historic or chosen techniques.

In the past few years, I have been an avid fan of HDR as a means to capture and process certain kinds of imagery. I have also realized that to a large degree the HDR process imposes many restrictions. It is also creating a new and perhaps negative criteria for judging photographic works. Will HDR be the way we all take pictures in the future?

Zodiac- © John Neel Black and white film image

Personally, I believe that there are many reasons to not have a full tonal range in an image. Many photographs are astonishing due to their minimal tonal range, their lack of details in the shadows. They have drama because of their use of limited tones or limited color. Drama, darkness, contrast and other factors are our creative choices for manipulating the light of our subjects. Light is the basic tool of our trade. Lenses and cameras should be used like brushes and paint in our creation of drama and suspense. They are the tools for manipulating and capturing the light. Light has many looks and can be used to define our subjects. Both lightness and darkness can be found and used to define the images we make. They help us make an image low key or high key, dark or enlightened. Images have always been manipulated to a certain degree by the cameras and lenses as well as the methods for bringing them to print. It has been our artistic license to manipulate the colors or the tones as we see fit or as we see fit for telling the story. HDR is simply one of the tools to help us create a desired result.

Therefore, I do not see every photographer or all photographs having to meet some specified methodology for production. In my estimation, any and all methods of image making existing now, in the past or in the future should be creative options. No tool, software or critic should dictate what is the ultimate method an artist should use. In fact, I would suggest that anything goes as long as the subject has been revealed to the viewer in a creative and understandable way.

The message is the real criteria that should be used to judge an image. The method used should help to support that message.

A continuation of this article can be found here tomorrow.

Please read my other posts at Pixiq.com.