5/13/09

refining the mind's eye

thinking about photography led to an insight which, if i have mentioned before, do forgive my most un-photographic memory:

i've often said that in a photo, it's the responsibility of the photographer to bring out the greatest beauty in the subject (as opposed to it being the subject's problem). so when a photo is technically good, but not flattering to the subject, i'd say it was a photo ill-taken. the ongoing effort then has been to refine that photographer's eye so as to capture beauty to the highest degree possible, with every scene, in every circumstance.

it's true that there's no way to determine 'best' or 'highest' in any objective fashion. and so the most i can offer is that i do the best/highest as far as possible, given my current and ever-changing state of knowledge and experience, and with single intent.

should translation from the photographer's eye to the mind's eye be so hard? so that all that is captured, iteratively, is the beauty that is utmost?

[clarification: i refer to translation as from being with a camera to being without a camera. just as the photographer's eye attunes itself iteratively to seeing the greatest beauty, so would i like the mind's eye to attune itself iteratively.]

No comments: