What is Vision?

[Jeff D. Welker]

As photographers, 'vision' is something I think we all wrestle with at one time or another. I believe each individual likely has a personal 'vision' that guides and informs their photography. Maybe we aren't typically aware of it, or we don't think of ourselves as having a 'vision', or we are struggling to find ourselves photographically. Is it style, technique, a 'look', all of the above? If nothing else, I think 'vision' is one of the reasons we can stand next to each other on a flight line and produce drastically different images - we interpret the scene differently from each other.

Below is a link to a blog post by photographer Cole Thompson. He is not an aviation shooter; however, I think his thoughts and comments are interesting. I hope you find it of use in your photography.

http://www.photographyblackwhite.com/vision/

[Tower Guy]

Jeff, thanks for sharing this article, very interesting, something to think about.

[Joe Copalman]

Thanks for posting this Jeff.  I had my "vision crisis" last year and reached a similar conclusion as Mr. Thompson did.  The result is that I always try my best to get the shots I want and avoid the ones I don't, which is why I was so grumpy after shooting Endeavour's arrival at LAX.  I felt that our circumstances and the information we had forced me to get the shots I didn't want, which really frustrated me when I learned that the area from which I could have gotten the shots I wanted was open to the public during the arrival.  

I would also add that "vision" is constant throughout the entire process of creating an image, not just the initial capture.  We do a lot of medium-to-large group shoots with a number of shooters photographing the same subjects, and it always surprises me how different our results are.  Some of us embrace dark shadows and use them for dramatic effect, some of us work to minimize shadows to get as much detail out of them as possible.  Some of us push vibrance and saturation to the edge of what looks realistic, and some of us dial back on the colors to allow the details to drive the image.  There are dozens of other examples of how we all do things differently, but my point is that even if your raw images are nearly identical to those of the guy next to you, how you process them will result in different finished products than what he produces, and vision is a major, if not the prime, factor in this.

[Jeff D. Welker]

When I was in Yuma shooting WTI with Joe and Ned on Friday, we had some 'down' time. At noon the ambient light was poor and it gave us a great excuse to visit Burgers-n-Beer for lunch. On the way back to MCAS Yuma, we stopped at the local Walgreen's so Joe pick up a couple of personal items. While we waited in my truck for Joe, Ned mentioned the thread I'd started on AzAP regarding photographic vision and asked me a question; "what is your vision Jeff"? The question caught me off guard and I did not offer Ned much of an answer - sorry.

During some quiet time this weekend I've given Ned's query some additional thought. Accordingly, this response is for Ned - and anyone else that might find it useful 

What is my photographic vision? What is it that I want to capture on the sensor of my camera? This goes beyond documentary photography (“I saw an F/A-18 – here’s the proof”) to something that I hope is a little more personal and maybe even a little more artistic. Since AzAP is primarily about aviation photography and I'm posting this commentary herein, I'll answer by saying my vision is to capture something unique about each individual airplane, pilot and/or air field that I photograph – something that makes that specific subject distinct and different, among other subjects in the same or similar settings. I don’t want an image of a generic Harrier, for instance, I want to capture the essence or personality (if you will) of that specific platform, what makes it unique among other aircraft, for instance. That’s what drives me, what pulls me away from the comfort of my home, again and again. I don’t always accomplish my vision, but it is the driving force behind what I do and why I do it.

Just because that’s how I describe my vision and what I want to capture doesn’t mean it will work for you or should be your vision. As many of you know, my father is a retired professional photographer. And even though he taught me photography from a very young age, he has a unique, idiosyncratic photographic vision that is often the polar opposite of mine. I believe when we define our vision, it makes us more mindful in our approach to making a photograph and capturing the image that we want. In the two days I've spent at WTI 1-13 (more days to come), I've shot literally hundreds of photographs. Of those many images only a handful actually achieved 'my vision'. That's not to say I have gotten a bunch of nice photographs - I have. It is simply that a 'nice' image is not necessarily consistent with 'my vision' - photographically speaking. I believe my current ratio of vision images versus nice photos is directly proportional to how much I keep mindful of my vision when I've got the camera to my eye.

I'll bet Ned doesn't ask me about this again     

[Joe Copalman]

Jeff, I can't thank you enough for getting this conversation started, I would love to see others jump in. 

I mentioned that I went through a "vision crisis" a while back (late 2010), and back then I never really saw the value of bringing it up on the forum because it seemed more like a "figuring myself out" thing than anything that really could have been of value to anyone else, simply because I think so much of this is subjective and based on individual preferences.  I even had a hard time using the word "vision" because it seemed a bit too hippie-dippy Sedona-eqsue. But "vision" is truly the best word for it, so I reluctantly embraced it.  Writers have a "voice," photographers have "vision."

Around this time two years back, I had gotten to a point where I started to feel like my shots were getting stale and unimaginative, like I was nothing more than a spotter, just documenting what I saw.  Looking back, I realize that part of this was due to a few fellow shooters upping their post-processing game, and me feeling like my largely "as I saw it" shots weren't as dynamic or engaging.  I started trying to get a bit more creative with my editing, and while I read/watched a few tutorials and experimented and liked the look of some of my more heavily-treated images, they ultimately did not feel like "me."  They felt like me trying to be like other people.

At that point, I started to think that if heavy editing isn't "me," then what is?  I had had a few friends and contacts on Flickr make comments to the extent of being able to see a thumbnail of an image and be able to tell it was mine instantly, so there was some comfort in that, but a few of those shots were also shots I was not particularly excited about.  That led to the one question that really mattered - what AM I excited about? 

Pretty much exactly like Cole Thompson did in the article Jeff linked to, I went through my collection of shots to find out.  What I found was that I had taken a lot of photos that I liked to looked at, and that while they might lack the razzle-dazzle of the heavily-photoshopped images my friends were producing, most of them had some engaging element, whether it was tight-crop framing giving an "in your face" feel or a nicely-panned shot oozing dynamism or just a unique angle giving a fresh perspective on a familiar subject.  Sure, there were some spotterish "reference" shots in there, but even with those, I realized that they were largely "forced" shots - not ones that gelled with my "vision" or preferences or whatever, but rather were the only shots I could get under a given set of circumstances.  My "vision" was still present, but greatly tempered by factors I could not control (refer again to my kvetching about not getting the shot of Endeavour's LAX arrival that I wanted).  I also realized that some of my most rewarding shots were ones where I made the effort to control the circumstances as much as possible, usually through where I positioned myself.  The result of all this is that I had a greater sense of self-awareness as a shooter.  I knew what I wanted to see and what I want others to see in my work, and I became much more confident about who I was with regard to my photography.

Since then, I've grown a bit more as a shooter, and have even embraced some over-the-top editing techniques and toned them down a bit more to my liking.  I've upped my personal standards so that less of my images are making it online, and the ones that are are more images that I like, rather than what I think others will like.  I've come to terms with the fact that I shoot with the gear I can afford, not the gear I really want, and have made greater efforts to understand the limitations of my gear and how to make it work for me in spite of those limitations.  I've realized that I like a bit more contrast in my images than most other shooters and that I find a slightly exaggerated balance between highlights and shadows to add something dramatic and engaging to my work.  In terms of subjects, I've realized that I prefer to shoot anything that flies, though I have a strong preference for images of aircraft under their own power.  I've doubled down on my insistence that "location, location, location" is the key to great shots and that even a few inches can make all the difference.  I've added a few new lenses to my arsenal that open up shots that I not only did not get before, but that I couldn't even see.  I've also learned the value of titles and captions, and how they present a photographer with yet another tool to guide the viewer to see what you want them to see.  And I've learned that I REALLY like taking photos at night and have put a lot of time and effort into building a new skillset there. 

My point is that "vision," at least for me, is a moving target, not an anchor.  While I am still who I was two years ago and taking shots similar to what I was back then, my interests and skills and self-awareness have all developed since then and have all made their mark on what I see, what I shoot, and what I want viewers of my images to see.  Jeff and I discussed this whole "vision" business a bit further on our drive back from Yuma on Friday (much of what I'm writing is covering the same ground from that conversation), and he made frequent reference to having "vision" shots and "non-vision" shots, but I would argue that they're ALL vision shots, and that some are simply tempered by factors that are largely out of your control.  When you raise your camera and point your lens at something, you are doing so because you WANT to photograph it.  And you are going to CHOOSE to photograph it in the manner  you decide to under the conditions you're dealing with.  When you get home, you will again choose which images to trash, which to keep, and which to edit and present to the public, and you will choose how you edit and create those images and how you display them.  There is very little that is out of your control in this process, and for what we do, those factors are often weather or fences.

Thanks again for starting this thread, Jeff. 

And LOL at "personal items."  Makes it sound like I was buying maxi-pads or something.

[Paul Dumm]

Jeff, I see an ISAP Article here.

[Joe Copalman]

Jeff, I see an ISAP Article here.

Or, you know.  An AzAP Blog post.  

[Paul Dumm]

Yes, very true my bad.

[Joe Copalman]

Yes, very true my bad.

Eh, partly our fault.  We really haven't done a good job of promoting the AzAP Blog as an outlet for members, definitely something we should clarify for everyone.

[Jeff D. Welker]

I'm stuck at the car dealership waiting for my truck repairs to be completed. Don't you just love when that unexpected part decides to expire without notice 

Even though Joe and I discussed the notion of 'vision' at length on the drive back from Yuma, reading his comments during lunch has caused me to reconsider a question I've contemplated before; "Is my vision inspired by the work of other photographers or is it an evolving creativity that is truly unique?" In the small artistic recesses of my mind, I hope that my 'vision' is truly solitary and not the product of outside influences. I mean seriously, how can my 'vision' be mine if it was inspired, influenced or otherwise informed by the work of others? Isn't that some form of vicarious plagiarism? For example, my recent photograph from WTI 1-13 captioned "Harbinger of a Nightmare" was the culmination of a nearly 12-month effort to produce an image with a single white cloud contrasting against a dark sky that incorporated a single airplane.

http://azaerophoto.com/forum/index.php?topic=1989.msg36240#msg36240

The inspiration came from a series of 14 images produced by Cole Thompson (there he is again) titled "Harbinger".

http://www.colethompsonphotography.com/HarbingerImages.htm

When I first saw Cole's "Harbinger No. 1" I was blown away [emotional response] by the imagery. I've actually ordered a print from Cole. His images in this series involves landscapes and my "Harbinger" a Harrier. Not the same, but clearly I was influenced. So is my "Harbinger of a Nightmare" a 'rip-off' of Cole's work or is it my idiosyncratic 'vision' as inspired by Cole? I don't know and I'm not sure it matters. What I do know is that the line between inspired influences and unique 'vision' is very thin for me.

Dale Welker, Ansel Adams, Morley Baer, Edward Weston, John Sexton, Ben Horne, Mitch Dobrowner, Steve Zimmermann, John Slemp and many of the AzAP shooters have influenced my photography for one reason or another. Where does their influence end and my vision begin? I have two quotes from Ralph Waldo Emerson that help me in this 'vision' quest;

"To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment."

"Dare to live the life you have dreamed for yourself. Go forward and make your dreams come true."

At this point, I'd expect Bill Oz to tell me; "don't get all sappy" 

[Jeff D. Welker]

Jeff, I see an ISAP Article here.

Or, you know.  An AzAP Blog post.  

I've already written an article for ISAP, it AzAP's turn 

[Ned Harris]

Jeff and Joe: Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts on "vision". I found them very useful.

[BillOz]

"To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment."

"Dare to live the life you have dreamed for yourself. Go forward and make your dreams come true."

At this point, I'd expect Bill Oz to tell me; "don't get all sappy" 

Actually all this discussion of What is Vision & Vision Quest has made me want to consider what is my "Vision".
Then again it has also made me want to throw up.
So I consider how could I express myself as candidly as the emotions expressed here, and then I throw up.

But honestly Jeff, I think your images show a Vision which no others here do, and it is and will be your images which others use to form their Vision.  Since you have been posting, I see extensive borrowing of your methods, even from those who are quite accomplished in their own right.
I know I don't have so artistic a Vision.  I am more the documentary photographer, and don't have false beliefs that I am otherwise. 
One of these days, maybe I will settle down to create art and not just documentation.  I am still in my Vision formative stage.  I hope to blossom before I lose sight

Here for you are a few quotes from the greatest American author, Henry David Thoreau, for my quotes are not suitable for open public display.
"If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away."

"I am sorry to think that you do not get a man's most effective criticism until you provoke him. Severe truth is expressed with some bitterness."

"The Artist is he who detects and applies the law from observation of the works of Genius, whether of man or Nature. The Artisan is he who merely applies the rules which others have detected."

[Jay Beckman]

Good Artists Borrow
Great Artists Steal

- Piccaso

[Jay Beckman]

Since (to me) a part of "Vision" is the ability to see the relationship between elements in the frame and to even be able to anticipate how certain elements can fit together beforehand, I'll offer this little gem as an example of how NOT to do things...

- Saw Tower in Background
- Saw Taxiway Light in Foreground
- Saw that Jet would pass between them
- Framed Taxiway Light and Tower from a nice low angle
- Waited for Jet to enter frame
- Not realizing I was at f/3.5, I FAILED to refocus on jet as it went past!

Note the crisp Tower and semi-creamy Taxiway Light (Oh, and the nice Soft, Fuzzy Jet)


WHOOPS...