Luminous Landscape Forum

Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: dreed on August 25, 2012, 07:26:59 am

Title: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: dreed on August 25, 2012, 07:26:59 am
What an interesting read and what a contrast to the prior article. I'm almost given to wondering if the ordering of the essays like that is part of the art of this web site or if it is just happenstance.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on August 25, 2012, 08:56:40 am
What an interesting read and what a contrast to the prior article. I'm almost given to wondering if the ordering of the essays like that is part of the art of this web site or if it is just happenstance.
Very refreshing. He gives an incisive look at an important aspect of good photographs without making outrageous claims.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: stamper on August 25, 2012, 09:08:27 am
I thought the connection far too tenuous. His observations on photography were fine and taken alone was sound advice. Therefore no need to connect the two. I wonder how many musicians will have in front of them photos instead of sheet music?
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: 32BT on August 25, 2012, 10:01:17 am
I thought the connection far too tenuous. His observations on photography were fine and taken alone was sound advice. Therefore no need to connect the two. I wonder how many musicians will have in front of them photos instead of sheet music?

???

The writer simply states that he has learned from classical music, particular patterns and counterpoint. The images exemplify his point very well. Why your derogatory comment?

Somehow your comment reminds me of this, skip to 30min and 30sec:

Listening to Jimi Hendrix (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq8g4NTaLxY)
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: stamper on August 25, 2012, 11:41:44 am
Which comment do you find derogatory? Is it the one about the musicians? I made it because it is the flip side of the coin imo.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: OldRoy on August 25, 2012, 12:03:49 pm
On reading this article I knew immediately that it would prove contentious. Perhaps it would have been less so if it had referred to "baroque music" rather than just "classical music" in general - a term that suffers from ambiguity.

Perhaps someone would like to contribute a parallel piece comparing photographic examples to the compositions of, let's say, Karlheinz Stockhausen. Or maybe some comparisons in the form of photographer/composer equivalents.
I'll start:
Ken Rockwell: Barry Manilow.
Roy
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rob C on August 25, 2012, 12:07:01 pm
Alas - or hooray! - I can't make myself read articles with titles like the one referred to here; life's too short, and photography a world of its own that doesn't need reference to another discipline to make it what it is, or to allow it to be understood.

I have to make another quotation from the notes (as in letters!) of St AA.

To Alfred Steiglitz, El Paso, November 27, 1936 (and to think I didn't even exist at that point!):

"I can see only one thing to do - make the phoptography as clean, as decisive, and as honest as possible. It will find its own level."

Rob C

Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: 32BT on August 25, 2012, 12:26:34 pm
Which comment do you find derogatory? Is it the one about the musicians? I made it because it is the flip side of the coin imo.

An implication doesn't have a flip side. (A common mistake btw on this forum as of late).

The author is not making a universal connection between the two. He simply describes what and how he learned from music, that he now applies to his photography. The examples make the point very clear.

If there is any parallel on the flip side, it may be that great music invokes beautiful images in the minds eye. In that respect a good musician should indeed have a photo in front of them. But again, I don't think the article was remotely suggesting anything to that effect.

Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: 32BT on August 25, 2012, 12:38:35 pm
Alas - or hooray! - I can't make myself read articles with titles like the one referred to here;

Then why comment?
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on August 25, 2012, 02:19:45 pm
Then why comment?
+1.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Keith Reeder on August 25, 2012, 05:08:59 pm
Ah - I see that the "only comment if you agree with me" police are out in force...

Personally I found the article pretentious, contrived, and not remotely relevant to my photography - as Roy says, photography stands alone as a craft (and - maybe - an art) and it needs no explanation by cross-reference to another artistic medium.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rob C on August 25, 2012, 06:05:11 pm
Then why comment?


Why  not?

It's a valid reaction; think sideways as in crab: you'll discover that direct lines from A to B are seldom the most interesting. You do like things to be interesting, don't you?

And Keith's right. He's done it long enough and well enough to know of what he writes. The sad bloody truth is, of course, that there is precious little to learn in photography; it has to be the next most simple job to do after washing dishes. But boy, is there music to be made pretending otherwise!

Rob C
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: LesPalenik on August 25, 2012, 09:08:57 pm
Almost like dancing.
Some photographers follow set and contrived steps like in a well-rehearsed rumba, then there are some passionate souls who express their emotions through a hot tango, and there are some who boogie through in their own frestyle, while most of the onloookers are still trying to figure out what's going on.

Fortunately, the dance floor is always watched and analyzed by some experts who are more than willing to bestow their critique and suggestions for improvement.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Ray on August 25, 2012, 11:50:56 pm
I think part of the problem here is that Mark Schacter is making analogies more in line with classical music. Probably most readers of this site are more into pop and jazz.

Classical music, the music of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Tchaikovsky etc, is much more detailed and complex than the average pop song. The range from loud to soft is much greater; the changes and interactions of themes and melodies is much greater; the variety of different musical sounds emanating from the greater number of different musical instruments is much greater, and the technical skill of those handling the equipment (the musical instruments) is usually much greater.

Call me elitist if you like, but you can't compare the pianistic skills of Elton John with those of Frederic Chopin.

I thought a recent photo of Michael's on the homepage was very inspiring because it reminded me of the subtlety one finds in Classical music. It's an image of a porter in China carrying a heavy load as he climbs up some steps, but he's hardly visible due to the heavy mist.

I liken that image to the soft passage in a piece of music which is so quiet one has to listen very carefully. Yet despite it being quiet, the music is so powerful.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on August 26, 2012, 12:10:43 am
Very well put, Ray.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Ray on August 26, 2012, 12:28:08 am
Very well put, Ray.


Thak you, Eric. I hope one day my photos may match my writing skills.  ;D
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: John Camp on August 26, 2012, 12:30:12 am
Call me elitist if you like, but you can't compare the pianistic skills of Elton John with those of Frederic Chopin.

Sure you can. Chopin is better than Elton. See, I compared them.

Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Ray on August 26, 2012, 12:39:28 am
Sure you can. Chopin is better than Elton. See, I compared them.



Hey! John, I never realised that logic was your strong point.  ;D
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: John Camp on August 26, 2012, 12:51:49 am
Hey! John, I never realised that logic was your strong point.  ;D

Made me laugh.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: stamper on August 26, 2012, 01:46:10 am
Quote opgr

An implication doesn't have a flip side. (A common mistake btw on this forum as of late).

Unquote

But an alternative point of view is allowed? Then again some posters don't like that if it isn't in line with THEIR thinking. ;)

Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: ysengrain on August 26, 2012, 01:58:50 am
After reading, I feel amazed. I can undertand the parallel situation of the music composer and the photograph, but
1- you quoted JS Bach and his conterpoint
2- About photo, you drove the attention of the reader on lines, leading the eye into the frame.

In counterpoint, there is a resolution, even if it is not a particular moment, an instant of music. If you're not able to catch it at the first time; try again (I know and listen The Art of Fugue since 45 years, and I still discover new "stuff")

I can see in that point a very important difference. On the first side, the "point" is there, in your ears ... and mind.
On the second side, you have to imagine, to build what your mind sees and initiate your imagination
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: 32BT on August 26, 2012, 03:27:15 am

Why  not?

It's a valid reaction; think sideways as in crab: you'll discover that direct lines from A to B are seldom the most interesting. You do like things to be interesting, don't you?

And Keith's right. He's done it long enough and well enough to know of what he writes. The sad bloody truth is, of course, that there is precious little to learn in photography; it has to be the next most simple job to do after washing dishes. But boy, is there music to be made pretending otherwise!

Rob C



I'm autistic. I find direct lines, repeating or otherwise, most comforting.

While it may be true that the uninitiated experience counterpoint as only depicting the window frame, other forms of music, not necessarily limited to the classical genre, may well exhibit traits that one does find relevant in photography or in a window frame, and thus, learning to appreciate musical form may help to learn and appreciate compositional form.

The article merely used counterpoint and lines as but one such example.

Of course, the most important task in washing a dish, is knowing when you're finished.


Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: 32BT on August 26, 2012, 03:46:48 am
What I have been wondering about in the past is this:

in music there is a base chord or tonic, and it is very obvious and apparent when a musical composition returns to the base. I always wondered whether there is a visual equivalent. For example, the white balance determines the overall tint of the image, and that tint generally determines the overall atmosphere.
1. Could that be considered an equivalent?
2. If so, how does the interaction happen with the content of the image?

For example: suppose you have a sunset image in a slight blue-ish toned B&W. Is that similar in experience to blues-music using a major chord scheme?
 
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: David Sutton on August 26, 2012, 04:51:19 am
I wouldn't  take the analogy too far.
It's hardly surprising that a parallel is drawn between visual arts and music, both having being around for at least 40,000 years as an expressions of a being's inner life. One hundred years ago Debussy was thinking along these lines when he said “Music is the arithmetic of sounds as optics is the geometry of light.”
Photography has appropriated many of painting's terms  (and why not?) So if you talk about a work's “texture, the arrangement of tones and the accents, the structure of its composition and use of rhythm, its underlying harmony and use of colour”, I would have no idea whether you were talking about music or photography, but those terms may mean completely different things once the context is known.
Photography and music: here's two things I know about both. Folks will argue forever on when either becomes art, and we get better with practice.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Ray on August 26, 2012, 06:26:16 am
I wouldn't  take the analogy too far.

I agree. All analogies have their limits. At some point they tend to break down.

Quote
Photography and music: here's two things I know about both. Folks will argue forever on when either becomes art, and we get better with practice.

We hopefully get better with practice, but I believe photography and music are quite distinct as art forms. Photography doesn't have to be art. It can be purely functional. That is, it is usually a visual record of something that can be recognised by all who see it, with the exception of deliberate distortions for some arty farty effect.

Music on the other hand has no specific descriptive meaning. It appeals directly to the emotions. It may make one sad or elated, but it cannot describe a particular idea or object with any clarity that can be recognised by all. One can take a photograph of a house that is recognisable as a house by all who know what a house looks like. Whether or not the photo of the house is also a work of art is something one can argue about. However, one cannot write a piece of music that clearly depicts a house, although one can inform people that the music was inspired by experiences in a particular house. All music is therefore extremely abstract art. The only thing to argue about is whether it's good abstract art or bad abstract art, whether it is interesting or boring, whether it moves one or not, and so on.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Isaac on August 26, 2012, 12:59:22 pm
... and photography a world of its own that doesn't need reference to another discipline to make it what it is, or to allow it to be understood.

Yes.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: David Sutton on August 26, 2012, 05:30:17 pm

Music on the other hand has no specific descriptive meaning. It appeals directly to the emotions. It may make one sad or elated, but it cannot describe a particular idea or object with any clarity that can be recognised by all. One can take a photograph of a house that is recognisable as a house by all who know what a house looks like. Whether or not the photo of the house is also a work of art is something one can argue about. However, one cannot write a piece of music that clearly depicts a house, although one can inform people that the music was inspired by experiences in a particular house. All music is therefore extremely abstract art. The only thing to argue about is whether it's good abstract art or bad abstract art, whether it is interesting or boring, whether it moves one or not, and so on.


Part of the reason no one will agree on where music becomes art is that there is no agreement on what music is. A definition will have to encompass African poly-rhythm, John Cage's 4'33" and a pub sing-along. Nobody has been able to do it. Is a pub singalong art? I'll pass on that one.
I'd be willing to tackle a definition of "photography", but no doubt it wouldn't take long for some-one to come up with an exception. Like many things, we usually know it when we see/hear it. And because it enters the realm of personal experience, that's all we can say.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Ray on August 26, 2012, 10:53:03 pm
Part of the reason no one will agree on where music becomes art is that there is no agreement on what music is. A definition will have to encompass African poly-rhythm, John Cage's 4'33" and a pub sing-along. Nobody has been able to do it. Is a pub singalong art? I'll pass on that one.

I was referring only to instrumental music. The article that has provoked this discussion referred specifically to Classical Music. Once you include singing, the chirping of birds, the tooting of locomotives, the drone of vacuum cleaners and the heavy breathing of the person sitting next to one during a non-performance of John Cage's 4'33", then all sorts of questions may arise as to whether or not such sounds can be considered as music.

Words have specific meanings. Instrumental music is purely abstract. One wouldn't consider a lecture in mathematics to be music, but one might if the lecturer were to sing the mathematical formulas, which wouldn't necessarily be impossible. Chinese, even when talking normally, may sometimes appear to be singing because of the tonal nature of their language.  ;D



Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: stamper on August 27, 2012, 03:39:07 am
If music and photography have a connection then does it make sense to go out photographing along with your walkman? ;)
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rob C on August 27, 2012, 04:20:05 am
If music and photography have a connection then does it make sense to go out photographing along with your walkman? ;)


Oh baby, have you touched on a dream!

Before we came out to live here, it had been my fantasy (one of them) to take a folding canvas chair out to the end of some beautiful harbour, sit down with a heavy tripod and a 2.8/300 lens or a 500 mirror one, my cassette player (pre-Walkman days) at my feet, and the Beach Boys singing their friggin' hearts out as I photographer yacht after beautiful yacht and made myself a fortune out of Motorboat & Yachting; in the end, I never did take the Beach Boys along for the ride, nor the chair, but I did shoot and enjoy a few of the boats.

The power of this site to stir the pot of old thoughts!

Thank you for that.

Rob C
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: BernardLanguillier on August 27, 2012, 06:36:36 am
Analogies help us map unchartered territories, describe them with the words we know.

We need that to turn fuzzy intuitions into actionable items, turn an intend into a repeatable outcome.

Some day I'll write about how photography helped me improve my tennis skills, because it really did.

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: petermfiore on August 27, 2012, 08:42:33 am
All art, in all it's forms, should and does cross blend. Your work will be richer.


Peter
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: stamper on August 27, 2012, 08:45:20 am
I think photography has turned all of us into internet bores? :) ;)
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: stamper on August 27, 2012, 08:48:51 am
Quote Bernard

Analogies help us map unchartered territories, describe them with the words we know.

Unquote

I think we need to pick appropriate analogies however and the one in the article - imo - doesn't come into that category.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rob C on August 27, 2012, 10:11:11 am
I won't bore y'all by telling how photography turned me into the world's most sort after stud.



Hell, I already was the world's most sought after stud! I hadn't realised that you were to blame for my demotion; had always blamed the beta-bockers.

Well, I forgive you; life is so much more calm these days - get a chance to take photographs. I don't say that's better, just less demanding.

;-)

Rob C
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on August 27, 2012, 10:19:46 am

I think we need to pick appropriate analogies however and the one in the article - imo - doesn't come into that category.
And, in my 'umble opinion, the one in the article is right on. So I must conclude that either you don't understand classical (especially baroque) music or you don't understand photography.

Since you frequently post quite fine photographs on LuLa, I also suspect that it must be the former.   ;)
Title: As a former professional musician - I only partly agree
Post by: ednazarko on August 27, 2012, 01:51:12 pm
I studied music - meaning not just private lessons and band camp, but performed with a range of orchestras, attended conservatory and took music theory, composition.  I also played and wrote jazz, and also studied and worked professionally as an actor and director. When I think about what I had to really focus on understanding in photography, and what I "already had" when I came to it, I agree about the ideas of progression, counterpoint, tension and resolution, line and lines. I was a pretty good black and white abstracts photographer without even much thinking about it - I even had my work in small galleries and individual shows.  One of the games that I used to play with friends I worked with in music was, we'd take a painting or photograph and improvise off of it, and find our way to what we felt was the essence of the picture.  Mostly playing with rhythm, dynamics, and line.

What took me years to understand was color, gesture, emotional content of an image, and the human flesh and blood part of what I consider to be the difference between interesting images and great photographs.  It's hard for a musician who's not facile on multiple instruments to play with color, and you can only do one color at a time. Even my design, improv, and directing training in the theater didn't get me to an understanding of how to really USE color instead of just thinking, isn't already there? and find gesture in an image. Performing arts of any kind have the benefit of iteration.

What gave me the biggest leap forward was working with, talking with, observing and questioning, painters. Color field painters taught me that colors have rhythms, and the right combinations of colors can play beats (opposite ends of the color wheel...). I learned about gesture from abstract painters of various sorts - learning why two canvases of seemingly random splashes and slashes of color had totally different effects, one was emotionless "isn't that interesting" and the other made me catch my breath, swallow hard...

When people tell me they want to be a photographer, I encourage them to study painting, where there are thousands of years of thinking about how to use 2D space and color effectively.  I'm sure that every art form can teach you something about others, I know it works that way for me to some extent. And it makes for great rhetorical flourishes as headlines on really interesting articles.
Title: Re: As a former professional musician - I only partly agree
Post by: petermfiore on August 27, 2012, 04:28:23 pm
From  EDNAZARKO

When people tell me they want to be a photographer, I encourage them to study painting, where there are thousands of years of thinking about how to use 2D space and color effectively.  I'm sure that every art form can teach you something about others, I know it works that way for me to some extent. And it makes for great rhetorical flourishes as headlines on really interesting articles.
[/quote]



PRECISELY!!!!!


Peter
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: BernardLanguillier on August 27, 2012, 09:20:43 pm
I think we need to pick appropriate analogies however and the one in the article - imo - doesn't come into that category.

I believe that you are missing the meta message here.

The meta message is about the value of analogies as a learning tool.

Classical music helped the author. I don't see any reason to doubt that this is genuine, nor do I see any reason why classical music would not help others... providing they have a sufficient knowledge of classical music.

You may have good enough photographic skills that you don't need additional learning, but for those of us who do, this concrete example of being inspired by another domain we like/know may open up doors in terms of trying to map others things we know onto photography.

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: PierreVandevenne on August 28, 2012, 08:23:18 am
Leaving aside the (again) over-ambitious title, I loved the pictures and the analogy... for that specific type of picture which does not represent, at least in my mind, "Everything Most Important in Photography".
But I suspect the evidence of the analogy is very dependent on one's tastes: afaic, Steve Reich came immediately to mind. And the connection with painting isn't far, just google contrapuntal painting.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Dohmnuill on August 28, 2012, 09:11:39 am
"I'll start:
Ken Rockwell: Barry Manilow."


Roy: Poor Form


No doubt the KR smart-arse comment is designed to dog-whistle, and curry favour with, the pound-pack. What a pity you think this forum
is such a venue.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: OldRoy on August 28, 2012, 09:43:02 am
"I'll start:
Ken Rockwell: Barry Manilow."


Roy: Poor Form


No doubt the KR smart-arse comment is designed to dog-whistle, and curry favour with, the pound-pack. What a pity you think this forum
is such a venue.

I'll go further. Not even a terribly funny analogy: whether it's offensive however, depends  bit on whether you think Barry Manilow or KR is the victim. Anyone who puts up for public scrutiny (ie approval) the stuff which KR emits is offering up hostages to fortune, amongst them his own children. So whilst I agree it wasn't particularly appropriate I find it hard to summon up anything as profound as guilt.
How about Ansel Adams: Mahler?
Roy
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: ednazarko on August 28, 2012, 08:14:11 pm

How about Ansel Adams: Mahler?
Roy

Actually, I was thinking Ansel Adams and Sibelius, or Ansel Adams and Dvorak.

Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: OldRoy on August 29, 2012, 06:32:08 am
Actually, I was thinking Ansel Adams and Sibelius, or Ansel Adams and Dvorak.


You won that one. Must think more before typing...
Roy
I really must.
Dvorak is a bit literal though.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: dreed on August 29, 2012, 08:16:09 am
...
The meta message is about the value of analogies as a learning tool.
...

Interesting that you say that. For various reasons I've come to abhor the use of analogies - especially by folks on the Internet. This is because there are always subtleties that make it not work.

I find much more value in an explanation of something that doesn't require an analogy even if it means I need to read twice as much text. For me this is because the person that can explain something without using an analogy quite often has a deeper and more thorough understand of someone that does.

However I would not place the use of classical music in this story as an analogy.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rajan Parrikar on August 29, 2012, 12:38:22 pm
I, too, have thought about classical music and its correspondence to photography, but it is not the classical music (http://www.parrikar.org/) most on this group are accustomed to. Raga, the fundamental idea in Indian classical music, literally means colour, and in the context of music, that which colours the mind. The constituent units of raga are swaras (there is no English equivalent; note is a crude approximation). There are interesting observations to be made between raga and photographic composition.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: NikoJorj on September 03, 2012, 11:06:00 am
I have to make another quotation from the notes (as in letters!) of St AA.

To Alfred Steiglitz, El Paso, November 27, 1936 (and to think I didn't even exist at that point!):

"I can see only one thing to do - make the phoptography as clean, as decisive, and as honest as possible. It will find its own level."
I'm quite surprised neither the article nor anyone here brought the counterpoint from St. EW, from approximately the same period :
“Whenever I can feel a Bach fugue in my work I know I have arrived” (Daybooks)

I found the examples discussed in the article quite interesting, with repeating lines in the pictures echoing themes and lines of the music, but feel this "fugue feeling" can also describe the particular imbrication of visions, or emotions, one can encounter in a richly composed photograph - see eg the first illustration (and main theme) of http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/in-defense-of-depth.html for an example.

A final quote in defense of artistic analogies : http://fleursdumal.org/poem/103
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on September 03, 2012, 01:41:24 pm
Thank you, Niko, for that wonderful post! The quote from Saint EW is one of my favorites, and the piece from the Oneline Photographer exactly fits my own feelings.

Actually, OldRoy's connecting of Ansel with Mahler is not too far-fetched. Having recently heard excellent orchestral performances of works by Ravel and Mahler, I was struck once again by the clarity and control that Mahler used in his orchestrations, even with a huge orchestra. That clarity and control feel to me very similar that of AA. To my ears, Ravel's big orchestra works sound muddy by comparison, a little like the currently popular selective-focus photographs with lots of blur.

Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rob C on September 03, 2012, 01:54:40 pm
Thank you, Niko, for that wonderful post! The quote from Saint EW is one of my favorites, and the piece from the Oneline Photographer exactly fits my own feelings.

Actually, OldRoy's connecting of Ansel with Mahler is not too far-fetched. Having recently heard excellent orchestral performances of works by Ravel and Mahler, I was struck once again by the clarity and control that Mahler used in his orchestrations, even with a huge orchestra. That clarity and control feel to me very similar that of AA. To my ears, Ravel's big orchestra works sound muddy by comparison, a little like the currently popular selective-focus photographs with lots of blur.



Interesting take, Eric: for me, shallow depth of field does anything but create mud; it focusses the attention very firmly (and crisply?) on the subject and frames it from within the frame of the actual format, giving it context by suggestion. If anything, I think it requires a better eye to do that well than simply to get all that's in the frame in focus.

Rob C
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on September 03, 2012, 05:43:02 pm
Rob,

I think that's a metter of personal preference. Selective focus is appropriate, IMHO, for simple photos that have one center of interest. This, of course, includes many portraits, product phots, etc. But it isn't appropriate in most landscapes or other complex images in which one might want to let your eye wander around through various parts of the image, just as you would if you were in the place where the landscape was taken.

Most of the time I tend to prefer pix in which I can wander freely through the image without feeling that my aging eyes are making it hard to see detail.

I will have to admit that I don't recall being bothered by unnecessary blur in any of your photos, either posted on LuLa or on your website.

Eric
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rob C on September 04, 2012, 04:08:44 am
Rob,

I think that's a metter of personal preference. Selective focus is appropriate, IMHO, for simple photos that have one center of interest. This, of course, includes many portraits, product phots, etc. But it isn't appropriate in most landscapes or other complex images in which one might want to let your eye wander around through various parts of the image, just as you would if you were in the place where the landscape was taken.

Most of the time I tend to prefer pix in which I can wander freely through the image without feeling that my aging eyes are making it hard to see detail.

I will have to admit that I don't recall being bothered by unnecessary blur in any of your photos, either posted on LuLa or on your website.Eric



That's the trouble with cellpix: everything ends up sharp! In fact, I sometimes spend ages doing Gaussian fakery to remove some background sharpness! Actually, I don't really mind that at all: I do it for fun and to see if I can convince myself that it worked. Sadly, no PS computer around at the moment, and when I left it with the shop, the moment they heard that, apart from other things, the mouse was freezing, other than offer a sock to keep it warm, they began to hum and haw and tell me how expensive replacement parts can be...!

The computer needs a fix; I need a fox fix!

Rob C
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on September 04, 2012, 09:16:44 am
Good luck with the PC.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Ray on September 04, 2012, 09:28:51 pm

That's the trouble with cellpix: everything ends up sharp! In fact, I sometimes spend ages doing Gaussian fakery to remove some background sharpness! Actually, I don't really mind that at all: I do it for fun and to see if I can convince myself that it worked. Sadly, no PS computer around at the moment, and when I left it with the shop, the moment they heard that, apart from other things, the mouse was freezing, other than offer a sock to keep it warm, they began to hum and haw and tell me how expensive replacement parts can be...!


Oh, Dear me! Life is such a trial! Spending hours doing Gaussian fakery in order to remove the beautiful, the God-given resolution surrounding a subject.  ;D
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rob C on September 05, 2012, 04:29:31 am
Oh, Dear me! Life is such a trial! Spending hours doing Gaussian fakery in order to remove the beautiful, the God-given resolution surrounding a subject.  ;D



It'll never replace life in a warm, fuzzy glow, your priorities firmly delineated as to avoid confusion and distress!

Rob C
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Ray on September 06, 2012, 12:21:26 am


It'll never replace life in a warm, fuzzy glow, your priorities firmly delineated as to avoid confusion and distress!

Rob C

I wasn't drunk, Rob, when I wrote the above, though I may have had a couple of glasses.  ;)
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Tony Jay on September 10, 2012, 07:50:34 pm
Having read the entire thread I am surprised that no-one has mentioned the late, great Galen Rowell who clearly saw (heard) the connection between music and the visual arts.
It is also true that he was severely criticized in some quarters for daring to 'connect the dots' as it were.
His comments and writings are just as relevant, and contentious, now as they were when originally penned.

Regards

Tony Jay
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Patricia Sheley on September 10, 2012, 08:45:29 pm
Needed to go back to notes kept in the sixties while trying to sort Nietzsche as he related to my explorations during a time in life when everything was being transfigured before my eyes with no opportunity for to change the paths it seemed. He wrote of tragedy being the representation of pathos and also born from music... for some reason my notes refer to his question of how one is to distinguish between music and tears...in reflective thought especially during long night exposures there are always the distinct presences of all of the above, for me...

I have tried to find what may have informed the question I thought he expressed...possibly just in dream during a turbulent time...all seemed to flow into one stream...but yes, music...always, once past mundane reality.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: stamper on September 11, 2012, 03:49:37 am
If there is indeed a connection between photography and music then does it mean someone should take a walkman with them whilst photographing? ;)
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rob C on September 11, 2012, 09:34:11 am
In the studio, the music was never off; pirates Radio Scotland as well as Radio Caroline North kept me sane through many long, weary, overnight stays in the darkroom, fingers frozen from turning over sets of batch prints in the wash, wondering how in hell to get them all glazed for mid-morning delivery in Glasgow's city centre. Those were the days - or nights. But I'll never forget the Mamas and the Papas immortal and oh so relevant line: And the darkest hour is just before dawn.

Shooting was exactly the same: music non-stop.

I appreciate that this isn't at all on the esoteric level that some would wish it to be; but, it was real and not part of some bullshit mental game of spiritual self-deception. It made everything possible, made everything work. Not so bad, really, even if Chopin never earned his way into the studio...

;-)

Rob C
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: NikoJorj on September 12, 2012, 12:12:32 pm
I appreciate that this isn't at all on the esoteric level that some would wish it to be; [...]
Oh, but the question is very practical and real, indeed : does the way music makes you feel relate to the way photography makes you feel?



As far as I am concerned, I tried (just for the fun of the experiment) to listen to Bach while post-processing.
As long as the music was somewhat light, or at least not too charged (Glenn Gould comes to my mind), it was only a minor disturbance and an incitation to reverie instead of concentrating on LR's cursors and tools. Counter-productive, in a word.
I did not dare to try Herr unser Herrscher (St-Matthew opening) as, notwithstanding being a complete atheist, it always brings me on the verge of tears (some other sacred cantates are also good at this). Not much to do with the tears of tragedy and pathos by the way, more some emotive surexcitation.

In a way, it is quite reassuring : my photography is the one of a mere mortal, and is mundane enough not to threaten to turn my mind upside down.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Ray on September 12, 2012, 08:37:58 pm

As far as I am concerned, I tried (just for the fun of the experiment) to listen to Bach while post-processing.
As long as the music was somewhat light, or at least not too charged (Glenn Gould comes to my mind), it was only a minor disturbance and an incitation to reverie instead of concentrating on LR's cursors and tools. Counter-productive, in a word.
I did not dare to try Herr unser Herrscher (St-Matthew opening) as, notwithstanding being a complete atheist, it always brings me on the verge of tears (some other sacred cantates are also good at this). Not much to do with the tears of tragedy and pathos by the way, more some emotive surexcitation.

In a way, it is quite reassuring : my photography is the one of a mere mortal, and is mundane enough not to threaten to turn my mind upside down.

I feel in a similar way about this issue. Despite the concept of multi-tasking, one cannot properly concentrate on more than one task simultaneously, which is why answering one's mobile phone whilst driving a car is not recommended.

Classical music is often so magnificent, complex, elaborate and emotionally overpowering, that to even attempt to relegate it to the status of non-intrusive background music would be a crying shame.
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rob C on September 14, 2012, 05:05:19 am
I feel in a similar way about this issue. Despite the concept of multi-tasking, one cannot properly concentrate on more than one task simultaneously, which is why answering one's mobile phone whilst driving a car is not recommended.

Classical music is often so magnificent, complex, elaborate and emotionally overpowering, that to even attempt to relegate it to the status of non-intrusive background music would be a crying shame.




There you are: no constants, no absolutes. My wife could always manage a hundred different things at the same time whereas I never could; she hated music in the car if she was driving but I love it. As a child, I used to do my homework with the radio switched on and it did me no harm whatsoever. The single time in the car when I had to switch music off was when reversing into a parking space. That requires so much absolute concentration that even conversation has to cease. I say had to switch off because I now drive in silent mode. Why? Because the bloody trafficators don’t make enough noise and because in the Fiesta the blinking warning lights are placed at the extreme edges of the instrument panel where the hands obscure them in the driving position. And why should any of that create a problem? Because the damned indicators don’t cancel soon enough: they continue to flash unless you almost do a loop in the opposite direction! When your car is constantly indicating either left or right, it will ultimately cause an accident when you do make that turn. I went back to the dealer and before I’d finished my tale he laughed and said they’re all the same: even his own Focus does it… design, bloody design!

However, I don’t really believe that that implies a lack of concentration on my driving when I’m driving forwards. In fact, I believe that nobody drives with their mind switched onto ‘driving’ per se; I believe that after a while one drives on auto, subconsciously, all the time. I’ve lost count of the number of times I realise that I have no idea whether I got to where I was going easily or whether I had to stop at lights etc. and stopping at lights here is memorable: we have very few. I know exactly why I have to switch off when reversing, though: cars since the 70s have generally suffered from dreadful design faults that limit parking ability: you can no longer see where the friggin’ corners are. In many, you can’t even see where anything might be since vision ends at the edge of the dashboard. Progress, yes. Why do you imagine they invented those expensive parking bleepers if not to screw even more money out of us whilst hiding the basic design flaw that creates the need in the first place?

Now, regarding working at the computer, whether typing messages as now, or working on a picture, I have no idea what the last song I heard might have been: it’s simply a very pleasant atmosphere in which to do that which I am doing; it’s a cocoon of comfort. Just as it is when taking the pictures.

Rob C
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Ray on September 14, 2012, 11:10:21 am
The single time in the car when I had to switch music off was when reversing into a parking space. That requires so much absolute concentration that even conversation has to cease.

There we are, then, Rob! It's all a matter of the degree of concentration required for a particular task. Normal driving is fairly automatic. Listening to music or engaging in conversation is fine, as long as one's eye is on the road and one's hand is on the steering wheel.

If one's photographic processing is largely automatic, a click here and a click there, then sure one can simultaneously appreciate fine music. Speaking for myself, when I'm carefully trying to select a particular part of an image for enhancement, I find the rousing music of Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries a bit distracting.  ;D
Title: Re: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music
Post by: Rob C on September 14, 2012, 01:50:07 pm
There we are, then, Rob! It's all a matter of the degree of concentration required for a particular task. Normal driving is fairly automatic. Listening to music or engaging in conversation is fine, as long as one's eye is on the road and one's hand is on the steering wheel.

If one's photographic processing is largely automatic, a click here and a click there, then sure one can simultaneously appreciate fine music. Speaking for myself, when I'm carefully trying to select a particular part of an image for enhancement, I find the rousing music of Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries a bit distracting.  ;D



So did Wagner; that's why he had to get it the hell out of his system.

At least Beethoven had Chuck Berry to help him roll himself out of his misery. Everyone eventually needs a sweet little rock 'n' roller.

;-)

Rob C