Art 'n Science 'n Photography

[Ray Maxwell]

Hi Group,

My Name is Ray Maxwell.  I am an electronics engineer, a silver gelatin print maker, chromogenic print maker, and digital printmaker and photographer.  I am also a storyteller.

Once upon a time there was a young person who came to a Japanese Master Potter and asked if he could become his apprentice.  The old Master agreed.  He took the young apprentice down to a river and taught him to dig a clay body and then how to wedge clay (this is mixing with the hands to remove all air pockets and make the clay homogeneous).

The next day the apprentice arrived and asked what he could do.  The old master sent the apprentice to the river to wedge clay.

The next day the apprentice arrived and asked what he could do.  The old master sent the apprentice to the river to wedge clay.

This went on for months.

One day the apprentice asked when he could make a pot.

The old Master said, "Before you can be creative, you have to learn your medium."

The old Jazz master also said, " First you have to "pay your dues"."

All creative art has technical aspects that have to be mastered before you can express yourself in a deterministic way and become a "Master" of your art.

You can use trial and error and come up with art that is serendipitous.  This is also valid art created via accident.  But pre-visualized deterministic art requires that you master the medium before you can accurately express yourself.

Painting requires that you understand pigments, canvas, light, perspective, brushes, thinners, and a whole list of technical things.

Digital photography requires that you understand CCD and CMOS arrays, A/D converters, digital file systems, light, optics, and the many more technical items.

I once worked with a painter who understood color science.  He limited his oil palette to only the colors that could be reproduced on my inkjet printers so that we could approximate his work without going out of gamut. He understood the limits of the reproduction methods that were available.  Don’t you wish there were more artists like that.

Ray

[rlebel]

"Studying color management (which may be a craft, not a science) is not doing science."

I trust that GretagMc Beth, Chromix, Color Vision, X-Rite, Epson, ColorByte and numerous other companies involved in color management will be delighted that you are setting them straight on the exact nature of their endeavors.


Alain
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53714\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It is not clear to me why Alain chooses to make this response rather than responding to what the author actually meant. The companies who produce the software could quite correctly be described as doing engineering, which is the practical application of science. Maybe they occasionally stretch into doing science, but I doubt it. On the other hand, the users of these products are ordinarily doing neither engineering nor science.

I suggest that the proper term for use in Alain's article instead of "science" might be "craft" or "technique". In any art there is a need to make use of physical tools to create the end result. (Give me a break and allow that even Photoshop is a "physical tool"; it uses electrons, right?) One can come to grips with the tools in a variety of ways, ranging from a basic understanding of the physics to "it looks right when I wiggle it this way". If you fail to learn how to use your tools you will have inconsistent results, but no one needs a PhD in image processing to use Photoshop effectively, nor a Masters in chemistry to make a competent print in the darkroom.

Photography today makes use of a lot of tools that have required an amazing level of engineering, and basic science including optics, chemistry, computer and semiconductor. A large amount of the engineering effort by the camera, printer and software companies is devoted to making it possible to take photos with good technique without needing to understand the science and engineering that are fundamental to success, just as I can write this post with no clue about how the hundreds of thousands of lines of code work when I hit "Add Reply".

I am also mystified as to how Alain thought he would improve the point of his article by dismissing the craft or technique required by painters. I myself cannot guess if painting is technically easier or harder than photography, but I appreciate that painting well is hard. If I am writing about technique and/or art in photography, why does this point matter?

I hope that future articles will help me blend craft and art to make better photographs, rather than inspire me to blather on about the proper use of certain English words!

[jani]

I once worked with a painter who understood color science.  He limited his oil palette to only the colors that could be reproduced on my inkjet printers so that we could approximate his work without going out of gamut. He understood the limits of the reproduction methods that were available.  Don’t you wish there were more artists like that.

I know you're not soliciting a response here, but I'd like to point out that no, I don't wish that there were more artists like that on a general basis.

While such artists may be a pleasure to work with if their work is primarily intended for reproduction, and it indeed may spark off a new trend in painting techniques, I don't like the idea of artists limiting themselves in this manner.

It would also be convenient if image artists limited themselves to formats that were either 1:1 or 3:2, since those are easiest to find frames for, but ...

[Ray Maxwell]

While such artists may be a pleasure to work with if their work is primarily intended for reproduction, and it indeed may spark off a new trend in painting techniques, I don't like the idea of artists limiting themselves in this manner.

Ray replies:

Masters of an Art understand the physical limitations of the medium that they are working in.  Being ignorant of these limitations does not mean you are free from them.

A serendipitous Artist sometimes produces happy accidents.

Both are valid modes of Art.  However, they are not the same.

However, a Master understands his "project" end to end.  He knows the market that he wishes to reach.  He knows the price point he wishes to hit.  He makes choices to produce his art within the constraints of his project.

Those who create in ignorance are not regularly successful.  They do enjoy the occasional accidents of sucess.  Some of these are beautiful.

I have been entertained by Art by accident, however, I prefer to work with Masters who can pre-conceive their work from beginning to end.

One is not right and the other wrong.  I make a personal choice to prefer the Masters.

Ray

[BernardLanguillier]

Interesting discussion, don't know how I managed to overlook it these past few days.

It struck me that those condeming the essay for its supposed lack of accuracy didn't bother to acknowledge the fact that the message it attempts to convey comes across clearly. At least it does for me, even if this was perhaps partially supported by this very discussion.

Even if the discussion surrounding the usage of "science" vs "technique" could reach a conclusion, would this really add value to an essay that already provides plenty?

As somebody else pointed out, isn't the focus on the technicallity of the article a great metaphore for the very point Alain was trying to make?

Cheers,
Bernard

[alainbriot]

"Isn't the focus on the technicallity of the article a great metaphor for the very point Alain was trying to make?"

Il est plus facile de voir la paille dans l'oeuil de son voisin que la poutre qu’on a dans le sien (It is easier to see a straw in your neighbor's eye than a two by four in your own eye) - French proverb.

Alain

[russell a]

Il est plus facile de voir la paille dans l'oeuil de son voisin que la poutre qu’on a dans le sien (It is easier to see a straw in your neighbor's eye than a two by four in your own eye) - French proverb.

Alain
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53958\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Maginot Line - defensive French construction - functions as a metaphor for the erection of an elaborate and highly engineered position which, however, can be simply ignored and circumvented by others who adopt a different view of the world and go about their business - rendering the position irrelevant.

[DiaAzul]

Maginot Line - defensive French construction - functions as a metaphor for the erection of an elaborate and highly engineered position which, however, can be simply ignored and circumvented by others who adopt a different view of the world and go about their business - rendering the position irrelevant.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53963\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's a great metaphor for this thread - a certain obtuseness which has been deployed to avoid discussing the true merits of the article written by Alain. Perhaps if people step back, take a breath and allow the series of articles to develop there may be more substance to the discussion.

[Jack Flesher]

(It is easier to see a straw in your neighbor's eye than a two by four in your own eye) - French proverb.

Alain
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53958\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Wrong again!  Has nothing to do with the French.  In fact the French weren't in existence when that quote was first spoken.  

So who said it originally?  Jesus, Mat 7:3.

[Mark D Segal]

Jack, totally off-topic - because I've already said what I wish to say about this topic for now, but just a short rejoinder that the "French" most likely were in existence at that time - but not in the political or social configuration familiar to us today!

Cheers, Mark

[Jack Flesher]

that the "French" most likely were in existence at that time
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53978\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Agreed -- it is OT, but...

The ancestors of the people that ultimately became "the French" were most certainly around and probably even lived inside the boundaries of what is now "France".  But "France" and "the French" were very clearly not even communal concepts at the time Jesus was walking the Earth.

[DarkPenguin]

"My cat's breath smells like cat food." - Ralph Wiggum, Simpsons:1F17.

So, when is the next article due out?

[alainbriot]

"totally off-topic - . . . the "French" most likely were in existence at that time - but not in the political or social configuration familiar to us today!"

Absolutely.  Plus, just because something was first said in Biblical times doesn't mean that it has not become a French proverb later on  

"So, when is the next article due out?"

I have it ready.  In fact, I have the next two ready.  This discussion has proved to be extremely helpful in this regard.  Thank you to all who are participating, whether you agree or disagree with me as I previously said.

Yours watching the Maginot line being built,

Alain

[Jack Flesher]

Yours watching the Maginot line being built,

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53991\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

And while we're at it, let's not forget that the Maginot Line is known as one of the great "Military Blunders" ...

      ,

[DiaAzul]

But "France" and "the French" were very clearly not even communal concepts at the time Jesus was walking the Earth.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53986\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sorry to rain on your party, but the 'French' did exist as a communal concept within, what are roughly, the existing boundaries prior to the birth of christ. The kingdom was Gaul and was populated by the Gauls (of Asterix fame). Obviously, European history with its ebb and flow of kingdoms, republics and such like has necessitated various alliances and changes of border - but in principle, there has existed a tribal grouping of people within what we class as modern day France for over 2,500 years.

Given this is a photographic forum it is of marginal relevance in this discussion. However, there is good grounds to agree that Jesus probably did come up with the original quotation (even if 2x4 planks didn't exist in his day); but we know for fact that it was the French and not Jesus that invented photography ;-)

[BlasR]

I'm very happy I'm drinking french wine right now,,To bad I can't get my hands on the bread too..But I need to look where I walk because the dogs are around in not buddy pick up after.
Now let continuo about love ops arts.
I need help.

BlasR

[Mark D Segal]

OH BOY - is there ever a whole debate about who invented photography. There is a strong case that it was a French invention, but check the literature....................

[DaveW]

Well, unfortunately I'm not drinking french wine right now..
.. however I do look forward to reading more of Alain's articles - I found his first series to be very helpful and inspiring.

I do hope future discussions of his work don't devolve into pedantic quibbling ....

[Jonathan Wienke]

Oh, and Jonathan, weighing into an interesting, and developing thread starting off with "This is ridiculous"... is this an example of the diplomatic tact and sensitivity that the US military is so renowned for ? Or are you just trying to bring us down to the usual level ? Just wondered.

As I said before, photographers use the scientific method all the time, even if they don't think of it in those terms. Every time you use your experience to set up the camera and lens and other equipment prior to a shoot, you are formulating a hypothesis based on your photographic experience regarding how the camera and other equipment should be set up and configured to achieve the desired result. The shoot itself is an experiment that either validates or invalidates the hypothesis, depending on whether the desired result was achieved during the shoot. And the experience gained results in modifications to the hypothesis that will hopefully improve the result achieved next time.

Every technically competent photographer uses the principles of the scientific method whenever he or she picks up a camera. Claiming that technically competent photographers don't use "science" is ridiculous.

[larryg]

Alain,  I appreciate your effort and attempt at sharing your experiences in fine art photography.

this thread reminds me of many years ago  (I was a top insurance sales person with an insurance company)  I was invited to speak at a small group of newer insurance want to be's.  
I gave my talk and tried as best I could to give practical tips on how to be successful in the business.  I told them some specific things that certainly worked for me.

At the end of the speech an agent approached me (and I was thinking he was going to thank me for the great advice and tips, especially since he was really struggling trying to make ends meet).  and told me that he kept track of my speech and counted   # of ahs   # of ohs and so on.
It appears there was no connection between my thoughts and his ability to hear what I was saying?

I appreciate any new approaches, ideas that can move move down the road to being a better artist, as I am sure most here are.