The idea of how photography relates to truth is complicated, as you say. Taking a photo implies technical and composition decisions, and therefore interference with reality. It doesn't invalidate the documentary quality of the photos, as long as we understand we see through the consciousness of the photographer.
Documentary doesn't necessarily imply social commentary. Taking photos of your kids is documentary and your photos are great. They mean something to you and will mean something to others through association to their own history. They will represent your perception of things that have happened. It doesn't need to go beyond that.
I don’t like labels of any form. Putting things into drawers is inherently limiting and a simplification of the complexities of the physical world and emotional dimensions. I do love your pictures. I don’t really care if they are candid and how you made them. What’s interesting is your brain, your vision and the little adventures you experience. Can’t wait for more inspiring thoughts and frames :) oh… and I also have your picture from some 15-20 years ago still hanging on my wall :D
I agree that any label is limiting but think the spontaneity is important. At least for me. My brain as you say, puts a spin on reality in the edit, by choosing what to include but I wouldn’t enjoy the images if they didn’t really happen. Part of my drive to capture moments is to celebrate the world as it is, there is enough wonder to not need to fabricate more.
ps. I also have one of those prints hanging, no idea what happened to the rest.
I understand and to a large extent my approach and motivation is identical. However, i do have some amazing photo books where the pictures include frames that are an effect of a collaboration (plenty of large format work) or are more preconceived ideas or fabricated realities as you put it. They scratch a different itch. Both and all approaches can yield amazing discoveries.
The idea of how photography relates to truth is complicated, as you say. Taking a photo implies technical and composition decisions, and therefore interference with reality. It doesn't invalidate the documentary quality of the photos, as long as we understand we see through the consciousness of the photographer.
Documentary doesn't necessarily imply social commentary. Taking photos of your kids is documentary and your photos are great. They mean something to you and will mean something to others through association to their own history. They will represent your perception of things that have happened. It doesn't need to go beyond that.
I don’t like labels of any form. Putting things into drawers is inherently limiting and a simplification of the complexities of the physical world and emotional dimensions. I do love your pictures. I don’t really care if they are candid and how you made them. What’s interesting is your brain, your vision and the little adventures you experience. Can’t wait for more inspiring thoughts and frames :) oh… and I also have your picture from some 15-20 years ago still hanging on my wall :D
I agree that any label is limiting but think the spontaneity is important. At least for me. My brain as you say, puts a spin on reality in the edit, by choosing what to include but I wouldn’t enjoy the images if they didn’t really happen. Part of my drive to capture moments is to celebrate the world as it is, there is enough wonder to not need to fabricate more.
ps. I also have one of those prints hanging, no idea what happened to the rest.
I understand and to a large extent my approach and motivation is identical. However, i do have some amazing photo books where the pictures include frames that are an effect of a collaboration (plenty of large format work) or are more preconceived ideas or fabricated realities as you put it. They scratch a different itch. Both and all approaches can yield amazing discoveries.