priorities…sequencing….what comes first, what comes second, what can wait for later….priorities in life and career and priorities in the sequencing of photographs….what applies to one, may quite apply to the other…the decisions we all make are as important as the actions we take…and it is the decision making process and the prioritizing of actions in fluid sequence that often seems oh so painful to achieve…
as i work with my students at home now, it is quite easy to see that these factors are the single dominant hurdle towards the building of a photographic essay…and the single dominant hurdle for me in life and in my work….maybe some of you feel the same….once the decisions are made and once the priorities are sequenced, then the "actions" are easy by comparison….
many of you have asked about the importance of sequencing the photographs in your essays….i will not judge you on this, because there are no rules….no formula…..nevertheless, the sequencing is so so important, as is the rhythm in a musical score or the juxtaposition of words in a poem…all a part of "visual literacy"….all a part of the "medium is the message"….however, in the case of your essays here, do not worry too much…i well know that few have confidence in sequencing….i will work with you on the final edit and sequencing, so when your work is shown it will be a collaboration between thee and me….
in the meantime, see how others do it….look carefully at the photographic books you admire most….watch carefully the editing in fine films you enjoy ….listen to classical music and feel the "blues"…..be instinctive, be yourself….make small prints of your work and carry them around with you…spread them around…play with the sequence….tack them on a wall…play with the sequence…this is very difficult to do on a computer screen regardless of the program…be tactile with your work…touching your photographs makes a difference…
if you have specific questions, now is the time to ask….
Dave, I can’t help but go back to “The Americans” for inspiration – I read somewhere that Robert Frank had a check list of photographs he wanted to take ,themes he wanted to tackle , emotions he wanted to play out ,so that when he came accross a situation his subconcious recognised it and placed it in his world view as a photograph.
or maybe thats my imagination.
Cheers Glenn
So sequencing doesn’t necessarily have to be about the literal sequence of the story, but maybe more about creating a balanced visual read, a flow—and that can be created through sequences based on composition, color, mood, emotion, etc.—just finding the right balance.
Am I warm here? Stong sequencing sounds a lot like strong design. My interest in this assignment has always been about the opportunity to show editors how I would approach a project, as well as see how like-minded peers approach the same as well. Maybe it’s premature, but I wonder how we factor design in?
David… Thanks for a new post, I was getting tired of scrolling down the comments of your previous one. A new beginning, lets see how far this one takes us.
I somehow find editing harder, much harder then sequencing. Once you get through the pain of eliminating dear to the heart photographs and get to essentials of the story the sequencing seems easier (a good friend, a writer, told me once that sometimes you have to take out of the book, or the story, your favorite sentence and the narrative suddenly becomes cleaner, more balanced). This still doesn’t mean I am good at sequencing or that viewers will recognize my point but only means that I feel less pressure and the process gets easier.
And Glenn, I think you mentioned a key word, imagination. That’s where the power is.
BTW, David, are you planning to provide some kind of feedback for all submissions?
Best,
David,
Thank you, I think I’ll take you up on your offer. On my website (www.brentclarkphotography.com), there is a gallery called “The Pier.” I’ve taken most of the pictures in that gallery since the inception of your contest, and plan to enter those photos in the contest.
I was just wondering what you thought of the sequence I’ve chosen so far (the sequence on my website) ? For whatever reason (delerium?), I’ve sequenced starting with day shots and ending with night shots. I have a feeling this should not really be my approach, but I’m not sure what my approach should be. My only other guiding principle is to begin with shots that sort of introduce people to my subject while maintaining enough mystery to keep them wanting to see more. I could be way off, and would really appreciate your input.
Also, please let me know if you see any images that you think aren’t working. I know you must be busy, so please take you time getting back to me. And thank you, thank you, thank you. I don’t have ANYONE to help me with editing, so this really means a lot to me.
Sincerely,
Brent Clark
Hi david and all…
Not sure this is the right category, maybe a technique Q:
In American Colour ( Constantine Manos )
Said…”A really great photograph is like a poem, its a perfect thing within a frame. In a poem if you were to take out a comma, you distroy the poem, if you crop a good photo you’ll distroy it”.
In all honesty i agree with him!!
But i’m curious what opinions you have (and others have) on cropping images???
hugs
ozzy al
Brent,
I just noticed your comment and took a look at your site. I do pier shooting myself and was interested in seeing your series, which I enjoyed. I noticed your site uses a format that I’ve seen around quite a bit and like and I wonder if it comes as a template?
Thanks,
Cathy
Hi All, I would like to try to help, though I may end up adding to confusion. This way I’ll either be right, or David will correct my misconceptions, and besides, I spent so many years as an educator, I can’t help it.
First, as regards cropping, in the end it’s the final image that counts. There are of course issues, like the more you crop, the smaller is the image size potential, but if cropping turns a so-so image into a killer, then by all means, crop it.
Sometimes we don’t have the luxury of putting on the perfect lens and getting into the exact position we want, so we crop. As a matter of good photographing and discipline, it is certainly nice to compose the shot before you shoot and not have to crop. But life is not perfect.
Hope that all made sense.
Now, sequencing: no rules, only considerations. About 30 years ago, my music composition professor told me that “once is an accident; twice is a coincidence, and three times is art.” To that I would add that four times is stretching it.
Think about the viewer. Put yourself in the viewer’s place. Depending on the venue, changing orientation too often (portrait/landscape) breaks up the unity and is simply interruptive to the viewing experience. On the other hand, light to dark and back can break up monotony.
I often get in trouble by shooting an entire series from the same direction, everyone looking in, or everyone looking out. That should be broken up, if possible. Speaking of direction, though, there’s the “looking out of/looking in toward” matter to consider.
Which way do you want your first photo to face? What about the last one?
Is it ok to flip an image horizontally?
What about concept sequencing? I love it. It’s my favorite. Gradual dark to light, distant to close, or like in a recent blog post, a pregnant woman/mothers with babies/babies’ hands/ adult hands/adult arms, kind of like dominoes. This kind of sequencing is where you get to take seemingly random photographs and make them mean something, just to find out what that something is. For me, that’s what it’s about. Making order out of chaos.
But what about the story line? It would be really nice if you could plan it out, get all the shots you want and lay out the shots as if you were filming a movie. In my experience, however, it hardly ever works that way. I find big holes where I didn’t get a shot good enough to use.
This is as far as I can go. This is the point where I need help.
Hope that added positive food to the meal.
Michael
If I were to make a guess, I’d say that I’ve cropped my photos less than 1% in my entire life—and it’s never been to change the composition but rather to get rid if a tangent. Even so, I’ve still felt guilty about it for some reason. Personally I feel quite strongly about framing with the camera rather than cropping—being satisfied with what you get at least relieves you of one more task. Plus much of the time I have to shoot without looking through the viewer, and if I allowed myself to crop I might end up disrupting the happy mistakes that have already created an interesting composition.
what opinions you have (and others have) on cropping images???
————————–
I think when David mentionned that the use of photography may rely on just more than strict photography, because to be short, times are changing, so that the use of other medias along and with photos (music, text, movie) redefines what a photograph is for, well I think that’s where cropping comes in. I do not see it as destroying a compo, or trying to hide flaws (though it’s an ubiquitous use of cropping), but simply making use of it, as one would do cut-outs in a bigger image, for example.
On the other hand, nothing as rewarding as seeing nothing superfluous in a full frame photo, and having simply improved in putting everything, plus a little bit of chance, within the frame.
It always comes down to asking oneself: what is the purpose of what I am doing, what am I saying, what is the best way to say it.
David, do you crop?
I do not crop because I do street photography for myself and therefore I have no agenda and no deadlines and if the photo doesn’t work I just trash it, I have no reason to try and make it work, I am not getting paid for it and I am never that attached to any photo I take to try and save it with a crop. The thing is though for me I always do compose in the camera, I have a 28mm lens but as of late, the last almost year I have been using a rangefinder camera solely and although I do think about that the lens not being exactly as the VF shows and try to make up for it, it is not like using an SLR and it is just not as exact. But again I am not the kind of person that really needs the composition to be “perfect”.
But on the other hand when I look at other people’s photos I do not care whether they crop or not, I rarely ever even know if it is cropped unless it is a strange aspect ratio and it does not matter to me. If I like the photo, I like it, it doesn’t matter if I later learn it was cropped, that does not effect my view.
Cathy,
My site was designed and is maintained by Neon Sky Creative Media (www.neonsky.com). It is a fantastic company that does lots of work for National Geographic, and designed Steve McCurray’s website. They give you over-the-phone training on how to use the site, and have been extremely friendly and helpful in my dealings with them. My site is a customizable template that they offer for a reasonable monthly fee. It’s awesome because I’m able to easily add or remove photos and text whenever I want.
Brent
One could also turn the images upside down. You can cut a lot that way. But that’s purely a balance exercise. Sometimes an off kilter image creates some tension that can be interesting. But at least it’s another tool. Turn them upside down or stand on your head. It gives a good perspective and removes you immediately from the personal involvement that can be so crippling.
Oh, another very important tool is a beer of two. It’s amazing how a nice cold drink can loosen one up. It can make one just that little bit braver in making that decision to rid the essay of an image that you know needs to go but you keep clinging onto. Have a drink. Get rid of it.
Hey David. Getting ready for your class next week. Very excited and have most everything ready. The portfolio went to the printer today and one of the things that became very obvious was sequencing and a portfolio isn’t even an essay.
I have been so busy preparing for this trip (getting the cafe set up for me being gone, the portfolio ready, the equipment sorted) that I haven’t been commenting but I do check in on occasion.
See you next week teacher. Lee
Hi All,
First let me say with gratitude how much I have gotten from David and everyone else on this forum since I stopped being a passive reader and plunged in as a contributor to the dialogue a while back. Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, everybody!… for your patience with a long-winded old fogie. This is really like an intensive workshop, and participating actively instead of just reading it passively from time to time makes a real difference, even if I may make a fool of myself sometimes. I did some shooting around town while running errands today, and my attitude and awarenes have really changed just in the last week towards what I’m looking for in the viewfinder, what I’m willing to try.
I’ve been able to see a number of your websites and it has given me a real sense of humility to see some of the dramatic lighting effects and bold compositions that many of you are already comfortable working with that I am only beginning to challenge myself to try. And ditto for emotional content. It has made me excruciatingly aware that I am indeed ‘old-fashioned’ in many ways and a lot of my own tastes will probably seem irrelevant or anachronistic to many of you. And I need to shoot off pictures more and shoot off my mouth less.
That said, maybe my sense of history can add a little something now and then.
Sequencing
About sequencing, I think David’s advice, as usual, is pithy, succinct, and totally on target- once you’ve got those great single images that I see many of you producing, I think you should stop thinking like a still photographer and start thinking like a filmmaker, a short-story writer, a composer. Or a band arranging a set of songs in a concert. Or maybe a racontuer with a shaggy dog story? I could mention some of my favorite photo spreads, books, and films, but I’d probably only show you how much I live in the conservative past rather than your more dynamic present.
Cropping
Used to be a big issue with me: “I do my cropping in the viewfinder!” Naturally, the better you are at composing in the viewfinder, the better your photos will be. In the days when many of us shot color slides, and rarely did our own printing, cropping wasn’t really an option, and clicking that shutter meant casting the image in stone. Especially if you were poor like me. Every shot meant less grocery money. And it’s part of both the discipline of the craft and manifesting one’s intentionality in the image. But in the digital age it’s no longer a big issue for me. There’s nothing sacred in the 2:3 aspect ratio of the 35 mm camera. In lots of cases I think it’s still the ideal format, especially in horizontal, but to tell the truth I often find vertical 2:3 either too tall or sometimes not tall enough. For many decades in photography the standard format for prints was 8″x10″ anyway, not 8″x12″. East Asian art is filled with a wide variety of aspect ratio formats not common in the West until recently that I feel are better suited to some subjects. But I think the biggest reason to allow yourself to experiment with cropping is that when I do, I often see more and learn more than I did at the moment I took the picture.
Sidney
Thanks Sidney, wonderful post. I count you as part of the “crop til’ you drop” crowd, then. :-)
I would ask a question to the people who not only rarely crop, but are of the opinion that cropping should be done in the viewfinder, does this mean that a cropped photo can never be as good/strong/potent as an uncropped one?
Would you consider somewhat unethical, not right, as classic rules of photography go, to find out that a photograph you like has been cropped? To be honest, I am a bit on both sides of the fence, yet this is why I often write art/craft when mentionning photography, the / being the fence, I guess.
Have you switched to the Leica M8?
herve-
I’d have to say that I don’t feel obligated to find out if a photo has been cropped or not—cropping of course affects composition, and composition is just one aspect of a photo. I usually more interested in the moment caught.
But personally, I feel that not relying on, or not allowing myself to crop has made me a better photographer. I’d rather throw photos out than try to salvage them. I’d rather get something I like up front than try to suit my needs later. I’d rather get close to a subject than zoom in with software.
But saying it’s unethical is going a bit overboard for me. I have a page layout background and come from the world where most photos have to be cropped to meet design needs. Maybe that’s why in my photo world I have such an aversion to cropping. I’m even sitting here wishing that I could magically have a square format viewer for my D200, so that I don’t have to crop to square but can compose that way without investing in a medium format camera.
That’s how uncomfortable I am with cropping, but that doesn’t mean I’m right. What I like about uncropped photos is that I feel closer to the photographer’s intent at the moment.
Thanks so much Brent. Believe it or not I may have met him recently…I’ll have to see if it’s the same guy.
Now for the cropping conversation…
Herve and others, I’m thinking about your question and hmmm…First of all I will say that my personal preference is to not crop and I wish I never needed to crop a shot but unfortunately it has not been the case thus far. I am always looking to take the “perfectly composed” image which needs no cropping.
To me cropping is not as bad as “I’ll fix it in photoshop” but close….a weakness of sorts. In other words in my own work good “seeing” means being extremely vigilant at the time the shot is taken and not having the “net” of cropping to fall back on….(although again I will admit I do from time to time)…but this is just the standard I set for myself only. I don’t impose this on what someone else does in their own work…I’m not going to judge them and if they felt it was important for them and they think their image is stronger cropped then so be it.
All,
Someone said it in an earlier post, but in an era in which editing, whether musical, video, web-based, editorial, etc. I have to say that I personally have nothing against cropping. I don’t personally practice it heavily (or try not to) but have no qualms with it. The opposite to me it’s like saying that Lorca diCorcia’s method of rigging a street intersection with lights strobes to take a street photo is wrong.
I feel that needs, reality, circumstances, opportunities, now allow for a meta-editorial process that includes the image as raw material as a much as the act of shooting itself; in which effects can be added to the frame at any point during the workflow. Is that so much different, “mutatis mutandis”, from the classic darkroom effect of 20 years ago? “Authorship” is mutating to invest other tools simply not available (at least not as easily) even a short time ago.
I personally believe the intended result must be the pursuit of a vision. Cinematography has taught us a lot about lens language and visual storytelling. I believe that has changed our perception of the frame space more than anything else. Well, it’s changed *mine* quite a bit.
I have deep respect for anyone who is willing to uphold tradition and canon, to work within the traditional theories of composition and image making, as long as others’ freedom of expression is not affected by heavy questions of legitimacy.
My 2 cents.
Giancarlo
glenn…
i did not know that about frank and “The Americans”…but, that is exactly what i did for “Divided Soul”…on a scrap paper one day by the side of the road out in the middle of nowhere spain, with a bottle of wine, a hunk of cheesee, and my vw “combi” i quickly, in a burst of magical energy, wrote down the words “passion…blood….cross…machismo….church….military…paganism…christianity….africa…black ….sweat…..forbidden…..pray…..hedonism….” those words and perhaps a few others were put into the hard drive in my brain and stored permanently so that when i was in a certain kind of situation my search engine would kick on in about a millisecond and find the key word and match with the subject in front of me…..basically, magic!!!
david m…
well, there is certainly structure in an essay, so i suppose that is by definition “design”…..but, there is brilliant design and over-design so naturally i would see the perfect sequence as not being over “designed”..
velibor…
sorry for not posting sooner, but i have a workshop class in my home this week, so my attention must be on students…i am sure you can appreciate that..besides, i was curious to see if those comments somehow went over 300!!!..natural curiosity…i was pretty amazed and mostly amazed that only about 20% of the chat had anything to do with the grant…everyone went philosophical, which was terrific in my mind..
honestly, i do not see how i might give feedback to all submissions….they are easy enough to view, but the amount of writing involved in feedback for all entries would be literally impossible…at least impossible in any constructive way…
i think what i should do is this…look for the best stories and singles i can find..give feedback to the photographers whose work is most likely to get published…give them mid-course corrections….
if i go the other way for example and try take the least likely entry and “build from the bottom up” i would never leave my keyboard….
i do “building” all the time with my students…i actually truly enjoy taking someone with a less than perfect portfolio and “building”…but this same activity which i can do in person would just take too much time back and forth chatting…
the whole purpose of this forum is “educational” i suppose…this forum grew out of the very workshop i am teaching now last year at this time…i decided to blog just the way i teach my class..what i say here is what my students are totally tired of hearing me say in class..
so, i will do my very best in the feedback department….most likely there is still a lot of “building” to be done even with the best posted photo essays…i am guessing very few will come in “done”…but i will cherish this essay when i see it….
cheers, david
Sorry, it’s getting late and apparently I can read my on writing anymore…
The first passage above should read: “Someone said it in an earlier post, but in an era in which editing, whether musical, video, web-based, editorial, etc. has become widespread, cropping is a natural development of the same tool.”
Speaking of editing! I should learn how to proofread. And finish my own thoughts…
Cheers,
Giancarlo
michael…
i liked what you wrote about conceptual sequencing….i think the same (more or less) and try to get my students into this mentality..
herve….
i do not crop….just old fashioned i guess….rightly or wrongly i grew up believing in artistic “intent”….besides, as a young man i believed everything hcb ever wrote about photography!!!
Dave,
Maybe I will pull my truck over to the side of the track with a cask of rough red do that very thing myself!
i believed everything hcb ever wrote about photography!!!
———————-
Aie!!!!! ;-)
David,
One of the things I like if I use a computer for sequencing, is that I can view the slideshow. When viewing a slideshow I tend to notice much more the ‘actual’ differnces between two photo’s, and the effect of viewing one after the other, and the rhytm and tension in the sequence.
Joost
we are telling a story with pictures… and all stories have a beginning a middle and and end and that is the sequence.
stories are everywhere so the act of choosing the story tells me something about myself… why did i choose this story and why does it interest or facinate me. after reflection then i may come up with the elements of the story that are intriguing to me and those elements are the essence of the story. ( i choose 2 stories, one on a religious order and the other on a farm…2 things i have experience with and an interest in…admitedly not very trendy and maybe a bit boring -
on the surface it seems pretty easy, aim the camera and press the button and that is true but what is simple is not easy and so in some way it’s like solving a puzzle.
i’m trying hard to observe and capture the elements of the story as they are revealed to me by the subject because the subject is what is important not me (for instance, what compells people to join an order and take vows of chastity, obedience and poverty…what would compell a person to do that when all around us is sexual indulgence, freedom of choice and materialism? interesting to me..probably related to my background and family ….and then farming…the basis on which this country was founded and so much hard work and vulnerabilty to the elements and the economy ). Anyway stuff, for me, to think about. everybody has their own stuff and their won stories.
i’m trying hard to capture events without using cliches and in ways that work but i’m not sure i even know what that means so it’s tricky trying to avoid the cow plops when you don’t even know what they look like.
what i found helpful is to read a small book by David hurn “on bieng a photographer” and it talks about some of tese very issues.
perhaps a syllabus might be of interest to some. this book and the photo essay by allard has been helpful to me. Does anyone else have any sources that they have found helpful?
Hi all, i just remember somenthing that it’s a good point in the discussion right now.In the magnum portfolios reviews in perpignan someone asked abbas about cropping; and the answer was:”I do the cropping with the eyes while i’m shooting, i don’t cross because i don’t need it”.
I use to crop frames when i need it but i hope not need it anymore sometime.
giancarlo…
sure….i believe in everyone’s freedom to do as they please…personally i do not crop or use photoshop, but i respect the right of others to do so…setting up some kind of parameter, in my mind, actually sets me free…one less decision to make, one less shackle to bear…
joost…
i am sure some can edit and sequence on a computer just fine…and i do it too for slideshows always…i am building a student show on the screen today…
but when it comes to sequencing for a book, then i go “to the wall”..and having those little prints with me always in the bottom of my camera bag and pulling them out and feeling them and spreading them out on the hotel room bed while i am having a morning coffee, seems to bring in certain kinds of ideas , certain “connections” not seen otherwise….but again, i only am telling of my method and this is not a “rule”….my only suggestion is just to find YOUR “method”…your canvas on which to paint…this decision will set you free…
david
jay….
all good thoughts on your part…and the allard and hurn books both good and full of interesting ways to think….
david
Hello David,
thanks a lot for the post.
You are right, sequencing is very hard. Infact for the “corpus” that I sent you, I almost took three days thinking, chaning, suffering but at the end I took a decision. I will try classical music next time, for this work I used Ryuichi Sakamoto and Imogen Heap, some times, samba is good too for me.
Tell me what do you think when you’ll have time.
About cropping… I hate cropping. You know, old school… I think it’s a way of training, educate the way of viewing, composition. If not I consider I did a mistake. So every time I press the shutter it become a challenge for me. Maybe in this digital era it is like do not “chimp”!
Take care and have a nice workshop.
All the best,
Ken
Lara and Joost, cool, hadn’t seen you before around here! ;-)
On sequencing. Having the pictures printed helps. The only time I have really been amazed by sequencing was last night watching Lights in the Dusk by Aki Kaurismäki. Sometimes the scenes followed to advance the storyline, sometimes they followed in conceptual terms and sometimes they followed aesthetically (the windows of a prison with a strong diagonal resembled a lot two trees against a wall in the next sequence, but upside down and with opposite colours). Some of these would have worked out as a single image, some as pairs. Just beautifull.
I like this conversation about sequencing. It shows me thinking processes of others and ways to aproach the subject from another angle. I have, in the past, ordered from light to dark, or sequenced by story line and then also by pairing common elements in pictures.
As far as cropping goes, I think everyone is probably proud if the picture comes out full frame and it comes out well. It works for majority of my shooting but I don’t let it hinder me. When there is a better shot by cropping, I crop.
I like to present a tight frame. Sometimes even though a print is fine as is, I crop about 5% of it only to tighten the frame.
There is also a part of me rebelling about too much focus on a subject. Lots of times I like to present items in the negative space that will give the viewer a feeling of ‘being there’. I like to think that those items either add to the story or let the viewer enjoy the subject matter a while longer by wandering their eyes into the background and corners of the image.
Those are all hypotheticals, however, and only true for the subset of people who like my pictures.
Rene, I like what you have to say about composition and elements within the frame.
I find that looking at painters’ work is really good for your eye. There was a whole show on last night on the Ovation Channel on Renoir. His paintings are so filled with people doing different things in different parts of the frame. The scene itself takes on life. I think what I’m getting at is the texture of the picture. I like texture.
Michael
“Be tactile with your work…”
Here here! For sequencing, for editing, and for the sheer joy of going through images, nothing beats a pile of 4X6 (5X7? 8X10?) photographs!
Cropping…I try not to. Want to do as much as possibnle “in-camera.” However, I’ve noticed many cameras (including mine!) don’t have 100% coverage in the viewfinder, which leads all too often to having little unwanted (unseen!) elements sticking out in some corner or edge of the frame! Ugh! In this case “chimping” is essential.
But if you shoot a lot and can’t take the time to check the image after each shot you end up having to crop at least a small amount later.
Any others find this to be a bother?
Hi David, and all,
I think it isn’t a rule to crop or not. It is a personal choice.
Personally I have learned to don’t crop my photos and at the same time I have learned to put more attention inside the viewfinder too.
David, attending your workshop I have learned a lot about sequencing, and I have seen how you create a good sequence easily and how you discover good connections hard to see. But the sequence is still a hard question for me; I often do my sequences just see the harmony of colours (the “mood” of pictures), or the message inside any picture, or the different/same subjects, but I never “see” and consider all these elements together. And I believe that a good sequence is the result of a magic mix of all variations among pictures.
It’s easier for me working on a sequence with printed photos and this method helps me a bit.
Dario
Personally I crop about 1% of my work. Sometimes the composition works better with things just a bit tighter than you could get at “the moment”. I’d rather have to crop it just a bit than to not have the photo. That said who says that the format of our camera is a holy thing that we can’t deviate from? What if you are shooting in 2×3 but the image looks better as a square or the other way around? Shouldn’t the image itself be the deciding factor?
As for sequencing, I think that one of the weaknesses of still photographers seems to be be an inability to see more than a single frame/moment. Movie directors, video photographers, writers, music composers , dancers/choreographers , animators – heck even cartoon strip/graphic novel writers all see, think and feel sequences – often very very long and complicated sequences to get to the end of what they want to say. Just as with all those art forms there are no rules to how to sequence images so long as there is a coherent flow to the ideas presented.
Scene transitions are critical to the narratives in all the above arts yet they are almost never used with still photographic sequences. “A guy walks into a bar. It’s cold and raining out on this graying November evening. He takes off his dripping coat and wearily slides into a booth. Meanwhile across town the pigeons are coming to roost on the top of the building where the little girl lives with her grandfather” …
To me sequencing is just writing a narrative, often like a movie, with my still images. I often try to think of the way that the backing music would accent/support the mood of the images I’m flowing together. If the story reads well then the sequence works regardless of the techniques you used to craft it.
I hesitate to post this bit on sequencing for being too practical, too formulaic, simplistic but perhaps like “rules” of good composition, it is a place to start, then break. Personally in an assignment situation I find myself all over the place, disjointed, frustrated and confused if I don’t start grounded with exhaustive research, an idea, a sense of what I’m looking for first (in that order) … then it is easier to let go and flow within a basic framework that is almost subliminal at that point. I think, too, that sequencing can be different given the intended presentation or the intended “message” … there are many different ways to tell a story … but a few thoughts in one area (not books, or perhaps it can apply, I don’t know) … I’m sure David will correct my course if I wander.
In many Nat Geo stories, for example, the photos often seem to follow a logical course. If there was a simplistic comparison to the written essay then it would be the five-paragraph essay – intro setting the background, sense of place and theme; 3 graphs in support which could include a conflict or crisis followed by denouement; and a conclusion wrapping it together and perhaps asking a question just beyond the theme to ponder.
This can equate to an opening photo that is an aerial shot or otherwise sets up the sense of place and theme. I was just looking at the article “Sudden City” on Dubai (Nat Geo, Jan. 07) since my wife will be going there in the spring for a women’s leadership conference. It is rich in anachronisms. The article opens with 3 intro photos (old and new juxtaposed, followed by the new Dubai of expats, followed by the traditional). This is then followed by several explanatory aerials – a long intro by Nat Geo standards flipped on its head (it buries the traditional opening aerial) and an excellent sequence in and of itself.
The intro is often followed by images that pull you in further, then perhaps an environmental portrait, a detail shot, then pull back out some for a conclusion. All of the images in the Dubai piece advance the theme set up in the intro. It’s not a fixed formula but there is some good basic storytelling logic in it.
And regarding that story, I would have cut the photos by one ;-{)>
tom
For those commenting on sequencing, from one who struggles with it, I’d like to hear who follows a strict time or story line, and from those who edits more loosely, and sequence based on compositional and emotional feel, rhythm, tone, etc. I know, I need to read Tom’s post again!
david@humanfiles.com
Choices: The Photographer makes them.
Obtaining, sorting, and sequencing images. They are all choices that have to be made. For a person to even pick up a camera, raise it to their eye and take in the light is a choice. Cropping is a choice made every time one sets their eyes to the world. Who do we choose to love, befriend or respect and who do we choose to hate, ignore, or disdain?
Reading earlier posts, I thought of a camera person in a bustling New York crowd. The person takes in the crowd with all of her senses. She waits, finds her subject matter and opens the shutter doors to the light bouncing off the shimmering sea of people. Inevitably it is impossible to capture all the light. Choices are made, people and things are admired, celebrated, exalted, envied, exploited, revered…and still others…excluded.
Chris
David,
As a fan of your work, I’ll say that no doubts your method seems to work very well for you.
BTW, I am very curious as for how you composed the image you posted here, on this very thread, where you clearly were holding the camera away from you. I would love to learn how you did it.
Cheers,
Giancarlo
It’s one thing for people to make decisions about cropping themselves, but what about those situations where you work really hard to microcompose the picture in order for cropping to be unnecessary and somebody else makes the decision about cropping your photo?
It’s a really bad feeling to have your photo cropped by somebody else. Although it may not be as bad as the feeling Sam Abell had when his Moscow Pears ran wrong reading in Harper’s.
Sometimes people have said me “you have strong pictures but you don´t have stories”… I thing this is my essential problem. Maybe I concentrate so much in doing good images that I lose be big picture… and the result is a bunch of photos very difficult to edit, to sequence, and make them tell me something… I try to invent myself a story with the images… normally I do it lonely but I recognize that maybe I’m too “Cartesian” guy… I should find someone to give all the photos to edit and wait what comes out…
about cropping…
I love so much that b&w photos that include the black frame of the film around the image… I don’t know… I thing is very elegant… and says a lot about a good photographer… is showing us exactly what he/she saw behind the camera…
But there is also a lot of good photographer who use cropping as a normal practice… and it works very well… “good” cropping is not easy… is like an art by itself… is like to “see” the picture inside the picture… not easy job…
saludos,
Jay,
Speaking of Sam Abell, his book “A Photographic Life” is very much about most of what we’ve been discussing here: the story of a vision and the effort to achieve it through 40 of his best known photographs… A great book.
BTW, in one of his video interviews (can’t remember where I saw it right now) Abell mentions that he believes most photo books are just flipped through more than perused, or studied, and I wonder if David, or any of us, has any thoughts on how that pattern affects his approach to sequencing and, more in general, to editing… Do you believe that a magazine is more prone to being used that way than a book? If so, is your editing process any different?
Cheers,
- Giancarlo
Giancarlo, are you asking about all the things that went through David’s head when he took the picture or how he managed to take it with the camera held like that?
If it is the second, I’ll bet that he held his camera up to his eye first to get the focus and all that and then he held the camera out and pushed the release.
Or…
Michael
Sequencing: Look at my blog to see about this conceptual sequencing. http://www.michaelashapiro.com/blog
It’s the “How I Think” post.
Maybe we could start a new movement called the conceptualists or sequenists.
Michael
thinking along the lines of choosing and sequencing…I was looking through Winogrand’s 1964 book a few days ago. Anyone slightly anoyed that the editors chose so many pictures from the Texas Fair? I would have been probably happier had I not known that.
what I mean by my previous comment is that the book titled 1964 is billed as a book about the state of the nation in 1964 where Gary travelled across the USA on a grant and tried to capture various US states. I thought that Texas got a disproportionate share of images. On one side I think it doesn’t matter as long as the content goes along with the story (and it probably does as his work is amazing) on another side I think that had this been an emerging photographer presenting his choices the editor would probably take more liberty in thinning out the overabundance of the shots from the Texas Fair.
“are you asking about all the things that went through David’s head when he took the picture or how he managed to take it with the camera held like that?”
————————
Michael S.
Actually both. I know how rigorous David is with his framing so I’m wondering how he achieves minute control over the compo, not just how he can more or less frame the shot. I have tried similar shots and it’s pretty darn tough, at least for me…
Giancarlo
Carlos, man can I relate to your statement about strong pictures versus story. Same problem. Rationally, I know that editing down a body of work and sequencing are not necessarily a linear process if you are storytelling. You MUST edit down to photos that advance your idea even if you toss some of what you feel are your “best” or strongest – in reality they are not your best or strongest if they do not advance your theme. Easy to say, hard to do – I love some of my photos too much, sometimes for the wrong reason (i.e. i had to hang from a yard arm in a gale to get it) – but there will be other places for those images someday, perhaps.
All of that said, people will often remember you not for your strongest photo but for your weakest … i know this and it drives me nuts in edit and sequence … second guessing, second guessing … where did I read somewhere about a study of a guy who, do to injury, lost that part of the brain controlling emotion – he couldn’t make even the most basic of decisions, queen bed or king at a motel … all of this, for me, boiling back down to feeling more and thinking less throughout the entire process, i think there can be a natural intuitive flow. I like David’s method of carrying photos around, feeling them, forgetting them (or relegating them to the subconcious to ponder) then revisiting. I will try this.
Off to research the Kingdom, crumpled 4 x 6′s in my back pocket … peace