I took part in a photographic walk (or photowalk, which is how it sounds better) through the streets of Lisbon, organized by two photography collectives that I had already had the opportunity to meet before: 1/4escuro and Coletivo Negativo.
Some of us don't know each other well (there are those who came for the first time and, therefore, didn't know each other at all and there are others who are long-time accomplices in photographic wanderings) and, when holding a camera in hand, it's easy for the question to arise - obvious - "And you? What type of photography do you make?"
[It is important to note, in this sentence, the use of the verb to make instead of the verb to take, but this is a theme for another story, for another publication]
I like the readiness of those who are certain. In fact, I don't like it that much, in so many areas of life, but in this case I genuinely like it. Maybe because I envy these certainties a little. "Street photography and landscapes", simple, direct and without hesitation. "And you, what photograph do you like to take?" Well, here comes the doubt, the uncertainty. What do I answer to make sure I answer well? How do you respond to this in a way that appears credible?
They might tell me that I'm giving too much importance to other people's opinions, worried about looking "good in the photo" - an expression that really comes in handy - but no, the concern isn't with others, it's with me, how do I manage? define? The others are just the interlocutors, peers, if I decide to use a large dose of self-confidence and desire, who lead me to raise a question of my own. Who am I, photographically speaking? What have I been doing?
I think I was taken by surprise, despite already having the ghost of the absence of a credible answer to the question. I started with the negative: I don't like street photography, but I like cityscapes, landscapes in general and photographing models. The answer was terrible, embarrassingly uncertain and insecure. After all, if I spend so much time and money on photography, how can I admit that I don't have the answer to this on the tip of my tongue? I have to admit that, in photographic terms, it's similar to being asked "What's your name?" and not knowing how to respond.
Of course it was more embarrassing for me than for others. The world didn't end. A single beam of light did not come from the sky and land on me, making me the center of the biggest public-photographic scandal in history, obviously. But I felt uncomfortable.
I still think that in photography the most important thing is the pleasure you get from the process, more than what you do or the camera you use. But... the rest also matters.
Of course I had to think about it, but the answer remains difficult. Closing my eyes, following my instinct, I believe I would like to answer "emotional portraits of human and urban landscapes". I think it's mainly this. But will it be a decent answer?
I went to Google to search for a list of types of photography, just to cross out the ones that didn't apply to me.
The list has 38 types of photography. I read everyone's description and found the list incomplete. I don't think I found myself there. Despite everything, I think I relate to seven of them:
Portrait photography
Still life photography
Landscape photography
Abstract photography
Fashion photography
Fine Art
Beauty/glamour photography
Considering everything well, I think I can adopt a type of photography that may not officially exist but that defines quite well what I do, or rather, what I would really like to do, if I were given the ability to really achieve the materialization of my internal desire; I think that, from now on, I will answer - at the serious risk of sounding like a phrase taken from a self-help book! - "human emotional landscapes".
And that's it. I will talk about this topic again in a future publication.
No comments:
Post a Comment