The world in the lens

The photographer's idea, the photographer's creation and the differences between photographers are all given by life. Life makes a person, so our actions and thinking should naturally adapt to and reflect life. If life is harmonious, photography is really unnecessary. But it is precisely life itself that is not perfect. This imperfection is manifested in many indifference, sameness and hypocrisy in life. Economically, institutionally, socially and conceptually. Photography is to express this imperfection. I think this is the task of photography.

Kafka put it well: "Photos make our eyes only pay attention to superficial things"; Because of this, photos make the life that was originally unknown more blurred. Life flashes a faint light through the outline of an object, like a scene of changing light and shadow, which even the most sensitive lens can't capture. One must explore life by feeling. Do you think you can feel the profundity of "eternal reality" by pressing the button on that convenient machine-how many generations, poets, artists, scientists and countless other miracle workers have stood in front of it with anxiety and hope? I really doubt this machine. This automatic camera does not complicate our eyes, but gives us a simpler and more absurd instantaneous vision.

However, it is a very specific problem to grasp the premise of taking care of the truth and how to express it.

Jiang said that if photography is regarded as a "thorough record", it will become "synonymous with copying". To "fully express" will be "far from reality". Therefore, he had to "shoot while worrying in the narrow gap between his performance and record."

Bresson's epigram: "Photography is holding your breath", because reality is "escape".

In addition, can photography have a unified answer to the real depth? Can photography control various means of expression? I don't think so. Let's see what famous artists say:

Sardo Jia, a radical leftist, insists on "respecting the object and understanding the object". He thinks it is "most important" to "live together" with the people who are filming. However, he is far more sober-minded than our pseudo-leftist artists and knows that creation depends on "individuals". He said: "It is still lonely to be in contact with people in this land ... This dual structure is very important and indispensable for photography."

On the contrary, Yukio Hatoyama insisted: "No matter who we meet for the first time, we can't shoot well, and we can't shoot well in the future."

Cortez and Bresson, devils who are good at capturing human nature, have never published the creed of "going deep into life" and "experiencing life". The latter said: "Apart from poetic expression, I am totally uninterested in the documentary nature of photography."

The beauty of perceptual knowledge and the profundity of rational knowledge are always balanced in art, and there is no final conclusion about which is better or worse.

I have read many famous explanations about what form photography is:

Alan Shayag, director of the photography department of Pompidou Center in France, confirmed that photography is an art. When asked about the criteria for the museum to collect photographic works, he flatly took "art", "progress" and "modernity" as the criteria. He said: "It's not what the photos reflect or whether they are faithful to the photography itself, but what new things he has contributed to modern art."

Clark said that when he took photos, "he never thought about art."

Bravo said to the extreme: "It is meaningless to talk about whether photography, painting and sculpture are art". The media itself is not an important issue. "

Hideyoshi simply said that his work "doesn't matter even if it's not photography."

Perhaps, a photographer is an ambiguous "occupation" because there are too many professional photographers who are not committed to photography. You can't expect the works made by a painter or film director to conform to the characteristics of photographic media, and you can't stop Bresson from specializing in painting in his later years. There are not so many boundaries in life, and neither is photography.

Photography is the art of subtraction.

As for why we need to take pictures, let's take a look at the typical photography landscape in China: countless photographers swallowed up by cameras. During the annual flowering period, the temple fairs of ethnic minorities and the most distinctive scenery in the famous mountains and rivers in the west, you can always see groups of photographers holding various brands of cameras to capture the sunset and aim at the scenery. I'm like Guo Jing in The Legend of the Condor Heroes, and I think deeply about why I want to practice martial arts. Or find the answer from the famous argument:

Cindy Sherman said, "I was not interested in being a photographer in the past, and I am not interested in being a photographer now."

Daido Moriyama simply said, "I don't like cameras ... I don't have a camera at all. It feels like a mountain city. " When he was short of money, he sent his camera to the pawnshop-can you imagine the relationship between a painter and a pen, a musician and a musical instrument?

Clark's motives are extremely simple. He thinks that "taking pictures is not important", but "I am taking pictures of young people".

Nobuyoshi Araki is extremely paranoid: "Photography itself is happiness, and photography is light or even frivolous. As a mood, I would rather believe in photos than words. "

Many photographers picked up the camera for a specific reason: Jiang felt that the Japanese "easily forgot the problems left over after the war" and he wanted to remember history with the camera.

Daido Moriyama, who takes the city as the theme, said, "I feel at home with any city."

Yukio Hatoyama, a teenage killer, believes that photography is "cutting off the best place in the existing world."

The purpose of Clark's photography is to "turn back and turn the past into photos".

Nobuyoshi Araki called photography a "memory device".

However, Shomei Tomatsu believes that photography "destroys memory", and it is this "lack of feeling" that attracts him to take up photography.

Photos make our eyes only pay attention to superficial things; Because of this, photos make the life that was originally unknown more blurred. Life flashes a faint light through the outline of an object, like a scene of changing light and shadow, which even the most sensitive lens can't capture. One must explore life by feeling. Do you think you can feel the profundity of "eternal reality" by pressing the button on that convenient machine-how many generations, poets, artists, scientists and countless other miracle workers have stood in front of it with anxiety and hope? I really doubt this machine. This automatic camera does not complicate our eyes, but gives us a simpler and more absurd instantaneous vision.