Boring

[Jorgen Udvang]

???

The Sunset Bar "slow day here..." thread has been going on since July 2008 and is still active. Lots of good, boring photos there.

Since this is so boring, I'll post a boring photo from August 2012, the first roll on my GX680 III, shot on Acros 100, don't know what lens, but probably the 65 mm. Coincidently just 5 minutes from where I live now, but more than 100 kilometres from where I lived then.

 

[cunim]

OK, I started it up in sunset bar. Let's see 'em.

 

[P1505C]

Do you ever take a snapshot of some local street, or a family member, or a pet or whatever and there is no reason for taking it. You know it is mundane, boring. But, for some reason, you are drawn to it. No one else will understand and even you don't know why, but there it is. What about a thread for photos like that?
GFX II, 110mm

View attachment 208942

This is a fantastic thread! I love it. I spend almost all my time trying to make photos that exactly fit this criteria. Boring subject, composition, and light - but somehow interesting.

I’ve decided to actually spend time finding actually interesting subjects to shot terrible photos of but I’ll never stop photographing the most mundane things I can with awfully expensive equipment.

Id share my website but can’t remember the URL. Let me dig it out.

Edit: found it. andrewmlarking.myportfolio.com

Edit 2: I’ll update the site. The primary candidates are absent.

 

[cunim]

@P1505C, this thread has been moved to the Sunset Bar forum. If you can tear yourself away from knitting, please post your most boring photos there.

 

[PeterA]

The Sunset Bar "slow day here..." thread has been going on since July 2008 and is still active. Lots of good, boring photos there.

Since this is so boring, I'll post a boring photo from August 2012, the first roll on my GX680 III, shot on Acros 100, don't know what lens, but probably the 65 mm. Coincidently just 5 minutes from where I live now, but more than 100 kilometres from where I lived then.

Nothing 'boring' about this shot

also I love the title and premise of the idea of 'boring'...well done OP.

 

[Godfrey]

To judge your own work as boring is your prerogative ... It's your work and whether it satisfies you or not is completely up to you.

To judge someone else's work as boring is a bit condescending and inappropriate. Other people's work might not appeal to you, might not have a voice to talk with that you can hear, but that does not give you permission to call it boring without input from the person who made it so that you know what the point of it might have been. It may then still be unappealing, uninteresting, or boring, to you, but that doesn't mean that it is boring in a larger, essential way.

When I am editing my own photos, I can immediately recognize what I call "junk shots" ... photos I made primarily to exercise the muscle memory of my eye and fingers. They are photos I make without any intent. I never show them, usually delete them. Then there's the class of photos that caught something of my intent, if not all of it, and I usually save them for reference later.

And then there are the few that immediately leap off the screen into my head, that caught It, whatever that It might be for that moment. When I show them, some people resonate with them and become as excited as I am about them, and some people find nothing of interest in them. Are they "boring" then? Or just not the right match to those latter viewers notions of what they want to look at?

G

"For we are the makers of Magic, and we are the dreamers of Dreams."

 

[Pieter 12]

To judge your own work as boring is your prerogative ... It's your work and whether it satisfies you or not is completely up to you.

To judge someone else's work as boring is a bit condescending and inappropriate. Other people's work might not appeal to you, might not have a voice to talk with that you can hear, but that does not give you permission to call it boring without input from the person who made it so that you know what the point of it might have been. It may then still be unappealing, uninteresting, or boring, to you, but that doesn't mean that it is boring in a larger, essential way.

When I am editing my own photos, I can immediately recognize what I call "junk shots" ... photos I made primarily to exercise the muscle memory of my eye and fingers. They are photos I make without any intent. I never show them, usually delete them. Then there's the class of photos that caught something of my intent, if not all of it, and I usually save them for reference later.

And then there are the few that immediately leap off the screen into my head, that caught It, whatever that It might be for that moment. When I show them, some people resonate with them and become as excited as I am about them, and some people find nothing of interest in them. Are they "boring" then? Or just not the right match to those latter viewers notions of what they want to look at?

G

"For we are the makers of Magic, and we are the dreamers of Dreams."

I think all of us are entitled to judge a photo as "boring" just as we can call it "good" or interesting." We do not necessarily have to take into account the author's situation or point of view but can judge the image as we see it. I tend to be opinionated, there's lots I don't necessarily like, but I don't expect my opinion to be the final word. If the photographer takes offense, I may be sorry for hurting their feelings, but certainly not sorry for my opinion. If the photographer offers up a reason the photo seems boring--or not boring to them--all the better. But my opinion my or may not be swayed.

"Boring" is not necessarily a criticism or insult, rather it is an attribute. I make boring photos, both intentionally and unintentionally. Boring has its place, for example as a pause in a sequence of photos or as the final one. Of course, boring can relate to the subject and how the photgrapher relates to that subject, too. Not everyone has the same interests, the same attractions.

These may be boring or not, depending.

 

[Godfrey]

Boring by definition means "not interesting, tedious". If that isn't somehow disparagement when applied as critique of a photo, well, I don't understand English as well as I ought.

The first shot you posed as possibly boring, of the ocean .. Sugimoto did an entire exhibition of photos like that at the De Young Museum some years back. Far from boring, they were breath-taking .. they instilled a feeling of space, isolation, calm, pent up energy.... lots of emotions.

The second shot you posed as possibly boring is a fine abstract, with geometric nuances leading to a number of emotional responses.

Boring to me would be looking at a series of sunsets, one after another, taken on the same beach on the same day at nearly the same time. That would be tedious and uninteresting to me ... but might be part of another person's abstract effort to convey an emotional feeling or response through the very tedious repetitiveness of it. What gives me the right to call that person's efforts boring, in essence to disparage the effort?

Boring to me is also the photos I shoot to retain muscle memory, because they are of random things with no intent behind the shot other than to keep my fingers and eye moving. They might be perfectly framed and focused, well-exposed photos, but without any intent or emotion to convey they are, by my definition, "not interesting, tedious." They might, however, convey something to someone else looking on that I don't see. Are they still boring?

Lumping things into a category called boring is, to me, very judgmental and suggests a good deal of prejudice in critique. Judging a show with other judges, we can often laugh about the number of "old men with wrinkled hands" and "barbed wire against gnarled wood" photo submissions there might be, which implies "boring", but never mean it seriously if we want to do an honest job of judging and helping photographers recognize the flaws ... and strengths ... of their photographs. I think it is important to get photographers (and myself) to articulate their intent, which generally speaking removes the disparagement of "boring" and replaces it with "successful" or "unsuccessful" in their photographs.

G

"To see, we must learn to open our eyes. And then—open our minds."

 

[Pieter 12]

Boring by definition means "not interesting, tedious". If that isn't somehow disparagement when applied as critique of a photo, well, I don't understand English as well as I ought.

The first shot you posed as possibly boring, of the ocean .. Sugimoto did an entire exhibition of photos like that at the De Young Museum some years back. Far from boring, they were breath-taking .. they instilled a feeling of space, isolation, calm, pent up energy.... lots of emotions.

The second shot you posed as possibly boring is a fine abstract, with geometric nuances leading to a number of emotional responses.

Boring to me would be looking at a series of sunsets, one after another, taken on the same beach on the same day at nearly the same time. That would be tedious and uninteresting to me ... but might be part of another person's abstract effort to convey an emotional feeling or response through the very tedious repetitiveness of it. What gives me the right to call that person's efforts boring, in essence to disparage the effort?

Boring to me is also the photos I shoot to retain muscle memory, because they are of random things with no intent behind the shot other than to keep my fingers and eye moving. They might be perfectly framed and focused, well-exposed photos, but without any intent or emotion to convey they are, by my definition, "not interesting, tedious." They might, however, convey something to someone else looking on that I don't see. Are they still boring?

Lumping things into a category called boring is, to me, very judgmental and suggests a good deal of prejudice in critique. Judging a show with other judges, we can often laugh about the number of "old men with wrinkled hands" and "barbed wire against gnarled wood" photo submissions there might be, which implies "boring", but never mean it seriously if we want to do an honest job of judging and helping photographers recognize the flaws ... and strengths ... of their photographs. I think it is important to get photographers (and myself) to articulate their intent, which generally speaking removes the disparagement of "boring" and replaces it with "successful" or "unsuccessful" in their photographs.

G

"To see, we must learn to open our eyes. And then—open our minds."

Interesting is subjective. So is the lack of interest. Both valid opinions, worthy of being expressed. The old, "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything" only hurts both the creator and the critic. As you say, how many banal and cliché shots of wrinkled hands or flowers can one look at with getting bored? I find a majority of landscapes boring, but that doesn't meant they are bad, they just don't say much to me.

Another point, you keep bringing up "muscle memory." I was under the impression muscle memory is pretty much permanent, so why the need to exercise it? And how does it come into play in photography?

 

[Godfrey]

And "boring" is not subjective? Ridiculous. Saying 'something is boring' rather than saying 'it doesn't do anything for me' has quite different meaning and connotations. But it's obvious that a discussion of this topic is boring you since you don't bring up anything novel, just that you feel it is fine to disparage other people's work because you find it boring. Some of those photos of flowers and wrinkled hands are actually very good photos....

My use of the term 'muscle memory' is metaphorical. Pianists, even accomplished ones, practice all the time in order to keep their chops .... same idea. I operate the camera — focusing, evaluating and setting exposure, releasing the shutter, etc — as a form of photographic practice ... I call this exercising "my muscle memory"—I want to be able to do those things without having to think about it, so that I always do it right and can concentrate on the photograph of the moment rather than the technology of making it. Every professional photographer I know does the same, it leads to making fewer mistakes when under pressure and getting these simple things done right.

G

 

[Pieter 12]

Why are folks insisting "boring" is disparaging. I never said so, there is nothing to imply or infer it. As a matter of fact, I have stated that boring can be necessary.

A camera is not a musical instrument, time would be better spent developing your eye by observing scenes, looking at photo/art books and going to galleries and museums. I have worked with dozens and dozens of A-level professional photographers and cinematographers and I am not aware of any who "shoot blanks" to practice. When they pick up a camera they are familiar with, they take a photo with intention.

 

[Abstraction]

Once a person presents his/her work for public display, he invites public scrutiny. People's opinions differ and offering one's work for public consumption invites these differing opinions. Not all work is objectively good, not every opinion is objectively valid, but every opinion is solicited by the mere act of posting one's work. If one doesn't wish to be exposed to opinions, one should consider keeping one's work off public display.

 

[Pieter 12]

Once a person presents his/her work for public display, he invites public scrutiny. People's opinions differ and offering one's work for public consumption invites these differing opinions. Not all work is objectively good, not every opinion is objectively valid, but every opinion is solicited by the mere act of posting one's work. If one doesn't wish to be exposed to opinions, one should consider keeping one's work off public display.

Try going to an art school crit. Students regularly leave crying.

 

[PeterA]

Why are folks insisting "boring" is disparaging. I never said so, there is nothing to imply or infer it. As a matter of fact, I have stated that boring can be necessary.

A camera is not a musical instrument, time would be better spent developing your eye by observing scenes, looking at photo/art books and going to galleries and museums. I have worked with dozens and dozens of A-level professional photographers and cinematographers and I am not aware of any who "shoot blanks" to practice. When they pick up a camera they are familiar with, they take a photo with intention.

This is a very interesting topic for discussion is it not? Perhaps more could be teased out of it if we substituted the word 'boring' with something else...I for one am not 'hostage' to subject matter as the primary determinant of 'good photography'.

Once a person presents his/her work for public display, he invites public scrutiny. People's opinions differ and offering one's work for public consumption invites these differing opinions. Not all work is objectively good, not every opinion is objectively valid, but every opinion is solicited by the mere act of posting one's work. If one doesn't wish to be exposed to opinions, one should consider keeping one's work off public display.

Agree in principle - except I have a niggling suspicion, that as soon as one uses the phrase 'objectively good' one moves away from objectivity or even goodness into a different sort of 'opinion' space....

 

[Abstraction]

Try going to an art school crit. Students regularly leave crying.

That's par for the course. You don't get better if you can't take critique.

 

[Abstraction]

This is a very interesting topic for discussion is it not? Perhaps more could be teased out of it if we substituted the word 'boring' with something else...I for one am not 'hostage' to subject matter as the primary determinant of 'good photography'.




Agree in principle - except I have a niggling suspicion, that as soon as one uses the phrase 'objectively good' one moves away from objectivity or even goodness into a different sort of 'opinion' space....

Don't read too much into my use of "objectively good". I was trying to make a point and I couldn't find a better phrase.

 

[Godfrey]

Why are folks insisting "boring" is disparaging. I never said so, there is nothing to imply or infer it. As a matter of fact, I have stated that boring can be necessary.

A camera is not a musical instrument, time would be better spent developing your eye by observing scenes, looking at photo/art books and going to galleries and museums. I have worked with dozens and dozens of A-level professional photographers and cinematographers and I am not aware of any who "shoot blanks" to practice. When they pick up a camera they are familiar with, they take a photo with intention.

gods, your riff is boring.

G

 

[Pieter 12]

gods, your riff is boring.

G

Just exercising for when there is a real discussion.

 

[drevil]

super boring, my new bike, C645 with 55mm and achromatic+

 

[P1505C]

Posted in the original thread but not here. Will post specific new images as they emerge.

I believe my entire style fits the reason for this thread. Images aren’t boring to me but I imagine are to everyone else. I must update my site, it’s very out of date.

https://andrewmlarking.myportfolio.com/