Wolgang Hammersmith on Good

Good photography, meaning photography that doesn’t happen by accident of opportunity but is the direct result of purposeful study of photographic technique, lighting, equipment handling, setup, corner and edge definition and control, leading observer vision, lens focal length compression, aperture depth of field control, exposure zones, knowing the rules of composition and implied motion and when to break them, color dissemination, and a thorough understanding of the many processes for creating a still photograph, is understandably rare. This comes as no surprise considering the lack of fundamental education on the subject and insufficient enthusiasm from technically inadequate, dispassionate teachers and meager budgets for the arts vs. the football team, coupled with epidemic levels of student apathy fostered by distracting school environments.

But when it does happen, all of the detailed craft of fine photography disappears and the naked truth of the photograph reaches out, engulfing our souls, giving us emotion or challenging our perceptions and making us pause. Maybe we don’t know or even care why. But we pause, taking in that magically frozen moment in time and in some way appreciating it, sharing that past instant with the living and the dead.

Unfortunately however, most of the time, good photography must be discovered and in some way declared “good” in order for us to appreciate it. All too frequently, and I apologize to my good readers for using this type of language, critics, who are the last people a reasonably intelligent person would pay any attention to, make this decision for us.

I have seen a photograph taken by a gorilla that was first touted by a critic as being “an amazing example of studied and incisive photography” until the critic found out that the photo was taken by a primate. While that critic’s life work will soon be forgotten, that situation will provide continual amusement for the foreseeable future.

But before we amuse ourselves to no end at the expense of critics, let’s ask ourselves an essential question: Who else will point out the relative value, intrinsic meaning, or cultural significance of a photograph? Who else has, through the study of several disciplines, developed within themselves the capability to analyze and make relevant comments of substance?

Yes, folks, it’s the exalted and demeaned critic, the highest authority and gateway to the acceptance of the validity and worth of art for us commoners. We’re at his or her mercy since most of us won’t, for whatever reason, spend the time to elevate ourselves to the level expected of those who determine for us what is good and what is not. When we hear positive or negative criticism we should ask ourselves, is every critic qualified? In the end, it’s only one person’s opinion, but do we accept this totalitarian determination without question, or do we go with our gut, a feeling that can be as fleeting as the time it took to take the photograph?

Wolfgang Hammersmith is a chess aficionado, and a martial arts expert.