About
Now that many cameras are able to go as far as to delay the release of a portrait shot to have only a smiling face on the final picture and this despite the inability of the "photographer" to release precisely at this moment.
The man releases the shutter, but the camera refuses and shoots when the model smiles.
It is no longer a question of simple parallax time induced by the technical process of SLR cameras.
The camera takes the hand and decides to shoot when it “considers” that the smile of the model is at its peak.
Should we only produce images of smiling people?
What about the rule of thirds?
Will our manufacturers be able to impose this dictate on us too?
In this context, there are photographers who, probably because they have a registration number, think they can teach photography and even denigrate anything that does not fit into the narrow definition of photography they have made for themselves.
I am not against these tools, these means of producing photography or against these people living from photography.
Assistances are useful.
From the integration of light measurement "through the lens" to auto focus and the current embedded AI, not to mention the various optical stabilizations and other hardware or software processes aimed at producing in real time flesh free of any form of imperfection.
We are all capable thanks to the democratization of photographic tools more and more advanced to produce "beautiful" and "successful" images.
Just understand that I do master my technique, and that my vision of photography may not be yours.
What I do is done consciously. There is behind all this a set of diverse knowledge, a technical mastery (colorimetry, sensitometry, densitometry, optics, chemistry, etc...) and perhaps a will, a speech.
My objective is different, no beautiful "smooth" or too "sharp" images.
The photographer is certainly a fine technician, but not only.
The photo is emotion, it is instant, it is sharing and is also and especially sensations and feelings.
So all this can be expressed by the blur (but not only). Because nothing is less clear-cut than a feeling, nothing is less clear-cut than a life.
It seems important to me to transmit but also to leave place to the reference system of the potential spectator.
I do it, and this, sometimes by the means of an apparent technical approximation.
I take for party to publish my feelings and to do it such as they are with this technical choice not necessarily to post "shots" considered as successful.
I must have been a photographer since I was about thirteen years old.
I benefited from a solid and expensive training, obtained some more or less prestigious diplomas.
I have done a lot of lab work, retouching (film and digital), assisting on various famous sets, used multiple and various photo equipment through the ages (from the old instamatic to the 20x25 camera, through many medium format and pinhole cameras, from the first leaf back coupled to a 6x6 hasselblad which was equipped with a wheel of three rvb filters (acquisition in three passes driven by a remote computer) to my current Leica Q2).
I worked in the edition worked on advertising visuals known of all for all the continents (several variants of the same visual according to the direction of reading of each culture but also of each one of the sensitivities of the said cultures) I thus have some diplomas photo, a discrete professional experiment at the sides and in collaboration with international references in the field (see the references in question here), it thus seems to me to control the photographic field a little.
The meaning of my photos whether you consider them as such or not, their meaning is therefore there:
My pictures are a confused display of lived moments, which aroused in me one or several emotions, emotions that I offer to share.
The bulk of my production currently revolves around street photography, having a job that allows me to live from another activity, I have no constraints and I have the luxury to offer, probably selfishly, only what I like.
A Leica with fixed optics that I should be able to keep until my last breath, my eyes shriveled by the famous degenerative process and this incurable need to share coupled with my total freedom.
Ps: I will never have, and it seems important to me to specify it, a rolex, I will never live old enough to earn enough to offer me one, but also because life is not that, not through my eyes.
Pps: I remain at your disposal if you wish one or several images of you or a close relation realized by my care. I am able to produce images of a rare beauty (you won’t see on my website), and even to interpret your desires without you even verbalizing them.