I get a lot of guff from people when it comes to my notions of what constitutes logical framing decisions.
I suppose my two responses to that would be something like:
- The received wisdom that one needs to learn the rules before breaking them applies, and
- That I am aware that I tend towards dogma with regard to certain aspects of image making–so take what I saw with a big old boulder size grain of salt.
In truth, I don’t really spend a lot of time thinking about it. The proliferation of lens based imaging methods has democratized visual culture only insofar as anyone who can lay hands on the equipment now claims to know what they’re doing. In my experience, however, the predicted increase in vitality of work turned out to be a trumped up pipe dream.
I really don’t like this frame. It’s clearly trying very hard to seem like a shot from the hip, every second of living the hip lifestyle obsession circle jerk is pure fashion poetry waiting to be memorialized by a snapping shutter. (If it was legitimately that, I’d be non-plussed but generally accepting of it.)
I don’t like that this is so carefully posturing as that but it’s difficult to hold the grudge since the Michael’s pose is so spontaneous and clearly unintended. (The fashion/glamour everything that’s not airbrushed must go aesthetic, infuriates me.)
So I find awkward poses like this–when they ever see the light of day–to be endearing. It’s like an admonition to remember that people are beautiful not only when they are trying to be or not succeding at being, they are beautiful because they are people doing the best they can with what they have.
The pose also reminds me of another image I had saved as a draft but I didn’t know how to address.