Limitations Aren't

Photo by Mark Hobson, from "iPhone Made"

Yesterday, David Comdico wrote of Mark Hobson (who has a category on his website called "iPhone Made"):

I admit to being a bit prejudiced against the iPhone-as-camera, but his square iPhone shots are really great. Bravo.

I've noticed over the years that pros (especially studio pros) who are used to using whatever tools are appropriate for any given job—up to and including bleeding-edge high-tech, high-cost ones—often have little prejudice against low-status cameras. They'll cheerfully do projects with toy cameras, cellphones, and pinhole cameras if they feel like it and if it suits the look they want. Mark is a big enthusiast of the smartphone.

What's unusual about Mark is that he's not a chameleon aesthetically. Lots of pros are; they have to be, providing radically different "looks" for different clients and different jobs. I imagine Mark, who has a list of Fortune 500 clients, can do that too. But with the work on his website he works more like an artist.

My observation has always been that artists tend to adjust to the properties of whatever tools you give them to work with. Amateurs hanker for gear that will "do everything," and tend to spend a lot of time thinking about what they can't do and how to equip themselves to remedy whatever the perceived shortcoming might be. But artists work the other way around: they see what the equipment will do and then go out into the visual world and apply it to good advantage, or whatever they consider to be good advantage. So it's difficult for an artist to have "the wrong camera," or lens, or whatever. Whatever you give them to play with, they'll figure out what it's good for (for their own personal definition of "good for") and then use it for that kind of thing. Give the latter kind of photographer a "bad" camera and he or she will come back with "good" shots.

So over the years we've seen great photographs made under all kinds of severe limitations: cross-processed transparency film, Polaroid transfers, Diana and Holga cameras with single-element plastic lenses, pinhole cameras, you name it.

These days, is it possible that the limitation might be that there isn't enough limitation? Cameras have all gotten so "good" that what's starting to emerge is a certain tyranny of sharp, clear, detailed, correct-color, adequate-DR digital images. It's not all the same equipment, but more and more it's the same, or a similar, aesthetic look. Yes, individual practitioners can depart from it deliberately, but then they can get slammed for being "fake" and "contrived" and so forth—even if the picture's just black and white!

One of the interesting things about Mark is that he has such a consistent way of seeing, and it comes through in all his artwork.

Mike
(Thanks to David Comdico)

Original contents copyright 2018 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

B&H Photo • Amazon US • Amazon UK
Amazon Germany • Amazon Canada • Adorama

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Kenneth Tanaka: "My own shortcut expression to summarize what you've said is, Wherever you go, there you are! [...Jon Kabat-Zinn —Ed.] The work Mark shows on his site has a frank right-in-front-of-your-face quality that would be, if not necessarily distinctive, certainly very apparent in any photographic format. It's how he sees the opportunity (no pun), how he organizes his frames. It hardly matters what camera he uses.

"If I could offer any bit of advice to Mark it would be to drop the 'iPhone Made' distinction. It's dated to anyone younger than, say, early middle age. It's like saying 'color TV.' Just take the photos and merge them into the crowd according to the moments or concepts that propelled them.

"Last year while moving my site to a new host I counted over 30 camera models employed over the 13 years spanned by the images. Fun fact to know...but irrelevant for considering the work."

David Stone: "Very nicely stated. I teach iPhone workshops and one of my main goals is to have the students stop thinking of their iPhone as a phone with a camera, but as a camera with a really useful accessory. Think like a photographer and it will deliver."

Dan Homan: "As an amateur, I think part of our obsession with having the right gear to 'do everything' is a fear of photographic opportunity loss. For me this manifests itself both in individual photo outings and for my kit more broadly. With finite resources, the decision of what to bring on a trip or buy for your kits locks you in place (at least for the time being) in terms of what you can do, so we wring our hands a bit more than we should.

"I've tried in recent years not to worry about it as much and follow the advice I've read here and elsewhere to embrace limitations. On most outings, I bring just one or two lenses and commit to making the most of those choices. I do think this approach has helped me learn to see more clearly and have more fun with my photography."

Frank Figlozzi: "Re 'But artists work the other way around: they see what the equipment will do and then go out into the visual world and apply it to good advantage, or whatever they consider to be good advantage.' Isn't that exactly the way it's supposed to be? I've been photographing since I was 10 and now I'm 77 (do the math). My first camera was an old postwar Reflekta TLR and now I'm shooting digital Fujis. But every camera I've ever used has had limitations. Our job is simply to understand those limitations, work within them and make meaningful photographs. What a beautiful post—it hits the nail on the head."

robert e: "I wonder if future hobbyists will wax nostalgic about the 'look' of vintage sensors and firmware in the likes of, say, Canon's 5D or Nikon's D40? Perhaps there will be apps and filters to simulate the look. Only half joking."

Comments

[Bill Poole]

Mike: What a treat to reconnect with Mark Hobson through these two posts. For years, I followed "The LandScapist," his previous photoblog, and while I had forgotten his name, I immediately recognized his style. Thanks for the reintroduction.

[Paul]

Personally I think Mark Hobson's iPhone images have more of a consistent way of processing than seeing. But anyway that does not take away from the fact that I found his gallery very interesting.

[Rob de Loe]

Photography is dominated by people who, first and foremost, really like cameras and lenses. Photographs are practically incidental for these folks. These are the people who are constantly looking for the next best thing, or the camera system that can "do it all", even if they never do much of anything with it. (And more power to them by the way! Life is short, if this makes you happy, go for it.)

When what you love the most is the photograph, what you used to make the pictures becomes secondary, or irrelevant. There are people like this, and they tend to be fine with the limitations of their kit.

Interestingly, I think a lot of these folks spend their whole life just in photography. They might be trying to make art, but their art is limited to what photography can do. In contrast, there are visual artists who use cameras, perhaps alongside other media, or just for a while until they move on to another medium that allows them to express their vision better. These people definitely don't give a fig about the latest and greatest offerings at Photokina... unless that new lens solves an artistic problem they're actually having.

[Herb Cunningham]

Amen. soft focus and other lens qualities are
underappreciated.
Where are the modern equivalents of Goerz Dagor, Percivals and the old Beach lenses?

[Pierre Charbonneau]

You are right on this one Mike. Certainly the case for many seasoned photographers around me.

Any appropriate tool is used for paid assignment to fit the bill. I just bought a Profoto B2 for lighting my corporate portraits. Wonderful and easy tool, light and portable. The current Canon 5D does the rest.

But I shoot analog for myself with an meterless Leica and a old lens.

[Geoff Wittig]

There's an observation by the great poet Robert Frost that's appropriate. His work was mostly classical in form but surprisingly modern in meaning. He was asked about 'free verse' poetry written without any attention to rhyme, meter or other poetic conventions. His response was to the effect that it was "like playing tennis without a net".
That is, the very limitations and strictures of the poetic form were essential to the art. The same notion can be applied to photography. The perceptual limitations and quirks of particular methods of capture, editing and reproduction of images can't really be separated from the aesthetic element. They're part of the art.

[SteveW]

I think you just made the best argument yet for an OCOLOY project.

[Ger Lawlor]

Thanks Mike for sharing. The temptation is to overwork iPhone photos (Guilty your honor!) But these are open and honest with terrific consistency and subtly worked over. A lovely example of the kind of work that TOP promotes. Bravo.

[Andre Y]

I'd put it another way: cameras these days are so good that we mostly see the flaws in the photographer's craft. Mark's excellent iPhone photos stand out to me because of his careful and considered composition: the edges of his photos are well-considered and very clean.

[cdembrey]

There are two different mindsets (an attitude, disposition, or mood) between the pro and the hobbyist.

The pros most important asset is their mind, not their gear. While the hobbyist will seek a non-existant magic-bullet to purchase and master.

[D. Hufford]

OK. I am becoming irritated at these people who fail to accept the reality known to us with real cameras that one cannot take good photos with an iPhone. Just because these photography miscreants consistly take good photos with an iPhone (and make 20x20 prints!) does not disprove that known to only us reality.

It's akin to those noisy kids that think they can play on your grass. No matter how many times you yell and chase them off, they come back and play on your grass. They can't do that!

[cdembrey]

Mike said: It's not all the same equipment, but more and more it's the same, or a similar, aesthetic look. Yes, individual practitioners can depart from it deliberately, but then they can get slammed for being "fake" and "contrived" and so forth—even if the picture's just black and white!

I'm not looking for "likes" on social media sites. I'm interested in pics-I haven't-seen before, so I try my best to "think different." Sometimes I succeed, sometimes I just suck, but I always learn.

[Keith B,]

Personally, I'd withhold judgement on Hobson's iPhone-generated photographs until I see actual prints. But, in the past, I have seen beautiful prints made from Diana cameras and other looked-down-upon photographic systems.
Interestingly, the development of smart digital automation for cameras has made it possible for the amateur operator to create "... sharp, clear, detailed, correct-color, adequate-DR digital images." Such images have now become commonplace. One doesn't anymore need to hire a pro to get clear, sharp pictures.
But the personal vision of what to do with the medium still resides in the creator's imagination. A quick view of the contents of various photo-sharing websites show that imagination is in approximately the same short supply that it always has been.

[Eolake]

Well said. All I dreamed about when young was better cameras and lenses. And now I have it, I feel less creative.

In Zen And The Art Of Motorcycle Maintenance, it talks about how a student had writers block, until her teacher told her to write about the main street, the first house, the first brick on the left.

[Thomas Mc Cann]

oI use a camera phone occasionally but find it useless when used outside. We're having a heat wave here in Ireland and I tried using the phone yesterday but couldn't see the screen properly in the bright sun light.Same reason I prefer an evf a la GX8

[Paulo Bizarro]

Very wise words.

[Jeron]

Probably today's limitation is the internet's function as harsh lowest-common-denominator judge of everything.

Which leads to the current generic aesthetics that removes everything 'the internet' frowns upon, like lack of sharpness, saturation or any visible DOF or even noise. Even the qualities of the camera are now dictated by the internet, spelling doom on a manufacturer who dares to deviate and do something unusual.

[richardplondon]

And consider what range of wonders can be achieved, from no more equipment than 1) a piece of blank paper and 2) a pencil!

[Peter Wright]

I sometimes think that this artist's ability to adapt to what's at hand, is true not just for cameras and photography but for life in general. I have often been impressed (and sometimes a bit puzzled) as to how some people seem to live very satisfying lives in quite limited circumstances; be it financial, geographic location, or something else (up to a point of course), while most of the rest of the population are not happy until the next pay rise, promotion, more time off, etc. is achieved. Could it be that the former group have an innate 'artistic' capability to adapt to life's circumstances and find more meaning by doing so?

[cdembrey]

Kenneth Tanaka: My own shortcut expression to summarize what you've said is, Wherever you go, there you are! [...Jon Kabat-Zinn —Ed.]

For what it's worth Wherever you go, there you are was made famous by the motion picture The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension (1984)

[D. Hufford]

@robert e: "I wonder if future hobbyists will wax nostalgic about the 'look' of vintage sensors and firmware in the likes of, say, Canon's 5D or Nikon's D40?

I already do.

[anthony reczek]

Visited Mark's website, and found his body of work a subsrantial and interesting one. Their allure is heightened for me by the square format, but especially by the borders/frames he uses. Elegant, solid and unobtrusive. And however he's rendering color should be bottled and sold.

[Scott]

I like to think about the artist and their tools differently: engineers create new tools for artists, and they often try to made the new tools emulate the old ones, yet solve some problem or other. To use an example in music, the first electric guitars were built to increase the volume of the guitar, especially in a big band setting, but maintain the sound of an acoustic guitar. But artists found that the electric guitars, with their lo-fi and distorted sounds, created news ways to make music. Today, almost every guitar you hear in popular, jazz, rock, etc. is distorted in ways that we, as listeners, no longer think of a “distorted” or a pale imitation of the acoustic guitar.

The same is true of digital cameras in general, and phone cameras in particular: artists use the capability of those tools in ways that they could never do with film (or glass plate, or metal plate, ...) cameras.

[Frank Figlozzi]

...and speaking of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, Robert Pirsig again: "You want to know how to paint a perfect painting? Make yourself perfect and then just paint naturally."

[Bruce Cooper]

"The absence of limitation is the death of art."
Orson Welles