Landscape, Nature And Travel Photography

Since the main focus of my photography is whales, I use the term "photograph". I used to use "shoot", but when one is dealing with a subject that is alive, I think photograph is more appropriate.

I "take photos" or "pics." I'm an amateur so I don't get high maintenance with terminology.

But what prompted me to post on this old subject was the show Mad Men, season 1, and episode "Shoot." An excellent series, this episode was also terrific, and you have to watch the ending and think back on the whole episode and then the title. Brilliant stuff!

I make photographs.
I find what separates a photographer from a person with a camera is that a true photographer makes a photograph.

You put your everything in that one picture. Well at least I know I do every time I shoot with my medium or large format film camera. I look at each and every thing going on in that view finder and compose that image from point A (the idea) to the end.

With a little help from Google, I come across your blog just as I wrote a similar post on mine — in French. More and more photographers here use "shooter" as well, it's more fashionable I guess.

Besides the gun analogy problem, there's something else which disturbs me : the act of photography is precisely the opposite of shooting. When I take a photograph, the subject comes inside my camera — just the opposite direction of throwing a projectile at someone or something.

If we use the syringe analogy, I don't inject anything. I pump, I suck something into my empty syringe. The opposite of a shot.

Maybe "suck" is the word. See ya, I'm off to suck !

As an experiment, I've been trying to use terms other than "shoot" over the last week - I use it more than I thought I did. It was rather timely, too, as I ended an email the other day (luckily to a fellow photography hobbyist) with "See, ya, I'm off to shoot something!"

With one exception, I try not to worry about what word we use to describe either the exposing of a frame or the entire process of going from seeing the scene to creating the print. (Sort of "the forethought, the afterthought, and everything in-between" perhaps? ;-)

The exception? "Capture" - at least when used to refer to a finished photograph. I suppose it is a somewhat apt term for certain photographs. For example, I don't have too much of a problem with the notion of "capturing" a photograph of a batter hitting the ball - in a sense that does capture and hold the image of something that is otherwise too fleeting to really apprehend.

But it just strikes me as wrong to refer to an image this way when it is _created_ by carefully considering, photographing, and then constructing in post-processing - in other words, most of what defines it is _not_ simply the thing that was captured, but the presentation of the thing.

Dan

Great thread extremely thought provoking.

I've no idea if being English makes a difference but analysing how I talk about things I've found the following...

1 - My language changed (past tense..) depending on what I thought was the level of understanding of the person I was talking to. If I felt they had an understanding of the artistic aspect of photography I would quickly settle into 'image' and 'shoot'. Having thought about it I feel the reason I use those words is because if feel that somehow they value and appreciate just how much effort of every kind goes into taking something.

2 - If I'm talking to someone who, I feel, either doesn't appreciate or understand the work that has gone into what they are looking at then I kind of reduce th elevel of my descriptive language to somewhere I feel they would be more comfortable.

At first I though I was being empathetic by changing but when I look honestly in the mirror I find its more about me... Basically I want to feel like what I am showing someone will be appreciated so temper my language to get best feedback.

Oh my god, just how shallow and pretentious is all of that! The experience of analysing it however has led to to conclude that in future whatever I put in front of people has to speak for itself. Differing people require differing stimulation so it's really up to me to show the right person the right picture (that is after all what it is...)

Thanks. An interesting journey...

This is much like the use of "taking photographs" vs. "making photographs." I prefer the latter, although some find it awkward.

I'm starting to think really how you look at the term has more to do with your relationship with guns. If you have more interaction with firearms, then shootig will automatically relate to a gun for you...

I've always used both terms, but recently I've tried to make a conscious effort to replace "shoot" with other terms. I used to joke about shooting people - I hate photographing people, so the only people shooting I'd do would be with a gun. In light of everything that's going on in the world, the joke has kinda worn thin. I'm anti-gun anyway, so even though the linguist in me says that one word can have many meanings, I'm becoming increasing wary of "shooting". Especially after last September when I thought the moose hunting season had already begun, and I heard gunshots close by while I was in the forest ("shooting" with my camera) - for a second I thought they had mistaken me for a moose! Talk about giving a new meaning to a word...

@dusty59 your response made me laugh out loud when I read it. I'll have to start using "stealing souls" from time to time.

@Brian Auer The issue is less the quality of your work, but the manner in which one chooses to communicate ones actions and the impact to the listener/reader. Clearly its best to speak to your audience using terms that they're familiar with. Even though I could use "shoot" or "shot" amongst friends I'm likely to avoid it now when I can. When discussing work with prospective clients or clients I will certainly use "photograph". For me at this point consistency is a good thing and I think using "shoot" or "shot" is a bad habit.

@Brian I agree... However, sometimes you do get strange looks from clients and other people who are not used to the term "shoot" as a synonym for "photograph".

During these "shoots" I always try to use words like "Photo", "picture" and "photograph". And then lead them on to use simpler terminology such as "shoot", even then, leading them on first, with terms like "photo shoot". Once they're used to the term, it makes no difference!

I think I use every no-no word imaginable when it comes to describing the act of taking a photo. Seriously, the words that come out of your mouth don't determine your photographic skill level. I don't know why some people get so uptight about terminology. 99.99% of all photographers will know what you mean when you say you "got some awesome shots last weekend".

I'd say "take pictures" except in the case of photographing people... in which case I'd say "stealing souls."

@Jennifer Glad this proved to be a timely topic for you. It'll be interesting to see if this topic surfaces more over time. Thanks for the comment.

@Brian Rueb Well lets not get started on art interpretation and academic discussions on art. I am right there with you. This topic likely is going to have different relevance to people in different geographic regions, those with varying backgrounds, educational levels and genres of photographic interest. It's easy at first glance to discount this type of discussion as being overly semantic, but if you think about our changing world increased security, violence in cities, and foreign conflicts combined with the growing hobby of photography choice of terms will start to have an increased impact on individual photographers.

Perhaps my background growing up with firearms puts their use in a completely different light than how I look at photography. This discussion is well matched to an earlier question I posed last year Philosophy of Photography: Photograph versus a Snapshot

OMG, This is a great article. I recall a few months ago my friend was talking to her co-worker. Their co-worker complained because she thought is was distasteful when she heard my say she likes to shoot animals and people. Then I was at a cafe talking to a friend about how one of my photog friends like to shoot brides and children. Since then I try to say photograph.

I guess it's all how you see the term shoot. If you take it as firing something with intent to injure...then yes...but the dictionary definition has multiple uses...and being as I'm not really a gun user...I don't associate shooting with guns as a primary relation...when I think "shoot" I thik basketball first, camera second, gun third.

I don't think my gun/camera analogy came out quite right...I know the END is different...but the I would still argue the process is the same.

1. Find subject. Both usually require early starts, and hiking.

2. Set up shot.

3. Aim

4. Shoot.

I would also argue that even though you're not dealing with a safety issue using a camera, you're probably just as aware of other people. I know for me personally I feel safer with a gun, than with a camera...from a threat standpoint.

Maybe this is also just something has affected you more...I've never had my use of the word "shooting" be associated with a gun...

I've also never associated "taking" a picture as being negative...because in a sense, you're taking away a memory.

If I really break down what I do...I like, 'recording a moment in time,' but I'd never say that, except in writing...

I think, also in response to my earlier comment about elitism...I know part of it is a bias I developed in college art and photo classes. I just personally have been very simple in my approach to "creating art" To me everything was easily broken down into. Drawing. Painting. Taking a Picture. The results were paintings, Drawings, and pictures. We spent HOURS analyzing things...where people would talk about the inner-emotional feelings of one-ness they felt while in the creative process. The people referred to paintings as "canvases" and drawings as "illustrations." And Pictures as "Images" I guess it kind of just eventually broke me down...or maybe I'm just the Luke Duke of Photography...and keep it too simple. While I would say there is always a definite emotional level in which all art is created, I just don't spend a lot of time on the terminology associated with it.

I'm going to also suggesst that this is a geographic thing too. I've found that the Bay Area has more highly educated people, and they tend to use vocabulary that demonstrates that factor. I was in Berkely at a BBQ awhile back, and a friend from school introduced me to a couple photographers...

I was involved in the conversation, but I felt like each of the other parties was trying to out vocabulary the other. I honestly think they disregarded anything I had to add to the conversatin because I didn't use the word "image"

I guess I've just developed a view that people like this appear to be taking themselves too seriously. I know it's not true of everyone for sure, and I use the art jargon as much as the next person at times...

I think that if I had been raised in an area that was more diverse, and closer to more avenues of artistic expression (there's the vocab) I would probably use "photographing" or "Creating images" more because I would be talking with other people who referred to things that way...and had more artistic conversations.

Also teaching art/photography to continuation school students requires my verbage to be such that kids can understand it. I can't flower anything up...they'd A) laugh, and B) not care.

I corrected a kid today...just for an experiment.

When they said, "I want to got shoot with the cameras."

I said, "you mean you want to go photograph with a camera?"

The response, "Whatever...can I use it or not?"

Sorry for writing so much Jim...you kind of hit upon a weird topic.

@Brian Rueb Actually I would argue that the motions you're going through to take a photo are distinctly different than firing a gun. From my experience shooting firearms not only is the end result different but the steps to fire a gun are distinctly different. Most notably the when taking a photo you're not concerned about the safety of others or yourself. Someone stepping into the line of sight for a photo won't kill them.

To this point I think Saïd is dead on. Equating triggering your camera to firing a gun sets the wrong tone surrounding photography. After thinking more about Susheel's comment about the negative connotation to other terms used for photography it leaves me wondering how photography has been so negatively associated with these terms.

To the obvious difference in the outcome of taking a photograph and shooting a gun... you're not killing, wounding or maiming your subject, but recording a moment in time. These are two distinctly different activities. To Saïd's point I'd rather have my words associated with recording a moment in time worth remembering rather than using a term that has a distinctly negative association.

@Susheel Interesting assessment of the other terms and their negative connotation. That leaves me wondering what terms there are that describe taking a photograph that have a positive connotation.

@ron and @Ron Niebrugge The multiple meaning of the term "shoot" can definitely be a hindrance especially when dealing with people or clients managing animals. Your example Ron made me laugh. I can only imagine the look on ASPC employees faces when you used the term "shoot".

@Brian Reub Funny I never thought the terminology would elevate the perception of the person using "photograph" as an elitist no more than "picture" would imply someone being an amateur. Considering your comments and others it would seem the term "shoot", "photograph" or any other term comes around to level of conversational or written formality. Clearly being more formal is awkward in particular situations. None the less if you're managing your wording based on principle like my friend Saïd it's still possible to work through the perception of elitism.

Anybody got a camera lets take some digis(deegeez).Eg no2. That trip to Brasil sounds awesome take many digis. Eg no3. I got a few good digis from the stag. ;-)

@Ben Although the language doesn't have an impact on the final product it does have an impact on the perceptions surrounding what we're doing. As both Ron and Ron have mentioned it can impact basic communication. On some level I understand this is Political Correctness working its way into what we do, but depending on individual principles and an eye towards the ever increasing scrutiny photographers are under due to increased security I think this is a valid topic to discuss and think about.

In this day and age sadly we would not go into an airport terminal and discuss shooting someone. Unfortunately modern life dictates that we choose our words carefully both in relation to where we're talking and whom we're talking to.

"If you’re photographing a bear, or shooting a bear with a gun…you’re pretty much doing the same procedure."

And if you use a 20D (like I do) it's probably just as loud. :)

Also...if you think about it...shooting a gun, or taking a picture require very similar actionss.

huntin out the subject...finding the best angle through a view finder, then pressing a firing mechanism...which does something.

If you're photographing a bear, or shooting a bear with a gun...you're pretty much doing the same procedure.

Photograph or photographing, capturing the light etc... is a mouth full and sounds like an episode of Beauty and the Geek. Since I'm worried about my street cred, I use the word shoot mostly. :-)

I use the term "shoot", though, often it seems odd. My bachelor's degree at college was in Visual Communication, where we were made adequately aware of the semantics of the term "shoot" and its broader implications.

I prefer to explain the term as my job being partly a combination of "capturing" (another 'violent' term?), "making" and "taking" photographs; depending on the situation.

Ben, Ron and Brian have adequately covered the "ease of use" aspect, and that's a major reason for my using the term too...

Shot or shoot sure can mean a lot of different things depending if you are a photographer, hunter, basketball player, nurse, bartender, whitewater rafter, or jump from airplanes - granted the last one is spelled different. :) I'm sure I'm missing a bunch more uses.

I don't think it is a big deal, but since the word means so many things to so many people, I try to avoid using it when I write because it can be confusing. I have actually had people misunderstand me when I have said I was going out "shooting".

Ron

The dictionary has a couple definitions of 'shooting' one is 'to spend' like as in spending exposures. or it also mentions 'taking pictures'...so I don't have any problems with that term. Strangely though...I used it 4 times in the span of trying to post this comment. To me it's not different than someone saying, 'I'm going to play hoops, or shoot baskets, or ballin' or whatever...

I think when you put yourself into using a specific term like that...you kind of put yourself in an elitist mindset. "What I do is PHOTOGRAPHY....not taking pictures"

if you really want to start a fire, talk about the word..."talent" that word drives me NUTS...when people talk about how "talented" someone is.

It very much depend on whom I'm speaking with. I photograph every week for the local SPCA and mentioning "shooting the animals" has raised more than one eyebrow.

It's a shame that while it's semantically linked with inflicting violence, it's also the only common verb that is so tersely descriptive. "To photograph", "to snap", "to take pictures"... all are either nerdy or awkward.

I'd have to go with 'I don't see what the big deal is' on this one since I use both. For me, the language used doesn't have much effect on the final product.

But if pressed, I'd have to say that, for me at least, 'shooting' has to do more with the physical process and 'photographing' (an awkward term) encompasses more the mental/artistic aspects involved with capturing a photo. I often say, 'I'm going out to shoot' - referring to the act that leads to 'photographing' a subject. And I've gone out to shoot several times where no 'photographing' actually took place. :)

I don't think there is anything wrong, or demeaning about a particular term. Sometimes shoot or shot is more appropriate, especially in an informal setting. I doubt I would get together with friends and say 'Hey, lets go photographing today.' I use both terms depending on the situation.