Collaborations - a step further

I finally made up my mind to start marketing my project beyond the internet so I started looking for like-minded people to help me make Culture Crossroads greater.

University Dimitrie Cantemir, Bucharest, Romania (March 2018)

Conference - „Culture of Peace and Sustainable Development Education in the Pre-school and Primary School” co organized by the Romanian National Commision for UNESCO

At this conference I was invited as a speaker and I naturally chose the world heritage panel. The topic of my paper was Cultural heritage as a tourism booster and it was closely connected to my project so I took the opportunity to share ideas and insights as well as get some new connections and look for opportunities for future collaboration.

The conference brochure

I was honoured to be given the word and to have the opportunity for discussion with students, all very passionate on the same topic.

Me at the conference at the end of my 2-hour lecture on the cultural heritage of the Balkans and how to market it in such a way so as to promote the tourism on the Balkans. 

Sofia University Saint Kliment Ohridski, Sofia, Bulgaria (April 2018)

Conference -  'Science, technology and humanities: interdisciplinary perspectives'

This was a student conference at the Philosophical faculty of the university. I presented my ideas for changing the status quo of Bulgarian museums drawing on good practices in the field. The topic of my paper was 'The interdisciplinary approach as means of attracting more people to museums' and I also managed to talk about Culture Crossroads attracting more audience to it.

In March 2018 I became a member of  The Changemakers alliance, which is a global network of young and passionate people aiming at changing the world. I became a member because of Culture Crossroads and the rest of the community promised support (I will need a hand in reaching out to more people and in marketing). 

More information can be found on their website:

http://www.dhillonmarty.org/global-call-to-change-makers/ (visited 23/04/2018)

I also applied for another international organization that unites people from all over the world but I am still waiting for them to respond with information about my application.

Work in progress portfolio - reflections ethics, framing, timing and composition

I love photographing architecture because it is a huge part of travel photography. However, religious buildings have their own specifics and you need to photograph some concrete details that distinguish them from one another. What is more, these have to be recognizeable. 

The first challenge was framing and I had to choose between two approaches - one was to concentrate on details and show only that while the other was to show the whole building. I love photographing  architectural details but I decided that this approach will not be very effective when it comes to Orthodox churches since they are very similar in terms of style. The Orthodox tradition was established more than 1000 years ago and hasn't changed much since so choosing to shoot details only would have led to having very similar images that themselves cannot say much. 

Here is an example - this is a mural at the door of the church of my neighbourhood, dedicated to Saint  Prophet Elijah:

Overall, it is a good image showing an old mural BUT on the other hand, it tells nothing of the architecture of the place, especially to a non-specialist in medieval murals. 

Another vote against the 'detail' approach was the fact that photography is forbidden in almost all places of worship - Bulgarian Orthodox churches leading the way. Even if it is possible to pay and take a few pictures, I consider it unethical in some way since it is a place of worship and prayer, not a commercial museum and it should be treated with respect. Things get even more complicated with places such as mosques and cathedrals since I am not very well versed in the rules of worship and I prefer not to offend someone because of ignorance. No one would tell me off - places of worship are open to all - but it simply does not seem right to me. 

For this reason, I decided to concentrate on the overall view of the places I photograph. I've always been better at photographing the general view, the 'big' picture. Throughout the module I figured out that I prefer to tell the story behind the place I am photographing and to do this I needed to photograph the church AND its surroundings. 

I was advised to try tighter crop and use the square format and I did try it out but it didn't seem to work for me, or at least it doesn't work for all places: 

In the case of these two images it seems to create the desired impact but things look quite differently when it comes to more elongated shapes, such as the churches I saw in Romania: 

Shapes such as these will look too tight in square crop. Besides, I noticed that I am so used to shooting in rectangle format, that most images look well-composed only in this way. Re-framing them in square format cuts out some of the story of the place and makes the images too cluttered - since the whole surroundings are just as important as the place of worship. 

Timing proved to be an issue since some places look better at dusk whereas some are better-looking at daytime. So I decided to use the time that makes the place the most enticing or tells its story better. 

WIP develoment - part 1 - roaming around Sofia

The first step in building my portfolio of places of worship for this module was to go around the streets of my phone town - Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria. 

One of the main reasons I chose this as a location (apart from the obvious convenience and proximity) was the fact that Sofia boasts as one of the oldest cities in Europe, having history spanning across 3 millenia. Moreover, the place was occupied by more than one empire during that time and these left its religious imprint on it and all of these places of worship coexist withing a very enclosed space - we have Roman basilicas, medieval chirches, a 15th century mosque, a Catholic cathedral. a synagogue and an Orthodox cathedral all coexisting withing less than two square kilometers. To add more to the story, these are only the places of worship that are still in operation - there are a few others that have been turned into something else or have undergone some transformation over the years. 

The historical centre of Sofia is rich in architecture, as even the Orthodox churches differ in style. Each nation that passed though our land left its mark on the architecture. Byzantine-style basilicas and rotundas, Bulgarian medieval churches, then a Russian style cathedral that became the symbol of the town and most recently - a Catholic cathedral. All churches have stories to tell but the story does not end with Christian churches - the downtown houses a mosque and a synagogue less than a kilometer away from the Christian churches.

The place is known as 'the triangle of tolerance' because Bulgaria has very short history (if present at all) of religious hatred. On the contrary, no one would make a fuss of how you call God unless you get radical.

What is more, since Sofia has such a long history, these places coexist in a modern urban environment all piled on top of one another - the main underground station incorporates the remains of the palace of Constantine the Great (the one who declared Christianity an official religion in the Roman empire), the upper layer of the same place houses a 12th century church with unique frescoes and above that there is the Stalinist 'Triangle of Power' architectural complex that houses the Presidency. Council of Ministers and part of the Parliament. Around the whole thing circles one of the busiest boulevards in Sofia. Speaking of layers...

The buildings from the 'Triangle of Power complex' which were built directly on the remains of Roman Serdica and the palace of Konstantine the Great. It is a very dramatic story and I'll it in the information post about the WIP images

When I set out to create my portfolio for this module, I ventured on documenting religious buildings around Sofia. The reasons were two - the story above and that I want to spread it to the world, since very few people know it and the time and weather restrictions. Winter is not exactly the season to travel to the other end of the country by car so this sounded like a reasonable option. Besides, it is my home town so I have the opportunity to roam around as I please without being restricted by one-time visits or having to take weather into account.

So I started with the idea to capture both the different types of religious buildings AND the turbulent history that goes with most of them AND to try out a more artistic approach - looking for unseen angles or strange weather conditions... Quite a few things for a single portfolio, I admit, but I decided to go by my old technique "take as many images as you can and then compose a coherent portfolio of the lot".

This is one of my favourite images from the series at the triangle of Power complex. This little church survived by pure chance as it was saved by the wife of a party official from Moscow. The whole story about the - in the post about the WIP images because this church is definitely on my list

The same church but a few weeks later and a bit before dusk. As you can see, the view is not that stunning. at least to me. 

I noticed that some buildings look better at night while others are more stunning at daytime. For example, this church looks much more impressive at night than during the day, because of the lights. I made an effort to revisit the places and see the difference in appearance at different times of the day. My walks proved that different places look well at different times of the day.

During the first evening, I managed to create some interesting images - such as this one - of the rotunda that sits in the middle of the Presidency building which looked stunning at night (and a bit dull during the day) because of the light that put an emphasis on the architecture and angles of the church and not on the building in the background which looms large at daytime.

This image was my first choice - the contrast between the 13th century building and the Stalinist architecture around it and the Byzantine palace at the foreground, combined with the yellow light (it was so yellow, that I couldn't correct it) told some of the story of the place. 

Then, as I exited the place, it came to me that I can create another story - because this church is just in the middle of the Presidency building and the access to it is actually monitored. 

My first roam around the downtown proved to be fruitful since I chose the blue hour and most places are very nicely lit. However, not all of them were lit as I needed and it turned out that the blue hour is not long enough to cover all locations. So, on day one, I managed to get around only a few images that worked.

Even though the place looks stunning at night, it is not lit (that was a surprise to me since it is a very beautiful place and all other buildings around it were lit). 

It turned out that few of the places I aimed at were lit the way I needed them to be - for example, this Russian church stands at the center of Sofia and is one of the most beautiful buildings in town. However, it isn't lit at night so the only interesting angle I managed to find was a reflection in a nearby shop window. Otherwise, to me the place was not enticing enough at that point.  

The walk at night delivered some interesting shots but some places I wanted to capture were not suitable for night images so I needed to revisit. One of them was this - 200 years ago it used to be a mosque but now it serves as the National Archaeological Museum. It's story is also very tangled so I totally wanted it on my portfolio. However, I couldn't take any decent images of it at night because two street lamps sit on either side of the entrance and make night shots of the building at night impossible. 

The entrance during day time - I love the contrast between the architecture of a mosque, the inscription above the door that reads 'archaeological museum' and the Bulgarian flag on top.

I didn't have the opportunity to photograph the mosque that is still in operation because I went there during prayer time and it seemed inappropriate to me to take out the tripod so I will do this a bit later. Same goes for the synagogue and the cathedral in Sofia so I'll definitely need to put my portfolio in order and re-shoot at some locations. 

Critical contextualization of my work - inspiration talk - part 2.2 - foreign artists far from home

Speaking of inspiration, it does not end with local artists. One of the photographers I look up to is based at the other end of Europe. 

His name is Frank Leinz and he is also an avid landscape and travel photographer. I came across his works by pure chance, someone from my Facebook friend list had shared an image of his and I immediately became a fan. Truth be told, I often use Facebook to scout for amazing photographs and use groups as both a means to promote my work AND a way to learn. 

Frank is a also a travel photographer BUT unlike Krasi Matarov he is not a fan of camping at the place for days to get the perfect shot. I love his ability to create dream-like scenes, regardless of the weather conditions, season or location:

Fig 1 –  Leinz, Frank – Mystery Castle,  2016

Leinz was obviously lucky with the mist and the drama in the clouds but apart from that, there is something subtle in the image. It is still a very popular location, Burg Eltz castle in Germany but it doesn't scream out loud "I am a commercial" or "I am a cliché" and I try to incorporate this into my approach, too. This is a very popular 'photographic' place but as you can see from the pic, there is no one in the frame. No humans, not even a silhouette. 

We have that trait in common as we both tend to leave people out of the frame. I have had this habit  ever since 2010 - it all started with a excursion to Italy during Easter when more than 10 million people had the same thing in mind. To avoid having crowds in my shots, I had to devise a way to avoid having people in the frame (wasn't that at image editing good to clone them out). Ever since, I always try to keep the 'human population' in an image to the minimum. 

One of the reasons I came up with is that some scenes look better without a living soul around to give you the impression that you are the only one seeing this now, as if you are in the image itself. Another reason is that to me, images with lots of tourists in them may have some documentary value BUT they look rather like the snapshots most tourists come home with than the images I aim at. 

Fig2 –  Leinz, Frank – Beangil Sea Cave,  2016

The image above is taken at a very popular beach in Portugal, favourite to all visitors but still, Leinz made sure that no one is 'blocking' the view and if you see the place, you are the only human being in the frame (if we count out the photographer that created it). 

Ever since I applied for Falmouth, I've tried to experiment with putting a human element into the frame to get more 'artsy' images and I started questioning this habit. 

This image is one of my attempts to put people in the frame (which would normally be left without them) to get more impact:

To me, this image really works - because the place, Rila monastery in Bulgaria, is also very famous all over the Balkans. I have visited multiple times and I've tried to keep people out of the frame. The last time I went there, in December 2017, I added this image of the person getting out of the monastery. My initial idea was to keep him as a silhouette. One of my motivations was that I haven't seen anyone do something like this and I was looking for unique angles.

Another thing I admire about Frank Leinz' work is the use of long exposure in some images, such as this one:

Fig 3. Leinz, Frank - Pure, 2016

It is a classic landscape technique, especially effective in scenes when there is some water and kind of a cliche but I keep adoring the dreamy impact it has, maybe because the human eye cannot catch that slow motion. 

Another reason I fall for images like this is that I lack the patience (and the opportunity/ logistics) to create something like this. I would really like to try it but I rarely have the time to wait that long at a location (and I suspect I lack in equipment, too). 

Still, I will try to make an effort and see if the technique would work for me. 

References: 

• Frank Leinz’s Facebook page

Available at:

https://www.facebook.com/fldesign.info

[accessed 13 April  2018]

List of figures:

Figure 1 – LEINZ, Frank – Mystery Castle,  2016

Available at:

https://www.facebook.com/fldesign.info/photos/a.502329203234609.1073741828.502320593235470/892397237561135/?type=3&theater 

[accessed 13 April  2018]

Figure 2 – LEINZ, Frank – Beangil Sea Cave,  2016

Available at:

https://www.facebook.com/fldesign.info/photos/a.502329203234609.1073741828.502320593235470/857367027730823/?type=3&theater 

[accessed 13 April  2018]

Figure 3 - Leinz, Frank - Pure, 2016

Available at:

https://www.facebook.com/fldesign.info/photos/a.502329203234609.1073741828.502320593235470/810809369053256/?type=3&theater

[accessed 13 April  2018]

Project development - Thinking quick or what happens when weather and web hosting sites are against you

In the previous post I talked about how glad I was to find a whole database with information, addresses and pictures of abandoned houses around Sofia. I even wrote to the page - fading Sofia

 - for collaboration and waited for a response. 

At that point I thought I had done my homework BUT no, nothing like this. 

Imagine my surprise when I searched for it yesterday (Thursday was planned for house-hunting) and saw this message: 

I was absolutely puzzled and worried - after all, I counted on this website to finish my work in progress portfolio - and I have no exact notion of all houses I could possibly visit. So I decided to check out more about the project and it turned out it is more than sever years old (started around 2010) so it is quite possible they didn't pay the hosting fee so they may not be live again within the next few weeks, or at all. So far for the easy way.

Worse still, due to awful weather last week (blizzard and heavy snowfall and then temperatures around -8 Celsius) the only thing I had done were these:

Eagles' bridge - one of the most famous crossroads in Sofia. I pass through it several times a day so this was one of the first images I took (with the smallest compact camera I just had in me)

This image looks very Soviet (or post-Soviet dystopian) to me. This is the monument of the Soviet army in Sofia (unique architecture and quite the controversial history). This boy just passed by and the shot works for me. The scene may be anywhere in the post-totalitarian Eastern Europe (unless, of course you know the place). 

St. Alexander Nevski church - the biggest, most famous and most visited church in Sofia (literally one of the emblems of the city) and this is its main entrance. What you can see in the image is not rain, these are snowflakes.

They may be good in a sense BUT they had nothing to do with the set topic for my work in progress portfolio this module - abandoned buildings. What made matters even worse was the fact that I couldn't roam around the city, looking for something I have no clear coordinates for in the blizzard (which didn't stop for two days - these images are taken on day 1 when it was just warming up). So I had to wait. I am posting the unedited versions of the pics here :) 

So, this week I had to make things work and find at least one house to photograph - fortunately, due to helpful neighbours (and to the subtle yet important fact that Eastern Europeans are highly suspicious to anyone wandering around their neighbourhood) - found three houses - all built within 500 meters from each other, practically on the same land plot. 

One of the neighbours told me that most of them are still in use and, despite the decrepit looks are not abandoned. To my shocked face he reacted with the explanation that the municipality forbade any repair works on houses smaller than 50 (or 70, I am not sure) square meters. For the sole reason that this way these will sooner or later fall down and make way for blocks of flats. Who cares about cultural heritage?!

More information on that in a follow-up post (when I edit the images) :)

Beyond the Postcard mini project - struggles with scope - or how to get a focus of your work in progress portfolio

'Darling, I write a long letter because I didn't have the time to make it short.'

I've never been good with writing short pieces. Each time I get a word count, I usually exceed it with, well, maybe a third. There's so much to say and so many ideas going on in my head that I just cannot put myself through this.

It seems, same goes for photography. For years, I've been told that I should specialize in one or two areas of photography, the implication being that I would be better at what I'm doing if I focus on less than 15 things at a time. For years, I refuse to discard the genres I love. Somehow, cannot make myself overlook that amazing scenery in favour of the architecture in the background. 

When I go somewhere, I take pics of anything that appeals to me, regardless of genre (OK, maybe I tend to avoid some things but most of the time I come back with quite the versatile portfolio). 

Naturally, when I had to devise a project for Falmouth, I came up with a topic that would encompass everything I love: travel, landscapes, food etc. This idea sounds great when you take into account the whole lot of work I have to put in it - go to a place, take a picture, put the picture online, then write a blog post about it and tell the whole back-story. 

That's how I created Culture Crossroads - currently I have a Facebook page and blog - the place where I will try to show the place where I come from, the Balkans, the way I see it - as something worth visiting, much more than just a cheap tourist destination.

So far, so good BUT it turned out that I count way too much on writing to explain to people what they see on the image than to just create a coherent body of work (for example - 14 images that tell a story without me lecturing in the background).

Struggling head-on with the education system in the UK (which, honestly, has NOTHING to do with anything in Bulgaria), I was quite disappointed with my result from the previous module. So this module I was dead-set on doing something better. I've always been a perfectionist so to me any score below the highest one possible is a failure. 

So, unlike the previous module when I traveled around Bulgaria to capture some amazing yet less-known places around the country. This required a lot of logistics and travel in a time not exactly great for photography (July and the beginning of August in Bulgaria are any photographer's nightmare with intense heat and dull blue skies). So, to me, the portfolio of 12 images LOOKED coherent - after all, it was all in Bulgaria, it was beautiful and less-known. 

One of the images from last module's portfolio - known as the Flooded church.
Amazing place with interesting history behind it. 

 When I started compiling the work in progress portfolio for this module, though, it became clear that if I want to get the message across with my work, I will have to focus on one thing in particular. To me all images matter and have some meaning BUT to people outside of my head, obviously things didn't work that way. 

In some sense, pursuing a degree in Cultural studies and having a keen interest in history, I tend to take for granted things that other people deem specialized knowledge. It was particularly puzzling when I got feedback such as 'you should try to keep the horizon line straight' for the image with the church. At that time I was puzzled because I really have problems with keeping the horizon line straight when I'm shooting so I went the extra mile to straighten it. Then, it occurred to me to zoom in the image and I saw that what my tutor referred to was actually the waterline of the dam in the distance that does not coincide with the actual horizon. 

Another case - same module, same portfolio - was this image: 

What totally puzzled me in the feedback was the advice to 'correct converging verticals'. To me, there are NO converging verticals as it is a tomb - here is exactly what I wrote back: 

The image from the Thracian temple, also has converging verticals in some sense but this is not only due to the lens I used (Canon 10-18 at 10mm) but to the architecture of the place itself. 
To me it's obvious how this thing looks like in real life but I've been to numerous such places and didn't even think it would need any explanation but it dawned on me it badly does :)

It is a dome-like structure (I've attached the plan of the place as a JPEG) and all lines do converge at the top. Even though it is the biggest Thracian temple in Bulgaria, it is less than 5 meters in diameter so it is a really small enclosed space. I actually tried to correct the verticals but that led to twisting the other lines in the image (I've also attached my lame attempt to do this) because of the way these things are built. Since more images of Thracian tombs and temples are coming, I attached a bit of information as well. 

So, having been to more than a dozen such places, I didn't even think that anyone would consider the look of this image as a technical mistake. BUT obviously things weren't the case. 

Here is a diagram of how the place above actually looks like - the architectural differences, I mean: 

A diagram of the place - as you can see, the burial chamber is round and dome-like so technically there are no straight lines anywhere. But that is something I know and I cannot put as a text while submitting the work in progress portfolio. 

While writing this, it dawned on me that I can count on the back-story of the place to explain the viewer what the thing is and why it is significant. Throughout the years, I've discovered that images with a story do better than images with just a title so on my page, I always try to tell the story behind the shot. So, it was only natural that I adopted the tried and tested (and proven to perform well) practice to my new project. 

BUT when it comes to submitting a portfolio of a few images with titles only, consistency is not something that works the same way as on a Facebook page or a blog where you have extensive explanations going on with every image. 

What is more, Culture Crossroads has 6 categories - to make the narrative work, I had to break it down into some kind of meaningful chunks. So here are my 6 categories: 

• Feel the Religion
• Admire Architecture
• See Nature
• Be Part of Culture
• Experience the Present
• Remember the Past

BUT at the time I cannot just throw in a few images from each category because, as my first work in progress portfolio proved, it simply doesn't work. When I first submitted it, I had no idea what I was doing - so far, since that's my first-ever formal training in photography, I've figured out how to present single and most of the time - isolated images. Never a coherent body of work. So I had no idea what the problem was...

Then I went to Crete and came back with amazing images (some of which even of the WOW type that make you look twice and crave to visit the place). When I compiled a trial portfolio for a webinar though, it turned out that coherence is STILL a problem (ugh!). Here is why:

I chose to start chronologically so this was the first image in the portfolio - a breathtaking sunrise at Iraklio port (Iraklio is the capital of Crete)

As much as I adore this image - really, I'm not much of a lark type of person so I genuinely hate getting up so this is one of the rare and beautiful sunrise images I have in my portfolio - I was told that it, and many of the other images, does not fit in with the rest. Why? Because what I am showing in the portfolio is too versatile (that thing just backfired on me). 

Same goes for this image: 

It is a Venetian fort famous for its ghosts that appear at the end of May. Long story short, it's a haunted place. Amazing architecture. BUT this one and the one from the port have few things in common:

• both are on Crete
• the fortress above and the one at the port (seen in the background) are both created by the Venetians around the same time
• they are both museums

Similarities end here (if we set aside the architectural similarities which I can point out but are of no relevance to my work as a photographer - at this stage - since I don't have images of the insides of the fortress at Iraklio). 

While, flipping though the images from Crete and choosing what to include in the portfolio, I collected everything that spoke to me in some way. That's how this image ended up on the last slide of my presentation: 

This is an abandoned house and I took the image through the window. It looks really creepy to me - maybe because in Bulgaria abandoned places are usually deemed dangerous and haunted - but I can almost see someone (ghost, zombie, whatever) creeping in though one of these doors.

There must be something in this image because both the tutor and my peers loved it. I too am keen on taking pics of abandoned houses and I admit it is a powerful message - especially if I start telling you the back-story of the place and its location - but somehow I thought of the other images (which are much more appealing to the non-trained eye) were better. Nevertheless, I agreed to search through the images from Crete and find some more abandoned places. And they started forming a pattern: 

Abandoned windmill, again on Crete

Ancient Doric town of Lato

Naturally, there was a proposal that I do just abandoned places for my project BUT the versatile nature of my photographic experience rebels against the very concept of narrowing things down this much. I simply cannot do this for various reasons:

• entering abandoned buildings is illegal and it's deemed trespassing in Bulgaria - you can get into a lawsuit, the police station or even hospital for that. Many buildings are left to rot on purpose so that the land would be reused for some new buildings. Even if the place is a historical monument, it can STILL be left to rot.
• some buildings can be photographed only from the outside
• I really want to do the full scope of the project (and have all categories developed)

These were some of the cons I had to list. 

On the other hand, one of the points of my project is to break the stereotypes of travel and tourism in the Balkans - there is much more to see and experience than just the resorts and the cheap alcohol. So these images - well, some of them really - especially those places with a story (like the Venetian fort or the flooded church) - have a powerful impact and a message. 

That's why I decided that I'll try, at least, to present a portfolio of abandoned places only - some in Bulgaria, some on Crete - to show a more coherent body of work, for the sake of good presentation :) 

This, however, doesn't mean that I will be setting aside my whole concept of the project - on the contrary - I will select coherent images from the current pool of images (because this module I came up with a huge amount of files and topics to choose from) and see if I can make it work this way. 

Next module, I'll choose another aspect of the Culture Crossroads to present (while keeping the work on all aspects available - because different times of the year offer different things to shoot). That's how I intend to enrich my project and still keep the work I submit for grading focused (while avoiding the too narrow scope). 

So - say hello to the subsection of Admire Architecture - Beyond the Postcard which will show abandoned buildings across the Balkans (wherever and whenever I find them). 

What's in a name? Who is a professional photographer?

One of the images I created back then. I have some amazing images from Crete BUT these are not one of the great ones. As you can see the weather was nowhere near spectacular and nothing looks interesting on the pic. Still, I was able to do this only BECAUSE the pros made some room for me and my compact camera.

I didn't call myself photographer when I started out. In fact, it took me years to even think of myself as one. I remember one of the first times when I was impressed by the way 'professionals' behaved: it was on that memorable trip to Crete. Actually, it was on the Acropolis in Athens - then, I remember, it was crowded with photographers using gear of all kinds. They were all standing at one and the same spot - where the best view is. I went up there and was amazed that all those 'pros' with 'big black professional cameras' made room for me and even showed me the place where I can photograph the best view. That was the first time I noticed something like that.

When I got my DSLR, I still didn't call myself a photographer. To outsiders, seeing the big black thing, it was absolutely obvious that I WAS, in fact, a professional (why else, carry that heavy scary thing around?). When asked, I said 'yes' laughing. It took me 3 years to really start claiming with confidence that, yes, I am a photographer. A professional. And it took me another year to start demanding the respect owed to such.

These days I have to edit some images created by a colleague - I call him a colleague BUT he still calls himself a 'hobby-photographer'. Truth is that the guy does photo-shoots with models and so on BUT he is still reluctant to state (especially to me) that he is a professional photographer.  Still, since we happened to work together for some time - he has an eye for people shots.

That's me - one of the images that colleague of mine created while we worked together.

This made me think - who has, after all, the right to call himself/herself a photographer? So I decided to conduct a bit of research.

The first place I went to is the website of the association of professional photographers in Bulgaria (link to their website can be found at the end of this post), where it is said that a professional photographer is:

A) getting more than half of his/her income from photography

B) studying photography as a degree at some university or college

Still, I think that this is not enough to define the whole process of calling oneself a 'pro' - I've met countless people who have a BA in photography but are terrible at it. This doesn't make them 'professionals'. I've also met wonderful talents that take pictures in their spare time and are better than most 'pros'. There is something mystical in the whole idea of calling oneself a photographer - as if that gives you some kind of mystical, even mythical status of 'the person who creates masterpieces with one click of the camera'.

So I decided to search the net and see what the great minds of the past have to say about photography. I searched through various quotes about photography but couldn't find a single one about 'professional' photography said by the famous photographers of the past. Somehow these people didn't think that you need to earn this and this and that to call oneself a photographer. You need to see the world in a certain way, you need the 'eye for detail'.

Money comes when there is talent. If there is talent or people who are willing to pay. Or both. Being a professional in what you do comes BEFORE getting money for it, that's what I think. Somehow the photographers of the past have seen it, unlike us, who try to divide into groups: pros and amateurs, those having a degree and those who are self-taught, even to landscapers and wedding photographers.

A degree can only hone the skills you already have but it alone will not make you a professional photographer. Talent alone will help you create something no one else has done (or just very few have thought of doing) but without the knowledge it would take a lot of time (trust me, I know that).

Being a professional is a feeling, a state of mind, not a degree. It takes some time (and some bravery) to state it out loud.

References:
http://photographers.bg
https://petapixel.com/2014/03/11/50-photography-quotes-inspire/ 
https://petapixel.com/2014/05/29/70-inspirational-quotes-photographers/

Photography creates worlds. But whose worlds? The viewer's, the photographer's or both?

“There are always two people in every picture: the photographer and the viewer.”

Ansel Adams
1902 – 1984

When I took this image, the only thing that was going on in my mind as an idea was to capture the candlelight from the insights of the church. The picture was taken at Rila monastery, A UNESCO World Heritage site and the biggest and probably oldest monastery on the Balkan peninsula. The monastery was built somewhere in the 10th century and now it houses the holy relics of its founder - the hermit and healer Saint John of Rila. Taking pictures inside the church (unless you have 101 permits from God knows who) is strictly forbidden so the only thing that was going on on my mind at the moment was to capture the candlelight glowing from the insides of the church and to show the true spirit of a Eastern Orthodox temple.

Later on, when I edited the image and uploaded it on the net, one of my followers saw a face on the stones, at the bottom of the image. I had to look twice for it, but once I saw it, the image looks quite creepy. Here is an enlarged version of the image, just to show how the face (of an old man with a big nose, in my opinion) shows on the image:

It has been there the whole time, watching me as I took the image and then showing up even better during post-production BUT it wasn't me who spotted it, it was another person - the all-mighty and all-seeing viewer.

This leads to the logical question - photography creates worlds, that's for sure, but does it create the world of the photographer (or the artist) or the world of the viewer?

Here are two wonderful examples where photography (and Photoshop) went to the extreme in favour of art and creating a fictional world:

Just two of the images in Beliy Den's amazing portfolio.

The first one comes from the website of a Russian photographer and visual artist (as he calls himself) - his pseudonym is Beliy Den. He does put photography to the extreme to create a fictional world that is absolutely spectacular. He transforms what he sees through the lens into something that is not exactly the same, it's set in a different world.

The other (also extreme) example comes from the portfolio of another Slavic artist - the Ukrainian photographer Anya Anti. She decided to create an image that would show the 'butterflies in stomach' concept that went viral:

That's Anya Anti herself, by the way. This was supposed to be a creative self-portrait. It definitely worked.

Anya also created a time-lapse video that shows exactly how she did it - step by step. What I'm trying to tell with these two images is that sometimes the photographer's reality is so extreme, that the viewer has no choice BUT see what the photographer wanted them to see. But what happens if the image isn't that straightforward?

For example, when you do travel photography, like me (at least, I hope to be doing that) - there are things that you simply cannot leave out of the image - like the atmosphere, the people or the amazing scenery. What do people see then?

Here is another example - old but gold

I saw the tree and the rocks, my mother saw a stone face (again, faces everywhere!) looking towards the tree. Because of that association, the image got its name - Stone Face.

Somehow with the other types of photography, things don't go that straightforward - the photographer creates something, which corresponds to what he/she wants to show  to the rest of the world BUT the viewer sees something totally different, according to their own perceptions and abilities to analyze the world and photography.

Ansel Adams does have a point up there (I chose the quote for a reason) but I think that two people is not enough - because it gets quite crowded in both the photographer's and the viewer's heads - they carry with them all their concepts, perceptions, and prejudices to help them conceptualize and make sense of the surroundings.

Photography is as much in the lens as it is in the eye of the beholder.

Sources:
http://beliyden.ru/#prettyPhoto
https://anya-anti.com

Photographer ≠ a single profession

When I was at high school, I was hopeless at Physics. Nothing could make me understand the equations or memorize the formulas.
Later on, when I took up photography, I found out that contrary to all logic (and most of my preferences) it is all Physics. Light angles, reflections, lenses, mirrors. What was not logic, was technical staff (I was never a tech-bimbo but I've never been a sys-admin either). So, willy-nilly, I learned about Physics and camera parts, how they work together and so on.
Later on, I discovered that being a photographer mean much more than randomly snapping at things around you.
So, I decided to compile a list of all the things a photographer has to do (that photographer is me, by the way) for all those who think taking a picture is a piece of cake and that sums up being a photographer.
You need to know:

• some information about the thing: ideally the historical, cultural and anthropological background of the place - that includes having MORE THAN BASIC idea of archeology, architecture, warfare, social and cultural history, ethnic groups and the list goes on and on and on.
• some social skills - to talk to people and make them pose for you or even to get some information from them.
• camera equipment handling - this means knowing your gear inside out and being able to work with it with your eyes closed. Plus, you are expected to work and 'be fluent' in more than one brand and its specifics - I've had to use five different brands. You need to know about lenses, tripods, filters and so on and so forth.
• posing 
• event shooting and how to behave at that time
• lighting (studio lighting, I mean)
• your rights and the laws about copyright, private property and photography of the respective country - so that you don't get into trouble.
• some social networking skills (Facebook and Instagram at least) and SEO (search engine optimization) in order to promote your work.
• sales and marketing skills to get yourself some clients.
• html codes - because at some point you'll need a website
• blogging to tell your story to the world.
• graphic design - because of the two above and the demands of your clients
• post-processing (on more than one type software)
• videography and video retouching
• sound editing (because you never know)
• licensing and copyright - so that you know which kind of license you lent whom, why and for how long. I mention it again, but it differs in different countries
• printing, color spaces and different materials - this is separate because it is a whole domain in post-production
• networking - you never know who will be useful for what
• presentation skills - for obvious reasons such as portfolio display
• first aid and basic survival skills - everything can happen on location and you need to keep yourself and the people around you safe
• writing - you'll need to write at least the titles of your images and that is not always easy
• basic self-defense - which includes a lot of common sense and self preservation instinct
• basic meteorology - to know which weather causes what and how to handle that.

This list can go for a long time and I intend to update it. Point is, that unlike most people who get a single profession, specialize for it at university for some time and then go on working in that field without having to learn new things which have nothing to do with their domain, photographers have to do that all the time.
Photography means much more than just clicking a shutter.