Shooting Stock: It's Not Brain Surgery

Posted on 9/29/2009 by Paul Melcher | Printable Version | Comments (5)

Commercial stock photography, in order to strive, has to offer an emotionally meaningful solution to potential clients.

Get the Full Article (2 Credits)

Have an Account?

Access to this site is an exclusive benefit for you. Enter your username and password in the form above. If you don't remember your password you can reset it at any time.

Keep me logged in

Forgot your password?

New to Selling Stock?

Selling Stock is an on-line newsletter that reports on developing trends in the stock photo industry. It is updated at least twice a month. On-line subscribers receive e-mail notification whenever new stories are posted. Archives containing stories going back to late 1995 are fully available to subscribers.

Buy Credits

Copyright © 2009 Paul Melcher. The above article may not be copied, reproduced, excerpted or distributed in any manner without written permission from the author. All requests should be submitted to Selling Stock at 10319 Westlake Drive, Suite 162, Bethesda, MD 20817, phone 301-461-7627, e-mail: wvz@fpcubgbf.pbz

Comments

Jonathan Ross Posted Sep 29, 2009
Well written post. Interesting way you dissect the brain to support your subject.

Best,
Jonathan Ross

Ann Guilfoyle Posted Sep 29, 2009
Loved this, and would really welcome some hard examples to support and expand upon the theory. Successful solutions of problems past would be great.

Best, AnnG

Sharon Mcdonnell Posted Sep 30, 2009
Nicely done article, thanks. For the requests for data I humbly offer a few suggestions here. The newest findings by neurosciences, socialogy, and brain imaging have helped us understand how important emotions are to our actual lives. I found the most direct connections to the questions raised here in the work of Dr. Roger Ulrich and in the book by the Planetree organization. Dr. Ulrich has written on research about important elements of environment, visual imagery and their associations with health outcomes. They produced interesting guidelines for "restorative" images and their use in health care facilities. We are doing some research on visual images +/- messages as part of physiological functioning in different settings. There have been articles in the medical literature including JAMA about the use of pictures (but not very hard science). In some respects the best connection is the research on the effect of for natural light and windows in hospitals. The results was a rule that now requires these for "good" care and makes the basic case. A picture can be a window-- it can be calming or not to someone who is stressed-- it can connect to the idea or "problem" at an emotional or gut level. The image can enhance, detract or be neutral to the mission or main point of a hospital or advertising.

I would restate the 4th paragraph from the bottom to say "connect to meaning and feeling". We are not so much trying to create the meaning but to connect and channel to that meaning and emotion which already exists for a large number of people.

Our problem is that people who select art for public places do not think of how they want the people there to feel while there or about the place very often. Too often people dismiss what has been learned by saying "art is subjective" and it is. But, if we hook people up to physiological monitors such as biofeedback one can start to see that a large number of people respond positively or negatively to various images in predictable ways

The guidelines we have adapted and are researching are available for comment (and improvement) at:
http://www.Gaybumgarner.com go to "health through imagery" tab and documents and images links are described.

Or try:
http://www.gaybumgarner.com/exhibit.htm

To go directly to documents:
http://www.gaybumgarner.com/HTIguidelines.htm
and
http://www.gaybumgarner.com/HTIassumptions.htm

Sharon McDonnell MD MPH

Paul Melcher Posted Sep 30, 2009
This is great and fascinating input, Sharon. Thanks !!
when you write : "I would restate the 4th paragraph from the bottom to say “connect to meaning and feeling”. We are not so much trying to create the meaning but to connect and channel to that meaning and emotion which already exists for a large number of people." Does that mean a photograph cannot generate a new Meaning/emotion ?
Again, thank you for the more scientific approach.

Paul M

Sharon Mcdonnell Posted Oct 2, 2009
Ah, good question. When I was making my suggestion the same question came to my mind and I think the answer would have to be yes. The process of connecting visual images, smells, sounds with emotion is constant. It is like cultural change in our heads. I decided to go with "Connect to meaning and feeling" because it seemed closer to the mark more of the time. A picture is experienced and that experience is connected and categorized to meeting, ideas, and feelings. Often this process is subconcious. In fact research on this shows that the more you think about a picture and move away from the feeling of it-- then the more likely it is that you will end up with a picture that you don't like as well.

But, yes sometimes the picture itself becomes the icon. It becomes symbolic (perhaps archetypal) and all things that can connect to that gain a bit of the baggage or charge.
I think its most fun when a picture creates a link between ideas that may not have been "articulated" or visualized that way before and suddenly the image helps us find the feeling(s).

Its a great topic and I am glad you started it.
Sharon

Post Comment