Here’s a thing I’m going to do. Well, it’s a thing I’m thinking I might do. I’m not going to commit to actually doing it because it might be awful–for me and for any poor bastard reading this blog. Anyway, here’s the thing:

I’m thinking I might periodically look at one of my old photos and review or analyze it as if it were shot by a stranger.

I almost never look at my old photos. The very idea of looking at my old photos sounds boring as fuck. The idea of talking about one of my own photos sounds pretentious and annoying (and also boring as fuck). So why am I going to do this? I’ll explain the reasons later. Anyway, here’s the first photo I’ve chosen for this maybe-project.

I shot this one late afternoon in September of 2006 (EXIF data is handy) with my very first digital camera, an Olympus C-770 UZ. A four megapixel powerhouse. It’s shot in a 4:3 aspect ratio, which I’ve never been comfortable with. As I recall, there was an option to shoot in 3:2, but it required some loss in resolution, which was noticeable in a 4mp camera.

I was having coffee with a friend and was somewhat distracted by the pattern of the late afternoon shadows. I recall shooting a couple frames of the shadows, but the images weren’t very interesting. At some point, my friend raised her arm to sip her coffee; the sun had shifted enough to illuminate the edge of the rolled up sleeve of her white shirt. I asked her to do it again and took the shot.

It’s not a great photograph, but that arm and sleeve humanizes the image. It’s not just a photo of some shadows; it’s a photo of a human moment. There’s a palpable mood here–quiet, reflective, casual, conversational. There’s something comfortably relaxed, intimate even, about that rolled up sleeve. I also like the fact that the image is intimate while being sort of impersonal; there’s almost nothing to identify the other person–age, gender, height, weight. It could be anybody. Fill in the blank.

Finally, the perspective puts the viewer IN the scene. Sitting relaxed across at a table with a friend in an almost empty coffee shop on a sunny afternoon.

Okay. Now, why am I talking about this 18-year-old photo? Here’s why.

I used to spend a lot of time thinking about photography. Thinking about different photographers, about styles and trends in photography, about the decision-making processes involved in making photos. For years I wrote a fairly regular series of essays about photographers (which can be found here). I started those essays primarily as a way to educate myself, but they became a tool for discussion in a Flickr group called Utata.

And then I stopped. I could probably cobble together some logical explanation for why I stopped, but really, who cares? The thing is, I just didn’t spend much time thinking about photography and photographers. I continued to shoot photographs, but lackadaisically and rarely with an actual camera. I was satisfied with my Pixel phone. Until a few months ago.

Again, I could probably cobble together some logical explanation for why I picked up a 12-year-old camera, but, again, who cares? I picked it up and started shooting with a camera again. Which led me to start shooting with another of my cameras. Which led me to decide to buy a new camera (which should arrive in a month or so). I’ll write about the new camera when it arrives. But the thing is, I’m thinking about photography again. I’m reading about photography again. And one of the articles I read included some bullshit about reviewing your old photographs.

Here’s a True Thing: I have no real interest in looking at my old photos. The very idea of looking at my old photos sounds boring as fuck. I mean, I shot those photos; I’ve already seen them. I’d rather look at new photos, photos shot by somebody else.

But this article suggested looking at your old photos as if they were made by a different person. The rationale is that we change over time, so our approach to photography probably changes. Which sorta kinda makes sense to me, since in a very real way I’m NOT the same person I was in, say, 2006.

So I said, “What the hell, why not?” and I opened up Google Photos and scrolled all the way down to the oldest photos. The photo above was one of them. It seemed like a good place to start.

I don’t know if this is a good idea or not. I’m not sure I’ll follow through on it. But back in the days when I was actively thinking about photography, I stumbled across some thoughts by Alfred Stieglitz and William Gedney about practicing in public. Although they didn’t put it quite like this, those guys were suggesting that if you’re serious about photography, you’ve got to be willing show your whole ass. Maybe this is related to that whole notion.

I almost never look back at my own photographs. I figure I’ve already made the shot, processed it in the way I wanted to, then either posted it somewhere or…you know, didn’t post it at all. Either way, I’ve already seen the photo; why look at it again?

I don’t feel that way about the photographs of other folks. I’ll still look at photos by Eggleston (today is his birthday, by the way) or Kertész or maybe one of the Pages (Tim or Homer), for example. There’s almost always something new to be discovered or appreciated when you look at the work of the photographic Big Hats.

But this morning, as I was going about my usual morning routine (after watching Nigeria’s amazing win over Australia in the Women’s World Cup), I saw this photo on Facebook:

I thought, “Damn, that’s solid work, right there.” Then I realized it was a photo I’d shot nine years ago. It was a weird experience–seeing a photo I’d taken but looking at it like it was the work of a stranger. What made it weird was that as I looked at the photo, I could remember why I’d shot it and what sparked the desire to shoot it.

It was all about layers. The wooden bridge under my feet, the water under the bridge, the lily pads on the water, the fish under the water, the stones under the fish in the water, the reflection of the bridge on the water, my reflection on the water standing on the bridge above the water, the reflection of the trees above me on the water, the reflection of the clouds above the trees.

I remember standing on that bridge in Wisconsin and being struck with an immediate sense of absolute location, if that makes sense. I was at that particular spot on the globe on that particular day. It was sort of a Doctor Who moment–time and relative dimension in space. No other person could be in that particular spot at that particular moment. That’s true constantly, of course, but it’s pretty rare that we actually think about the reality of it.

I also recall very deliberately composing the shot in my head. I shot two frames; this one, shot rather quickly but intentionally slightly askew. The second shot was more formally composed, with the line of the bridge horizontal along the bottom of the frame. The more formal shot was…well, uninteresting. It has all the same elements as the photo above, but it’s strangely unemotional. Two photographs of the same thing, taken seconds apart, but only one of them works. That just seems sort of freaky. But normal. Freaky-normal.

I like this photograph. I like it both as a photo, and as a personal experience. Maybe it takes the distance of a few years to be able to actually see your own photos.