Playing A Game
I’m not much of a gamer. The last one I played was Minesweeper on a PC many years ago and gave that up after beating the game in two seconds, in three moves. I was done with games. There was little fun in winning without struggle, sacrifice, failure, examination, and exploration.
Yet every day I go on a hunt for a good photo that meets my requirements. Something new, different, or better. My PHoly Trinity.
There is a strategy in game theory called the Nash equilibrium where a gamer’s strategy is based on what has happened so far in the game. No one can increase their chance of winning by changing strategies while the other players keep theirs unchanged. The current set of strategy choices constitutes a Nash equilibrium.
This is where the game of feature hunt photography gets interesting.
My subjects, the other players in the game, are constantly changing. They change with the seasons, the weather, the time of day, interaction with other subjects and materials, government agents, chance, welfare, inattention, narrow focus, sickness and/or pharmaceuticals, and a host of aspects of society over which few of us have immediate or any control of.
Finding order in this chaos, and setting a strategy, requires photographers to use the Nash equilibrium to their advantage to prevent a zero-sum game.
Observing subjects over long periods to determine their long-term strategies can simplify decision-making when affecting elements influence their action. I’ve watched light play on subjects learning when it would be best to make photos to tell their story. I’ve walked away when making a good photograph wasn’t going to happen, no matter all the interactions. When the strategies weren’t working.
Through this, I maintain my three requirements. They are my Nash equilibrium. Game theory tells me that setting a firm strategy and not deviating no matter the actions of my subjects, the other players, will be to my advantage. I will make more good photographs than bad. I will succeed making new, different, and better.