Should we as photographers be insulted somehow?

Discussion in 'Ethics and Philosophy' started by Richard S. (rich815), May 31, 2012.

  1. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,959
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  2. Mainecoonmaniac

    Mainecoonmaniac Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,958
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I try not to be offended as I get older. Especially as a photographer. Being pissed or offended takes energy which is a waste of time. Painting really isn't a photography. Wasn't the group f/64 railing against photographers trying to be like painters?
     
  3. blansky

    blansky Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,985
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Location:
    Wine country, N. Cal.
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    No he's right.

    He means that a biography is not a true representation of the person but a crafted mish-mash of facts and myths and representations by other people's memories.

    It's like a painter laying down strokes of information to form a likeness of the subject.

    All biographies are myths.
     
  4. Toffle

    Toffle Member

    Messages:
    1,848
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Location:
    Point Pelee,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    No, I don't think it's worth your effort to be upset over this. If you'd like, you can take satisfaction that unless the film is very good, it is unlikely to eclipse the definitive Steve Jobs portrait, which was shot by Albert Watson on 4x5 film.
     
  5. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,959
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Exactly! I'm not offended but he seems to be saying that a photograph cannot do justice somehow and that a painting would as if it's "better" or a that photograph lacks what a painting can achieve. And I would not agree with that sentiment.
     
  6. Colin Corneau

    Colin Corneau Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,871
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Location:
    Brandon, MB
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I read the article twice and still can't figure out why you or anyone else would even bring up the word "offended"....
     
  7. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,959
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Then your answer is no, we should not be offended. I see the tone, however subtle or mild, and as I mentioned above, as if posturing it as a painting is better because a photograph just cannot do it justice or is not as good.

    What exactly do you think he meant buy "Anytime you watch a movie based on a true story, "you have to think of it as a painting not a photograph," Sorkin said."? Why cannot a movie based on a true story be accurately portrayed or thought of as a photograph?

    Maybe "offended" is too strong a word, but somehow I feel it's saying paintings are better than photographs.
     
  8. blansky

    blansky Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,985
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Location:
    Wine country, N. Cal.
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I don't read anything in there that infers one is better than the other.

    A painting is a made up representation of a person.

    A photograph is much more a definitive likeness.

    Most biographies are not books about the facts of a person's life, although there are definitely facts in there. They are more about why he did this and what was he thinking at such and such a time, and pseudo amateur psychologist/authors sort through his life and say shit like, "well because his mother did this to him when he was 3.... then when he was 30 he did that..." and other such stuff.

    "his early bed wetting was the reason he later invaded Russia...."

    "he had a mommy complex, so in later years he dressed like her while doing the ironing..."

    "he became secretary of state because he had a thing for his dads secretary when he was 9...."

    " the screen of the iPhone, iPad, and iPod is black because he suffered through bouts of depression"...

    That stuff sounds like a painting, not a photograph.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 31, 2012
  9. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    16,809
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    When most people think of a photograph, they don't think of it as something that consists of something built up of many layers of subtle nuance. They think of it as just "taking a shot".

    When those people think of a painting, they are more likely to envision it that way.

    Many of us here know that a good photograph can indeed be something complex, nuanced and multi-layered. And quite a few here know that painting can be simplistic.

    I'm never offended when someone says something that shows they think of photography as a simplistic medium, although I am a bit surprised Sorkin didn't say "snapshot" rather than "photograph".
     
  10. blansky

    blansky Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,985
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Location:
    Wine country, N. Cal.
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I think we are lucky that whenever we say something, it isn't quoted worldwide as who and what we are, and what we think.

    Of course he was talking to the media which lie all the time, where we here on APUG can say shit, and because it's the internet we know it's going to be true.

    He may have actually been thinking of snapshot when he said it but that sounds like more of a commercial than a full length movie/book.
     
  11. CGW

    CGW Member

    Messages:
    2,797
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Finished embarrassing yourself? Try some Robert Caro on LBJ or, better yet, Hilary Mantel's "historical" fiction, "Wolf Hall," on Thomas Cromwell. Stick to photography, mate.
     
  12. CGW

    CGW Member

    Messages:
    2,797
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    see below
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 31, 2012
  13. CGW

    CGW Member

    Messages:
    2,797
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Most biographies are not books about the facts of a person's life, although there are definitely facts in there. They are more about why he did this and what was he thinking at such and such a time, and pseudo amateur psychologist/authors sort through his life and say shit like, "well because his mother did this to him when he was 3.... then when he was 30 he did that..." and other such stuff.

    "his early bed wetting was the reason he later invaded Russia...."

    "he had a mommy complex, so in later years he dressed like her while doing the ironing..."

    "he became secretary of state because he had a thing for his dads secretary when he was 9...."

    " the screen of the iPhone, iPad, and iPod is black because he suffered through bouts of depression"...

    That stuff sounds like a painting, not a photograph.[/QUOTE]


    Duplicate post
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 31, 2012
  14. blansky

    blansky Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,985
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Location:
    Wine country, N. Cal.
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I'm not your mate.

    I've never even met you.
     
  15. CGW

    CGW Member

    Messages:
    2,797
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Lucky me. Just keep the tarbrush in the bucket.
     
  16. kevs

    kevs Member

    Messages:
    544
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Why would I feel insulted at this? Sorkin is merely using the words 'painting' and 'photograph' as metaphors. Paintings are inexact and embellished likenesses interpreted by a human eye and brain and translated onto media; photographs are more physically exact but perhaps don't incorporate the emotional connotations like paintings. I'm sure you get the drift.

    Seriously, there are more things in life to feel insulted about. I feel insulted whenever photographers are killed, persecuted, prosecuted or otherwise hounded for doing their jobs. If you really want to feel insulted about anything, look at what's happening in Syria. That's an insult to the human race. IMNSHO
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-17128337
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18224559

    Cheers,
    kevs
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 31, 2012
  17. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    19,976
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    local
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    im not offended and have no idea why anyone would be offended.
    nothing is shot on film anymore anyways ..
    should i be offended that it won't be shot on celluloid ?
    personally, i think it would be the best if the filmmaker shot it on an iPhone or an iPad.
     
  18. John Austin

    John Austin Member

    Messages:
    521
    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Location:
    Southern For
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Who gives a phuq what he calls it?

    However, this thread means I am logging out of here and going to clean my darkroom ready for tomorrow morning, much more productive

    John
     
  19. E. von Hoegh

    E. von Hoegh Member

    Messages:
    3,925
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Location:
    Adirondacks
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    +1

    And, I really don't give a shit about Steve Jobs. Just another self serving borderline megalomaniac who disguised his profit motive as some sort of altruistic plan (to get everyone possible buying his crappy products).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 1, 2012
  20. Toffle

    Toffle Member

    Messages:
    1,848
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Location:
    Point Pelee,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Ah, the many ways that APUG inspires us. :whistling:
     
  21. Domenico Foschi

    Domenico Foschi Member

    Messages:
    440
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles,
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    It's just an ignorant and narrow statement of what photography can be. You can feel offended if you want, but then what do you do with it?