Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,933   Posts: 1,585,552   Online: 817
      
Page 11 of 18 FirstFirst ... 567891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 172
  1. #101

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern Ontario-ish
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    548
    I have no problems with this image or others in the same style. I would need to see the entire body of work from this series to be able to have a better grasp of what they're trying to say.

    I would hazard to guess there are probably just as many photographers who find the sharpness and detail of some photographs (let's use trees and rocks as an easy example) to be tiring and without merit and done to death. Doesn't mean it's bad, just different strokes kind of situation.

    I just want to see engaging photography no matter what style the photographer works in.

  2. #102

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    428
    So, after contemplating around this subject and the content in this discussion, my conclusion so far is that the use of technical processes to make photographs less "perfect", is indeed a part of the composition, an additional dimension is probably what I would call it, based on a reaction towards perfection or not.

    A reference was mentioned in this thread to Robert Capa and his "Beaches of Normandy" photographs. In his case I think we all can agree that he's happy he got home in one piece, and that the shots he had with him most probably was worth everything for him, no matter that they were blurry and grainy, a special situation so to speak.

    Though maybe, amongst things, these pictures has helped opening up that additional dimension in documentary photography, so the shots has in some way become a reference to something that after that point is okay to do? As more or less all of the other work I've seen from Capa, apart from his very early stuff, is razor sharp, or at least very sharp, and "perfect" by all means, so the Normandy photographs seems to be an exception to his normal "standards" if we look at the rest of his work.

    And here we go again, the exception to the norm, to the standard, and this is then potentially found to be appealing, and as it's done once by one of the "big names" (there's probably more examples with other photographers etc.), it's allowed, and with that, possibly considered to be useful for adding something to the story as well...
    Last edited by Felinik; 02-18-2013 at 09:06 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    http://street-photos.net/ | http://felinik.com/ | http://www.facebook.com/jf.felinik

    "The one with the most stuff when he dies wins"

  3. #103

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    320
    Images
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Felinik View Post
    So, after contemplating this subject and the content in this discussion my conclusion so far is that the use of technical processes to make photographs less "perfect..."
    What is a"perfect" picture for you?

    Take care.
    "The problem with photography is that it only deals with appearances." Duane Michals

    "A photograph is a secret of a secret. The more it tells you the less you know." Diane Arbus

  4. #104

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    428
    Quote Originally Posted by Dali View Post
    What is a"perfect" picture for you?

    Take care.
    This is covered in the discussion in different ways and from different angles, but okay, let's define "perfect" for the discussion then: A picture representing the actual conditions of the situation in the most realistic and technically optimal way possible.
    http://street-photos.net/ | http://felinik.com/ | http://www.facebook.com/jf.felinik

    "The one with the most stuff when he dies wins"

  5. #105
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,560
    Images
    300
    What does this discussion hope to resolve? Do photographers not have artistic freedom to do whatever they want with their pictures?
    Stop trying to categorize everything, putting them into neat descriptions of things we can understand. Just appreciate the art for what it is, and take what you can from it. Maybe do some research on the photographer, or even contact them to ask questions. You may find something you didn't expect to find. Most importantly - keep an open mind.
    Finally, look at the amount of discussion this created! That in itself makes the photograph of the truck successful.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  6. #106
    horacekenneth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    MD
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by Felinik View Post
    This is covered in the discussion in different ways and from different angles, but okay, let's define "perfect" for the discussion then: A picture representing the actual conditions of the situation in the most realistic and technically optimal way possible.
    "Representing the actual conditions of the situation" is tricky. Here's two ways of describing how cold it is outside: 8 degrees F or 'so cold your nostrils stick together when you breathe in'. You might say the most accurate and realistic way of describing the temperature is by 8 degrees Farenheit, but that is actually describing what mercury does in an arbitrarily numbered container, and doesn't actually communicate any information about how cold it is to me, unless I remember that last time it was 8 F, it was so cold my nostrils stuck together. You're actually adding in an extra step to communicating the temperature when you use Farenheit or Celsius. They are very helpful descriptors, but not more realistic.
    Sometimes the less scientific and less technical description is more accurate and more realistic. Which would be my argument for blur being perfect in the truck photo - there was a lot of motion and vibration at the time, your technically optimal photograph would be less realistic, wouldn't it?

    Just appreciate the art for what it is, and take what you can from it.
    That's what we're working on. Don't get so uppity about our art criticism.

  7. #107

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    428
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    What does this discussion hope to resolve? Do photographers not have artistic freedom to do whatever they want with their pictures?

    Stop trying to categorize everything, putting them into neat descriptions of things we can understand. Just appreciate the art for what it is, and take what you can from it. Maybe do some research on the photographer, or even contact them to ask questions. You may find something you didn't expect to find. Most importantly - keep an open mind.
    Curiosity, it started with me finding it very odd, and a bit sad, that documentary photographs were produced with a far from "perfect" process. I'm not driving this to categorize or put things in boxes, I try to understand and find the origin to this in a bigger picture, philosophy, history, etc.

    And as artists indeed have artistic freedom, philosophers can enjoy the freedom to discuss and speculate, right?

    Last edited by Felinik; 02-18-2013 at 09:44 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    http://street-photos.net/ | http://felinik.com/ | http://www.facebook.com/jf.felinik

    "The one with the most stuff when he dies wins"

  8. #108

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    428
    Quote Originally Posted by horacekenneth View Post
    Sometimes the less scientific and less technical description is more accurate and more realistic. Which would be my argument for blur being perfect in the truck photo - there was a lot of motion and vibration at the time, your technically optimal photograph would be less realistic, wouldn't it?
    I think you get my point about "realistic" and "optimal", and yes, I agree with you for the rest, hence the added "dimension" I'm talking about, this is definitely the way I look at this too, now, after having this debate during the last days...

    http://street-photos.net/ | http://felinik.com/ | http://www.facebook.com/jf.felinik

    "The one with the most stuff when he dies wins"

  9. #109
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,560
    Images
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by horacekenneth View Post
    That's what we're working on. Don't get so uppity about our art criticism.
    Not uppity. Just sharing what I feel this discussion is. May I participate with my opinion?
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  10. #110
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,560
    Images
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by Felinik View Post
    Curiosity, it started with me finding it very odd, and a bit sad, that documentary photographs were produced with a far from "perfect" process. I'm not driving this to categorize or put things in boxes, I try to understand and find the origin to this in a bigger picture, philosophy, history, etc.

    And as artists indeed have artistic freedom, philosophers can enjoy the freedom to discuss and speculate, right?

    You can philosophize all you want. I am a natural born devil's advocate, because I usually think in different terms. There is a very large percentage of the audience that view photographs that don't care about process at all. The only thing they care about is the picture.

    So, my question is: Why does it matter so much whether a picture is in focus or not? Why does it matter so much that there is grain or not?
    The point being: It is possible to look beyond the surface of the print, and look further into the picture and discover it by other criteria. There's emotion, memories, social aspects, the photographer's intent, history, etc. In my opinion those aspects are far more important.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin