Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,707   Posts: 1,548,506   Online: 914
      
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    16,412
    Blog Entries
    2
    LOL seems like every other week the same thread pops up
    but with another first poster ...

    fine arts is just a title.
    art schools teach it ... rather than vocational schools.

    anyone can say their photography is "fine art photography"
    but it seems that mainly ansel adems wannabee landscapers
    use the title the most.

    do what eddie suggested .. just make photographs

  2. #32
    Jim Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rural NW Missouri
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,819
    Quote Originally Posted by zackesch View Post
    . . . More then anything, I want to find my photographic voice and have my voice recognizable. . . .
    Too many have found the best way to make their style recognizable is to trumpet whatever they do, regardless of any intrinsic value. This means studying psycology, marketing, and the art scene; and by courting anyone who can promote their work. Fortunately for the art of photography, others have pursued some area of photography that inspires them to exert the effort needed to become masters of their field. Edward Weston and Eugene Atget are examples of this. Only by the efforts of a few who recognized Atget's accomplishments has he achieved the recognization denied during most of his photographic career. Weston had some help from his wife and fellow photographers in achieving some fame during his lifetime.

    Ask yourself, "Which is more important, your photography or your fame?" Perhaps you can join the few who have both. Until then, concentrate on just one.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Waukesha, WI
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    127
    I suggest the O.P concentrates on becoming fine photographer, and not producing "fine art".
    This is my intention for this post exactly. I am interested in what qualities make fine art photography "fine art." After the numerous responses, I understand now that there is no set of qualities of that make it fine art. My goal as a photographer is to master one genre of photography. Fame is not my goal.

    There are a number of competitions in my area and my goal is when I enter my competitions, and have my work easily recognisable from one competition to the next. If prints are sold along the way, that would be great, but not my main goal. I do not aim to please the masses, but to challenge myself and discover what I am fully capable of.

    Thank you all for your very helpful and informative posts.

  4. #34
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,365
    Images
    225

    What makes fine art photography "fine art"

    Quote Originally Posted by zackesch View Post
    How about the german taxi driver and he got his work shown of all the topless women in his cab. Isnt that fine art too stone? :P
    If he makes metal prints and puts it in a fancy frame and it sells for assloads of money, then sure


    ~Stone

    The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by batwister View Post
    There isn't really an answer, especially on this forum, but two things are for certain - an art education helps and the validation of critics is absolutely necessary.



    A Leica is a bare minimum. This is what I've discovered through poring over books and literature. But go medium or large format if you want to literally nail the 'fine' bit - assuming you know how to focus.
    35mm photographers rarely win the fine art label from critics because their negatives are too small and heads too big. (Try Googling a picture of Garry Winogrand and tell me he doesn't have a big head. Critics don't like this, as it takes up gallery space reserved for their own giant craniums - physically and otherwise.

    This is a very subjective statement. Use whatever equipment you have available. The camera gear you mentioned is just fine. My response is not with respect to pouring over books and making historical references. My college photography professors *all* used a combination of formats, all of whom have done world-wide shows, won awards, and hold distinguished academic positions.

  6. #36
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum50/1...statement.html

    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum50/1...rt-status.html

    "What's in a name? That which we call a rose
    By any other name would smell as sweet"

    (somebody from a balcony)
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Midlands, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    919
    Quote Originally Posted by ajs77306 View Post
    This is a very subjective statement. Use whatever equipment you have available. The camera gear you mentioned is just fine. My response is not with respect to pouring over books and making historical references. My college photography professors *all* used a combination of formats, all of whom have done world-wide shows, won awards, and hold distinguished academic positions.
    I was playing around of course, but there is definitely a bias towards large format work. Agree that using multiple formats (playing with the medium) is great and some work very well this way. But there are very few notable for it, because the art world likes auteurs - people who do the same thing over and over in a way that makes us familiar with their work. Bresson (35mm), Strand (LF), Weston (LF), Ansel (LF), Robert Adams (MF), Stephen Shore (LF) - their approaches are tailored to their formats, and they've stuck to their single minded technical (and subjective) approach to great success. It shouldn't be forgotten that your camera format informs how you investigate photography and it takes a lot of investigation to get anywhere. As with painting, your choice of materials is your first artistic decision. 'Whatever' won't do. <subjective> Isn't that how we ended up with postmodern trash? </subjective>

    Technique, subject and aesthetics have a symbiotic relationship in the best art. I'd say the OP should use the Elan, but play to its strengths and weaknesses, rather than trying to work around them. There's always a better tool, but it always gets to a point of accepting your camera's and photography's limitations before you might as well take up painting. Large format is like the cut off point, which is why I think many of these photographers dabble in and take from painting - they're so close to it.
    Last edited by batwister; 11-05-2012 at 09:28 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,241
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by batwister View Post
    It shouldn't be forgotten that your camera format informs how you investigate photography and it takes a lot of investigation to get anywhere.
    I like this comment.
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  9. #39
    Jim Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rural NW Missouri
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,819
    Quote Originally Posted by batwister View Post
    . . . but there is definitely a bias towards large format work. . . .
    Yes, and for many reasons. Ansel Adams compared the negative to the musical score, and the performance to the print. The better the score, the more possibility for the print. However, concept is often more important than technically perfect prints. The 1954 Pulitzer Prize in photography was earned by amateur Virginia Schau with a Brownie box camera.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Midlands, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    919
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Jones View Post
    The 1954 Pulitzer Prize in photography was earned by amateur Virginia Schau with a Brownie box camera.
    Photojournalists only I think.
    Last edited by batwister; 11-05-2012 at 10:07 AM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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