I come here primarily to learn. I have been photographing for thirty years, mostly with an old russian rangefinder, now I want to take things a little more seriously and have taken the plunge into developing my own bw negatives. Soon I hope to acquire an enlarger and so on...
Occasionally I climb out of the box. I put my SLR and Rangefinder on the shelf, I then take my little Lomo LC-A out of it's box, put in batteries and go snap some fujicolor at random. But there is a site dedicated to that kind of photography, (you can see a little of what I have done with that here www.lomohomes.com/Minitar1 ) so what's the point in posting any of that here on APUG, where it would look totally out of place? [size=1](Unless people want to see double exposures made with a cheap russian p+s!)[/size]
I learn a lot from work posted by others, I may not always comment but I do look at a lot of stuff in the galleries, I read which films/developers/lenses/apertures were used, regardless of what I, personally think of any particular image. Some subject matter may do nothing for me but I can appreciate a well made photograph regardless of it's subject.
As for 'am I an artist'? That's not for me to decide.
But a 'nice photo' comment, does keep me encouraged and makes me try harder...
Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.
I wonder if there is any subject that isn't boring to someone who isn't shooting or interested in that specific subject within photography?
I know we've got into this on other threads and it's a re-occuring theme. After an earlier thread I had a dig around and found a picture I mentioned which I shot and chose the cropping for this year. However although I felt it was reasonably fresh for me, I later found a similar one in a 1952 edition of Picture post.
Botton line is though folks that we shoot what we want to shoot because it's what interests us. We paid our monies and now we're shooting what we like.
Btw I like his version better damit but mine was a street shoot so I had no control
I am a regular visitor to the galleries here, standard, tech, critique and alt opps I mean experimental. I scan through all the images, click on the ones that interest me, and sometimes make a post or two. I'm not by any means a really good photographer/printer or highly tech minded, so I rarely make critiques (twice I think usually on the easily spotted stuff eg: perhaps a little extra burn on the left side). If I think a photo is good, I sometimes post "nice shot" or "like it" If I don't like it, I usually don't post anything, if I even click on the thumbnail at all. I'd like to think that I have learned from them
I have posted a select few,(all gone now) even a couple in the Critique gallery. I got feed back on some, none on others. I was happy with the critiques, and general comments, was even happy when all I got was a few views (at least someone looked at it).
I say "Damn the torpedoes and keep the galleries!" Browse don't browse, viewers choice.
After all this is a photo site.
Oh and TPPhotog, nice shot! Like the tones and the way you captured her concentration. I like yours better.
I don't know if this has been touched on but I think part of the repetition we see is due to the way we learn how to make photographs. For the most part we learn from books, magazines and other photographs, so to quote Fred Sommer" images are about images". what pictures would we make if we had never seen other photographs?
I think we can all agree that at some time we have all used a photograph as a model to get us making pictures and they are a great way to start us off on a voyage of discovery.Ansel adams did it, Emmet Gowin admitted he did it, it's hard not to we are bombarded with images continuously. When I started photography the hardest part was not technical, but of what to photograph. If we have no idea then we turn to other photographers and see what they did and do as they did.
As to what we can do about it, who knows? I think we owe it all to ourselves to at least have a brief history of the medium and be aware of whats gone before. Maybe we will reach a point and discover everything has been done and all thats left to do will be re-photographs of whats gone before. Maybe making re-photographs of our rapidly changing towns and cities is a worthwhile project and hey we all know how to make photographs archival right,and it would be nice to know that 150 years on they could pull our prints out of the archive and I wonder who(insert your name here)was.
One last bit to this ramble, photography is time based but why are there so few sequences of images made of the same subject over a period of time? My favourite is Nicholas Nixons pictures of the Brown sisters, this is what photography is good at.
There are several levels here:
First, there is an idea or a concept: "I'm going to make a photograph of a waterfall with the flowing water blurred." Been done a million times, and certainly sounds boring.
Second, there is the representation of this on the Internet. It may be a print that has been well scanned and looks great, or it may not. The viewer may be looking at it on an ancient, uncalibrated monitor. Who knows? The stuff in my gallery here on APUG looks OK here at work (with a nice, new monitor), but looks horrible at home on my older monitor.
Last, there is a print, made from a properly exposed and developed negative, on a fine paper, by someone who knows how to print. It is then mounted and displayed beautifully, to be experienced in person. In this situation, I've rarely thought "boring" or "trite."
"If You Push Something Hard Enough, It Will fall over" - Fudd's First Law of Opposition
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
It's simple, Grace: DON'T TAKE IT
Don't make pictures you think are hackneyed, trite, pointless, masturbatory, camera clubbish, whatever. Ignore them when you see them.
Now what's left? The good stuff! and there's plenty. No need to waste your time worrying about being nice or egalitarian. You only have so much time to waste.
Thank you I must admit I'd have liked mine more (if you will excuse the phrase) she had her head down.
Originally Posted by rogueish
My apologies Art, I made a gross generalisation by projecting my own motivations.
Originally Posted by Art Vandalay
Not everybody posts there for the same reasons I do.
It's easier to talk about photography than actually apply it.