Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,963   Posts: 1,523,223   Online: 801
      
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 44 of 44
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,942
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    John-

    I'd disagree that you read it correctly. That's an incredibly arrogant thing to say, because the question doesn't define 'style' with any degree of precision.

    It alludes to marketing/selling images. In that context, being known for a 'style' is generally a good thing (see Blansky's comment), so long as you don't get so stuck in it you become "the tree guy" (or "the colored gels painting-with-light guy" or "the pink bunny rabbit somewhere in the photo guy"). Which as Blansky pointed out, is just a marketing gimmick anyway. Defined your way, it's impossible to NOT photograph in your 'style', so there was no purpose to the question. Every photo is taken in your own 'style' - I don't think you can take a photo in someone else's style. You can certainly imitate others' techniques, but you can't stop seeing with your own eyes.

    I took my cue in my original answer from the comment about not taking a photo for moral or ethical reasons - i.e. the proverbial "I saw this homeless guy lying in a pool of his own vomit, and it would have been a powerful statement image about the social decline of America today, but I didn't take it because it would be exploitative". But the follow-up I read as something akin to: you're out documenting a protest march and see a really cool antique motorcycle that could make it on the cover of Biker magazine. Do you take the photo of the bike?

    Ultimately the answer to that is - it's up to you. But I wouldn't put it in any kind of ethical/moral context. 'Style' doesn't have morality.


    arrogant ?
    well, if it is arrogant to suggest that
    style has not much to do with subject matter
    and more to do with the person behind the camera
    well, that's my take on it, i guess im arrogant.

    i am well aware of what style is scott
    and while it is how someone markets themselves ( or tries to at least be known for "something different" )
    it doesn't have to be defined by project unless you want to put yourself in a pigeonhole.
    but to market yourself, you want to be in a pigeonhole, so it is a catch22

    no "style" ?
    even people copying other people's work eventually leaves the work he or she is copying,
    and finds their own way of seeing it and expressing what they are seeing.


    Quote Originally Posted by FRANOL View Post
    What would you choose:a good photograph that doesn't fit your style or not to take photo (assuming that will be published)?
    if i only had a small amount of film, and i didn't want to "waste it on a photograph"
    i wouldn't expose the film .. but i rarely see something that isn't worth the piece of film.
    time is fleeting, if you see something that interests you photograph it, life's too short to not photograph something
    because it doesn't fit with a current project, don't be stingy.

    to add onto scott's vintage motorcycle lead.
    i have been sent on assignment to photograph an event. and an event can be defined by the people that show up,
    the setting, as well as other things. photographing a vintage bike has everything to do with an event, it has to do
    with the people at the event, not just the riot, burrning things in effigy &c. photograph the bike, don't pass it up, and submit it along with
    the portraits, and mess of people, the riot and the after party.
    too many people stand too close to their subject. stand back a few feet and see what is around you
    it all has to do with the "event", don't limit yourself and open your eyes WIDE.

    and if it is a satan's helpers convention, and you didn't get the camera confiscated by one of satan's helpers
    who knows they might want to have a transparency made on velum so they can get a tatoo of the bike, where the sundon't shine.
    Last edited by jnanian; 08-14-2012 at 02:21 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #42
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,127
    Images
    340
    Style can be defined as has been said in the marketing/commercial sense, but if we are talking about artistic style then that is something that evolves without a label. Others may label a particular artist with a specific style, but the artist will probably not understand such a concept as it is intuitive within their MO. Hope this doesn’t sound that I’m preaching.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  3. #43
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,243
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    John- it was arrogant for you to say you KNEW what the question was, and I didn't. It's still an open-ended question which hasn't been clarified by the OP what he was looking for.

  4. #44
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,243
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    Where did I say you didn't read the question? I said I disagree that you read it correctly. I disagreed with your interpretation of the question. That's different than saying you didn't read it.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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