Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera
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.
if i only had a small amount of film, and i didn't want to "waste it on a photograph"
Originally Posted by FRANOL
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.
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”
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.
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.