Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,557   Posts: 1,573,288   Online: 945
      
Page 13 of 28 FirstFirst ... 37891011121314151617181923 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 278
  1. #121

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,286
    Images
    21
    There's a bit of an unanswered question here: What is the *point* of fine art photography (whatever the term may encompass)? Consider your own answer before reading further.

    I think the traditional answer is the gallery wall---a "fine art" photo in any other setting is kind of out of its habitat, and private displays thereof are sort of expected to conform to the gallery aesthetic. When a fine-art print REALLY makes the big time, it ends up in a museum. Hence the emphasis on archival materials: the intended audience is posterity, and as much of it as possible, with ideally no shift at all from the original state of the image.

    But I'm not sure that model really resonates with as many people as it used to, especially young adults who are accustomed to the internet as a conduit of (largely undifferentiated) media. In that sense, maybe the aspirants you're seeing aren't "fine-art photographer wannabes" at all, but photographers who wannabe...what? Something different. It might be interesting to interrogate them about their ambitions, and see how much those ambitions really comport with the "fine art" model.

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  2. #122
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,574
    Images
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Davis View Post
    If you really want an argument, I can refer you to one of my graduate students that very loudly states nobody should look at other photographs.
    How stupid.

    “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. #123
    PhotoJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Regina, SK, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,221
    I was recently at a museum in San Diego that had an exhibition of fine art black-and-white prints. Many were done with silver; many were done digitally.

    I intentionally decided whether I liked the prints or not before I read the information card that discussed the image. In particular, I didn't want to know if the images were traditional or digital until I'd decided whether I thought they were good or not. Even though I now own a digital camera, I have a very strong pro-film bias.

    Of the seven photos that I really enjoyed: four were silver prints from silver negatives; one was a palladium print from a silver negative; one was a digital print from a silver negative; and one was a fully digital image.

    Frankly, I don't care how you do your capture - my capture is the only capture that really concerns me - but this validated, to me, that I prefer the character of film-based capture. The reasons for my preference might be interesting to learn, but I'll save that for another day. (I have theories, but really don't know for certain.)
    Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

    A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.

    Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?

  4. #124
    eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,486
    Images
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by PhotoJim View Post
    Of the seven photos that I really enjoyed: four were silver prints from silver negatives; one was a palladium print from a silver negative; one was a digital print from a silver negative; and one was a fully digital image.
    Interesting personal observation... And, it helps to point out why I think looking at excellent work (both technically and aesthetically) is important. While I have seen some superb digital BW prints (there are many taking the time to understand, study, use the proper tools, and master the technique), far more often I see digital BW prints which are lacking. When I've talked to the creators of the lacking work, it becomes quickly apparent that they've never seen well produced silver gelatin work (to say nothing of alternative processes). They have no framework to assess quality. They're creating work without a baseline standard- a superbly printed SG image.

  5. #125
    Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    495
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by jglass View Post
    Wow. This sure degenerated. I skipped from page 1 to page 11 and, Jesus, did this ever go downhill. These are real and significant issues. Why not discuss them maturely, without this silly pissing match b.s.? ...
    I went through every last post on the thread before I posted. From what I've been reading, I think I can summarize it like this:
    1. David runs a gallery.
    2. People come to David.
    3. David tells them no.
    4. David comes here to bemoan his fate.

    I haven't read too much sympathy for David. There has been some, but not much.

    Thing about "art history" is that we are post-Dada. Since most of it has come down to pretentious BS, I can really understand why people don't bother reading about every last photographer out there. When there is an admonishment to stand upon the shoulders of giants, how many giants are lauded? I have seen many people here castigate Adams and others. Why? So everyone gets reduced to the stature of a pygmy. Now, where are the giants whose shoulders will give us new sights?

    Non-photographers might have heard of Ansel Adams, and they certainly haven't heard of anybody else. If a person fits the "I have an expensive camera and therefore I'm a photographer" category, of course they will go, photograph babies and brown dogs, and then go to a gallery and expect to be lauded.

    Hmmm, come to think of it...

    Hey, David, what's your take on William Wegmam and Anne Geddes?

  6. #126
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,806
    Images
    60
    The very best way I know of helping people improve the technical quality of their prints is to give them an opportunity to actually see high quality work.

    I don't think it is any different with artistic quality of photographs.

    Photography is essentially a very unnatural two dimensional medium (mostly). While there are probably a few people out there who are born geniuses, the vast majority of talented people need to have some sort of reference before they can create something of high quality in photography.

    So I will agree with the OP - a familiarity with some sort of body of photographic work is necessary in order to create something artistically valuable. An artist needs to say something with their work, and the language of expression depends on history.

    Note however that I don't believe that a photograph need be artistically successful in order to have value - pretty pictures have value too.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  7. #127
    Greg Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Crestview Hills, KY
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    How stupid.
    We all agree.
    www.gregorytdavis.com

    Did millions of people suddenly disappear? This may have an answer.

    "No one knows that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." -Matthew 24:36

  8. #128
    ROL
    ROL is offline
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    794
    Quote Originally Posted by davidkachel View Post
    When I talk about using archivally adequate materials or presentation appropriate to fine art photography... same thing. Even the most obvious basics appear to be missing.

    I also have noticed that on discussion boards they talk at great length about using materials and methods that I, and most here, would consider anathema.

    My concern is this: since new photographers have no need of seeking knowledge concerning analog materials and techniques from older photographers, they are therefore no longer immersed in an atmosphere conducive to acquiring knowledge of other aspects of photography from those same people. They do not learn the history, aesthetics, the various schools or even familiarize themselves with any of the work of the past. It is as if, for these new photographers, all the greats and what they had to teach us have simply vanished from the Earth.


    I would like to hear the opinions of others on this. What have you seen?...
    David, regrettably I have seen this very thing here on APUG over the last few months. I am attacked (frequently personally) for my "classical" technique views when I have offered them. It is the reason I rarely contribute here anymore. I presumed, now it seems with some evidence, that there was a new cadre of vocal contributors who don't share the same history as I, and simply aren't willing to tolerate old rules of commitment to once was a necessary state for the creation of fine art photographic prints.

  9. #129

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    16,883
    Images
    23
    i think part of the problem is that there are purists
    and people who want to not be so rigid with the "rules"
    the purists insist they are right, and often times they are the only ones who are right
    and the no-so purists say they want to play too,
    but they are looked upon as being "hacks" or "wannabes"
    they don't use a certain type of camera
    or process the film in a certain magical concoction, or print
    on a special paper, or tone with a special toner, or they don't use some
    arcane process, or hold the same photographers in high regard &c ...
    people fail to realize that its all photography. too many haters, too many snobs
    not enough art ...

  10. #130
    Greg Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Crestview Hills, KY
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,950
    +1
    www.gregorytdavis.com

    Did millions of people suddenly disappear? This may have an answer.

    "No one knows that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." -Matthew 24:36



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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