Right on. He's writing Horsefeathers. Besides, none of the "Greats" ever took the definitive picture of MY dogs!!
Originally Posted by WarEaglemtn
If I had been present at the creation, I would have given some useful hints for the better arrangement of the Universe.
Alfonso the Wise, 1221-1284
Thanks Guys for your some of them, very interesting comments.
I was probably not clear enough when I asked for comments: It was comments on the 'quotation' that I meant, not on my irrelevant comment...
My knowledge of the English language is too limited to go in debat.
The only thing that I would say, refering to a statement on 'criticisme' of the late Pol Vandepitte, who said:
"A comment/critique about a photo says more about the guy who gave the comment/critique then about the image itself."
The same I would say about comments on text:
A comment/critique about a text says more about the guy who wrote the comment then about the text itself"
Yes. Therefore I suggest that all who agree with this sentiment immediately cease production and get out of the way.
Originally Posted by fred
Arrogance is an artistic pre-requisite, duh
Originally Posted by bjorke
[QUOTE=bjorke]Yes. Therefore I suggest that all who agree with this sentiment immediately cease production and get out of the way.[QUOTE]
You and the other respondent who made a similar remark, whether tongue in cheek or not, totally sidestep the issue (and the question which I suspect Fred wanted to ask), which is:
Is there any validity in producing images which you know to be merely pastiches of what has been done before?
The general answer from the APUG members who replied (who are predominantly hobbyists producing work for their own pleasure) seems to be yes, but in terms of effective communication to others (apart from fellow hobbyists) I maintain as I said earlier that it is vital to eschew clichés and do something NEW (which against a background of 170 years of production of photographic images by millions of photographers, including some with a very high level of talent, is daunting to say the least).
Another respondent remarked that the great themes have been re-worked again and again. This is true, but equally this will not happen from now on. You [bjorke] appear to have founded a movement against unwarranted interference by petty officialdom, so this must be an issue you are aware of. The whole genre of street photography is dead, killed on the one hand by changed public attitudes, including a hysterical readiness to sue, and on the other by the seismic change in the market for photojournalism (which I remarked on but no one picked up. I feel there is unsufficient awareness of just how much this has changed the future scope of photographic activity).
Of course anyone can photograph anything he/she wants within (steadily-tightening) legal constraints for his/her own pleasure, and I am not decrying this, but to use photography as a broad-based communication tool these days requires a radical re-think!
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "effective communication"....
The phase, as you have used it, seems to carry with it an implication or assumption of economic viability.
I hear you saying that since hobbists aren't generally concerned about deriving any sort of economic return from thier photography, it doesn't have to be "effective communication" or, it is at least, irrelavent.
Can you please elaborate?
I'll try (briefly). It is a fine and noble thing to produce artwork for your own pleasure, and there are many good reasons to do this. By definition, your own pleasure becomes your primary objective. There have been several recent threads on APUG where people have defined their motivation as being to photograph what interests them, if others also like it, good, if not, unimportant. People may well work with material such as trees and rocks.
Originally Posted by GaussianNoise
If, on the other hand, your PRIMARY concern is to communicate ideas to others (for artistic rather than commercial reasons), the position is very different (although it may not seem so to hobbyists).The communication process is a highly movable feast, and in a world which is saturated with images, an idea or style which is effective today is commonplace tomorrow and a worn-out cliché the day after. (After an indeterminate period of being discarded and forgotten, the said idea or style may well begin the cycle again and be hailed as brilliant and groundbreaking). The communication process essentially involves breaking through people's defense mechanisms, unconscious assumptions and default thought patterns, and requires the communicator (artist) to be highly mobile. Trying to work in this field is not intrinsically better than producing work for your own pleasure and concentrating primarily on high levels of craft skills, but it IS different!
OK. This does make sense but, does it allow for a work of art to be widely accepted as a "timeless masterpiece"?
Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington
Photography makes ME happy; therefore, since I am a reasonable man and not into things that make me sad, I will continue to photograph. AND, IF I EVER GET LUCKY ENOUGH TO GO TO PLACES WHERE GREAT IMAGES HAVE BEEN CAPTURED, YOU CAN BET YOUR SWEET A__ THAT I WILL GIVE IT MY SHOT!!
The above spoken with 95% enthusiasm and 5% anger/annoyance. Just photograph!
It HAS NOT happened to me. I have not made the discovery that any imaginable situation has been photogrpahed already. Why? Every imaginable situation has not happened, yet.
Originally Posted by fred
Tomorrow I may, or may not, proceed out of my front door to retrieve the daily newspaper. How could anyone "push a button" and produce an image of that event?
Tomorrow a trout will rise to a fly on a river in New Zealand ... where can we retrieve that mage?
Admittedly, we may be able to retrieve/ crate an image approximating the event, but that can only be a very poor substitute for the event itself.
The only possible chance of that is that one's imagination is so shallow that the incredible, beautiful "chance" happenings are not recognized, and one loses the memory of the myriad surprises encountered constantly, so that we cannot extrapolate the possibilities of the future. I don't know - I can't conceive of a human being without an imagination ... I'm not even sure that survival is possible, imagination-less.
"I would rather buy a book of good photographs, than produce another bad one" (or something like that).
What comment can be made of a statement like that? The only logical course of action I can see here would be for him to give up photography altogether and become a book collector.
Will the next photograph I make be "bad"? - I really have no idea. Maybe. Maybe not. There is the beauty of photography ... It is, above all, to me - an adventure. I am able to "fade out" the `bad ones' and carve the `good ones' indelibly into my memory. On the whole, I am having a GREAT time.
How incredibly boring it would all be if it was truly predictable!
Ed Sukach, FFP.