.::Gary Rowan Higgins
A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
Good, because I'm thinking of all the pictures I'm going to be able to shoot with the 80 dollar Nikon F that will give me money leftover to buy the gas to get to all of them. I might have found it--my very own camera that I never took apart before it was acceptable for proper use.
And thinking how if I had a time machine, I'd get in it and go back and move the microphone a little closer to the guy on the drums....
As far as this discussion, I still think the professor will still think of some slick way to slip it past me and leave me looking empty-handed and stupid.
There must be on some level. Cultural norms play a significant part in determining how things are accepted in so many other things.
Yes. there are definite cultural and geographic divides in approaches to photography.
Make a start by looking at Beaumont Newhall's History of Photography with it's heave US bias and compare it tom Peter Turner's History of Photography which takes a more global approach and includes the European aspects.
It's a subject that can be written about in depth.
I guess one further should divide between the in-crowd (Beaumont Newhall and the folks visiting art exibitions) and the wider public.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I'd say different cultures around the world have different views on just about everything, I can't imagine photography being an exception. If you showed a picture of a mega-church in the UK, most people would likely see it in a different way than if you showed it the Bible Belt of the USA.
Originally Posted by cliveh
#14 and counting...
Originally Posted by Ian Grant
I think there are definitely differences in style between North America, Europe and Asia.
Each continent has had their photographic pioneers, who have established certain styles that others follow.
To be fair, I think that the American pioneers have the strongest styles. Although they have been very influential worldwide, they are quite difficult to translate elsewhere.
To simplify things, I would say that American photography is very strong in style and expression, European photography is a bit less dramatic and Asian photography is very subtle.
Almost all of my photographic heroes are Americans, but their style is very hard to translste into a Northern European setting. The landscape, cities and people are so different, that you have to find a different way of approaching them.
Ian and AgX are right. There is a difference within countries, too. The East Coast of America, the West Coast, and the great Midwest are all different. Sometimes I wonder if the Eastern Establishment realizes that there is civilization between the Mississippi River and California.
I'm sure they do. Some of the best landscape photography is produced in the East and Midwest, surely.
Originally Posted by Jim Jones
But I think that the presence of cultural diversity is also a cultural thing.
I live in a small country, Sweden, which has a lot of ethnic diversity nowadays due to immigration. But cultural tastes are still pretty homogenic.
Artistic photography as had a huge upswing in recent years. Most museums and galleries do multiple photographic exhibitions each year, and they get big audiences. I think it's because photography is more accessible than other forms of fine arts.
But still the national photographic scene is very consevative. Most domestic photography is very formulaic and sticks to traditional ideas on composition, exposure and choice of subject. You could say that it's an emphasis on "nice" photography, rather than bold, expressive or personal imagery.
For comparison, I saw a Cindy Sherman exhibition at the Museum of Modern art a few months ago. Even though, most images were staged "selfies" each image carried a massive emotional content, much like a punch in the head or stomach. My companion and I actually had to take a long break in the middle of it because it was almost exhausting.
She was one of the foremost pioneers who established photography as an accepted artform for expression, not just documentation, on par with painting or drawing.
We don't have that in domestic photography, even people who try to be gritty end up bland because they don't create a correlation between the subject and the technique.
Last edited by Jaf-Photo; 06-07-2014 at 09:18 AM. Click to view previous post history.