Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,041   Posts: 1,560,710   Online: 1051
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,601
    Images
    5
    i dont think it matters at all what one does or doesnt do ...
    as long as it is whatver the user wants to do .. and i am never sure why it matters.
    it is like suggestig ( extremely of course ) that all photojournalism has to be done with tei x and pricessed in dektol, or all landscape work in velvia and large format, or all portraits be done with
    techpan processed in technidol by shaking ...the list is long

    it is simple of course to put everything into pigeonholes much easier to sort things out
    and as an imagined methodology this works fantastically but in the real world, for me at least,
    someone can ise paper coated with plant juice and cyanotype chemistry with an azo overcoat, processed in dung.and fixed in seawater ... if it is what the person wants to do and he or she is enjoying why should it matter otherwise ... and if someone wants to pay this person for their toil even better ...

  2. #22
    David Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    near Dallas, TX USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,331
    Images
    8
    I addressed this from a slightly different angle in a blog post last month.

    http://silverdarkroom.wordpress.com/...28/influences/


    I interpreted the Group f/64 aesthetic as wanting to use photography for its own strengths and weaknesses, rather than trying to imitate another medium, usually painting.

    I am as impressed as anyone, by an artist that can paint or draw so that it is indistinguishable from a photograph. There are many ways to work with photographic materials to imitate a painting or drawing. But then, so what? If the purpose is to expand the limits of one’s medium, and I think this is where John (OP) os coming from, then why not? However, if the purpose really is just to imitate another medium, then there are limits to that, and it can or may quickly become just a gimmick.

    The element of chance in art is a whole other discussion.

    I don’t have any answers, just observations and my own approach. The bottom line is that it is hard to be original, and we're all trying different things. My different thing is concentrating on working within the limits of a very straight technique, but looking at the subject differently. I actually follow the manufacturers' directions ...

    YMMV

    John may be right. Maris may be right. Valerie may be right. Others may be right. I just hope I’m not wrong, ya know …
    Last edited by David Brown; 07-28-2014 at 01:30 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,648
    Quote Originally Posted by David Brown View Post
    I am as impressed as anyone, by an artist that can paint or draw so that it is indistinguishable from a photograph. There are many ways to work with photographic materials to imitate a painting or drawing. But then, so what? If the purpose is to expand the limits of one’s medium, and I think this is where John (OP) os coming from, then why not? However, if the purpose really is just to imitate another medium, then there are limits to that, and it can or may quickly become just a gimmick.
    It's a bit of a niche genre (the hyperreal painting or drawing, I mean). It asks some nice questions about reality and "reality" (and to photographers perhaps especially about the claim of photography to be something to do with reality) but I'm not sure where it goes after that. That may be quite enough, of course.

    One of the difficulties is that every position one takes is bound up (necessarily) with implicit assumptions about the purpose of the activity of photography. So I try to produce beautifully exposed and flawlessly developed negatives some of the time, and other times I mess about without a plan or goal, throwing stuff in developing tanks and trays for the hell of it. Now for some people the latter activity is quite anathema, indicates dilettantism and lack of seriousness and purpose and is Not Photography. For others, the former activity is pointlessly anal and indicates that I am a sad old geezer who probably has a tweed jacket with leather patches and dandruff on the shoulders, let alone a problem with BO.

    Of course I exaggerate to make a point, but there you are. I like a bit of exaggeration.

    The thing is, whenever someone looks at a photograph of mine and asks "which camera/lens/developer/agitation/paper/enlarging lens/developer/pixie dust did you use?" I either have rather a feeling of failure (Oh god is that all the reaction i've managed to produce?) or of irritation (FFS look at the damn picture will you!.

    On the other hand if I stand in front of a (picture, painting, photo, sculpture, performance, dancing pixie) and can only wonder how it was done, of course then the problem is the artist's rather than any failure of aesthetic appreciation on my part

  4. #24
    eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,441
    Images
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by David Brown View Post

    John may be right. Maris may be right. Valerie may be right. Others may be right. I just hope I’m not wrong, ya know …
    There is no right or wrong. It's a creative endeavor. The only issue I have is with those who strictly define photography based on their own goals and requirements.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,601
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by eddie View Post
    There is no right or wrong. It's a creative endeavor. The only issue I have is with those who strictly define photography based on their own goals and requirements.
    i have never understood extremes like this ...
    photography is an extremely broad thing and putting barriers up
    and suggesting
    abc is, and everything else isnt is pretty out there, although i know of someone
    that jsed to argue nothing but portraits are photographs ...

    to me boundaries serve no purpose other than to stifle .. buth the medium as a whole
    and creativity .....

    ===

    pdeeh i know exactly what you mean about excessive perfection and then letting things rip .
    it is a good exercise .... keeps ones mind and wits sharp

  6. #26
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,457
    Images
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    but when your taking tricks become second nature, as is what usually happens when we do something
    often .. will you do something else ?

    the challenge of things makes us better
    When it becomes second nature, the challenge is to relax into Zen photography. HCB achieved this and us mere mortals are still trying.

    “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

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,601
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    When it becomes second nature, the challenge is to relax into Zen photography. HCB achieved this and us mere mortals are still trying.
    yeah ... zen is good ...

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    California desert
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    882

    straightforward

    My technique is pretty much straightforward but from time to time I have tried various alternative ways of making photographs or photo prints. These include panning while making a long exposure, zooming while making a long exposure and so on. Once a long time ago I set up my Rolleiflex on a tripid, opened the lens, and using b&w film photographed an old abandoned house at night. Four times during the several-minute-long exposure I flashed a strobe so what I got was a young lady in a Victorian style dress carrying a candle. I got four images of her and a streak of light showing in between the four images of her. Lots of work and lots of fun.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,601
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by snapguy View Post
    My technique is pretty much straightforward but from time to time I have tried various alternative ways of making photographs or photo prints. These include panning while making a long exposure, zooming while making a long exposure and so on. Once a long time ago I set up my Rolleiflex on a tripid, opened the lens, and using b&w film photographed an old abandoned house at night. Four times during the several-minute-long exposure I flashed a strobe so what I got was a young lady in a Victorian style dress carrying a candle. I got four images of her and a streak of light showing in between the four images of her. Lots of work and lots of fun.
    exactly!!
    fun .. always good to take a vacation from thenusual and have fun
    the image you created were the results
    good enough that you might try it again?

    or was it just chalked to experience ?

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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