I'm just bitter because I spend all my trust fund on camera equipment and didn't have the good sense to save any of it for my old age.
I respect fashion photographers, but I have no sense of fashion, and do not see the point of a $699.95 (or $50.00 for that matter) piece of clothing.
I respect landscape photographers, but have yet to open an Ansel Adams book and reach the end without a yawn.
I have NO respect for drive-through family portrait type places. I once attempted to work at one of those, but waiting 1+ hrs for the make up to be done, only to have 12 (yes, as in a dozen) shots to take made me sick. It's a character flaw, but I hold myself above that.
I respect portrature, especially when some character shows through the photograph (be it the subjects or the photographers).
I respect some photojornalism. see documentary.
I have NO respect for paparazzi. Once again it's a character flaw. paparazzi-photography lacks style, content, and quality. Not to mention purpose. It exists merely for the sake of greed. I despise it.
I hold documentary photography in very high respect. To me, it's putting the medium to good use. Tell a story, spread culture and understanding. Maybe most importantly, aquire (as a photographer) culture and understanding.
I also respect fine art photography. It is done by the photographer for the photographer. It's no one else's business. Self-discovery and masturbation.
The wonderful thing about photography is that rarely is it only one of the above. Shooting a documentary about people? Portrature as well!
As for commercial photography, well... if it's done for the sake of money alone, it probably won't be any good. If there's more in it for the photographer, it has value.
Moral of the story? Not only does my opinion not matter (it's your life, live it as you may), the lines are so fuzzy that my opinion is uselss.
That's O.K. Michael...There is a book that deals with all of those considerations. Should I mention the title?
Originally Posted by blansky
man, I hope you guys are joking
Originally Posted by Donald Miller
I can't speak for Michael. I assure you that I am not joking.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I majored in commercial photography in college. I now work as a freelance assistant for commercial photographers in Chicago. Anyone who wants to tell me that commercial photography is inherently less difficult, less creative, or in some way inferior to "fine art" photography can lay lips on my posterior.
There isn't anything wrong with commercial photography. In ways, I see it as a greater challenge to make good commercial photographs than most any other kind of photograph. How so? You're trying to make a beautiful, artful image, just like in fine art photography. However, you're also trying to make an intelligent, communicative image that accomplishes a specific goal. Yeah, there's a lot of cheap, soulless commercial photography out there. But for every crappy commercial photographer with only a minimal amount of care about quality, there are ten Ansel Adams zealots churning out boring, uncreative b&w prints in the name of fine art.
To make a qualitative distinction between commercial photography and fine art photography is to make with copious eletist quasi-intellectual masturbation. Fine art photography and commercial photography are on equal ground. One is not better or worse, more or less ethical than the other due to any arrangement or lack of exchange of monetary funds. They have equal potential to be gorgeous and masterfully produced and equal potential to be undeniably worthless piles of crap.
I pursue photography as photography. I make no distinction between my personal work and paid commercial work. I aim to produce fine images with insight in both endeavors. I refuse to accept any blanket statement of superiority or inferiority in the relationship between the commercial and non-commercial disciplines in photography.
I don't do commercial photography - anymore. And when I did, I had another job so I could turn down the assignments I didn't want.
But to pass up a photo opportunity merely because it might have commercial aspects? I consider that stupid!
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
Gee a trust fund, must be nice. I earned my retirement money the old fashioned way, lying, cheating and stealing.
Your on Michael. Now if you hate the Flames so much why do you want a jersey? I suppose since it will be XXL you could tie up the arms and use it as a money bag for your days take.
I am not disagreeing with you or challengin your statement, eric, but I am even more confused. What is this high road you speak of. I am beginning to feel that lines are drawn in the sand for no reason.
I think most of the participants on this board are serious amateurs and as such can take whatever high road they wish, as their livelyhood is not dependant on the sale of their art. There's nothing wrong with their opinions it's what is to be expected.
By the way Donald, in what way was Michael's statement arrogant? And that very childish snip about Michael and his Zen comment from a different thread, where the heck did that come from?
By the way no one has said why commercial photography is bad yet.
Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI
So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004
You know, I used to kinda-sorta-maybe like you. Not any more however :x Them's fightin' words! Go Flames!
Originally Posted by blansky
Back on topic :-) Regarding commercialism, people do photography for various reasons: personal expression, physical activity, your livelihood, etc. It's really a personal thing, and eveyone has an opinion about what makes good photography (I'm not even going to call it fine-art, since that opens another can o' worms entirely).
It's almost like saying that making a photograph that someone else has already done is a waste of time. Is it? Commercially perhaps, but what about for you, personally?
For example, I just spent a week in Yosemite as part of a B&W workshop. There are very few new 'big' photographs you can make in Yosemite, since it's truly been done to death. However, that did not stop me from making numerous images of Cathedral Rock, or making a bunch of images from the tunnel view. Will I every try to sell those photographs? Perhaps, but I made the images more for me than to sell. You know the second you try and show an image like that to someone in the 'know', and they'll immediately say you're trying to copy AA. Perhaps I was, or perhaps I just liked what was going on at the time. Regardless, the image was for me.
You must do whatever you feel you must do. Make it, don't make it. Sell it, don't sell it, frame it on the wall, or toss it. It's always about choice, and it's always your choice, no one elses.
There is no one right path in photography. To each their own.