I was never cut out in my younger years for the hardships of international photojournalism. Anyway I am humbled by the story of Rena Effendi.
The comforts of capitalism kept me confined to the cozy 48 contiguous states.
My kids are nearly grown, and while I don't feel the need to cover anything on another continent, there is plenty here and in this hemisphere that needs a light shown on.
Too many photo-turkeys here on APUG worried about what to photograph with, what film to use. Women like Rena Effendi took the nearest tool available in the budget they had, and got to work.
Enough talk... more work.
I think if you have 200 posts on APUG and no work posted you should go away... I don't really mean that but I am puzzled with people with 1000's of posts and not one photo to show for it.
Ok flame me now. <<< this originally a cheeky admonishment to myself that this post should not be taken too seriously, flame away if you need, but don't hate>>>
Cheers from my corner of the planet... (and I am now working on a self funded, and soliciting other social projects).
Last edited by vpwphoto; 03-05-2013 at 08:27 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I guess I'd defend those of us without posted images by pointing out just because one doesn't post to the APUG gallery doesn't mean he has no photographs. That is the same sort of silly thing as when someone occasionally chimes in on a technical discussion to proclaim a finer grained film doesn't make a finer picture. Pearls of wisdom.
I've said many times an interest in technique, materials etc. in no way precludes the making of great photographs, nor does a lack of such interest necessarily lead to the making of great photographs.
I agree that it's wonderful to see the work here and I'd love to see more. But I'm sure that there are others like me who participate in discussions, but have a specific reason for not posting photos. You see, the analog process for me ends when the film comes out of the tank. I don't print, though I'd like to someday. When my film is dry I cut and scan, and while I do stay very close to what can be done in the darkroom, I still feel that I'm probably outside APUG's ideals for posting. So I don't post out of respect for the beginning-to-end analog workflow that is the purpose of this site. BUT - the discussions about film, camera work, theory, equipment, events, classifieds, etc.... that stuff can't be had anywhere else (including DPUG). In APUG's FAQ area it says that the site was founded because people were tired of searching through digital forums for relevant info, and I still feel their pain 10 years later. So there's one reason for being part of the discussion without posting images, I'm sure you'll hear more, and I doubt any of us believe we "should go away".
Harsh professor in me.... if you haven't printed but plan to you better start printing now! Making negatives to print with vs scan with are two different places. Printing is much less forgiving. Everyone who posts here has to go d-pug sort of unless we mail prints around.
Originally Posted by whowantstoast
I'm not buying that if someone has 1000+ things to say that they can't show a few examples of their work.
whowwantstoast... I'll give you a pass... only 24 posts.
Micheal R. I dunno what is the point of being here if you aren't fully immersed (my opinion). EVERY professor I studied under showed their work to the class at some point. I see APUG as a great place to exchange ideas... I like to poke around the gallery for 10 minutes in the morning while sipping coffee. And that is why I posted more prints last month, and will try to put up something new again by summer.
The main thing I am pointing out (which seems to be missed) is so many people sign up here as "passionate about photography and traditional workflow" but just talk and ask about which is better etc. I was/am pointing out that there are so many that have made huge contributions to the visual canon that have not or never will give much a care about what machines they use to create this work. I will argue that even HBC used his fist Leica's out of convenience that they were there and the best he could afford at the time... (late 30's early 40's) Japanese camera copies were a good 5-10 years out... this is the main reason Leica and Rollie are vaunted, but in reality they "legends" were made mostly because they were just about the only reliable tools around. Same goes for Hasselblad,.. they went to orbit... then to the moon (why switch what you know -- same goes for HBC in the 1950's and 1960's...), and the Japanese equivalents weren't on the table yet it was the early 1960's and 1970's... .... and that comes round to my OP ad folks like Vivian.
Last edited by vpwphoto; 03-05-2013 at 06:18 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I worked for what was then the world's largest newsgathering organizations and have taken a zillion photos but they do not belong to me. So I cannot post them. Bill Gates has them locked up underground in a salt mine in New York State (you can look it up). I have images I do own but perhaps if you got out more you would figure out that people steal images off the Internet so why should I leave $100 bills, so to speak, laying around on any old streetcorner and presume I'll be able to spend them tomorrow? I guess the whole world is a grave disappointment to you out there amid the corn and soybeans.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
See, that's just it. I don't need a snarky "pass" from you, and neither does anyone else. And I don't actually care what you think of my process. You said yourself that "Women like Rena Effendi took the nearest tool available in the budget they had, and got to work." That's exactly what I'm doing. APUG says that "This site is mainly focused on community discussions and information regarding traditional photographic processes." Notice that it says discussions? Discussions are the main purpose of this site, and any member who calls for any other members' ouster for "discussing too much" isn't understanding that. Like I said, I'd love to see more images too, but saying we should kick people out for not posting images is just windy posturing. Why would you want people to shut up? That's counterproductive.
Originally Posted by vpwphoto
The galleries here are a nice convenience, but far from the most important part of APUG.
And photography is a vocation, an avocation and a process with a product.
Some participate for other reasons then showing our photos on a shiny screen that does a lousy job revealing the qualities of a print.
I will agree, however, if you are talking about people who criticise the work of others, without showing their own.
“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
Sorry if I came off too snarky...
I understand what you are saying DesrtRat and don't doubt you.
I put a watermark on my images on the gallery (and have been called out for it as some say it is distracting) just for the same reason you outline..... I also have photos that "I do not own".
I stand behind my opinion of more gallery posts... but no I don't want or actually advocate anyone kicked out.... I came right out and said "rant"...and I accept your (others) critique of me without malice.
I don't think anyone needs to take me too seriously... and this one is my thread.
Originally Posted by vpwphoto
Didn't say throw anyone out... just advocating a discussion with IMAGES and words.
Thats all.... and yes I am happy and the world doesn't disappoint me.
I started this thread to get some of these 300-1000- post people to consider posting visually what they are about. Copyright watermarks are OK with me....
Last edited by vpwphoto; 03-05-2013 at 08:24 PM. Click to view previous post history.