Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,705   Posts: 1,482,801   Online: 1067
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43
  1. #21
    SrdjanMatejic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    Instant Films
    Posts
    13
    Andreas Gursky is different, there is an idea behind it's work that is rather provocative but also easy to understand, and i like that.



    What I have noticed as well, is that todays critics don't really say WHY a work of art is so important, they just make a statement like: "this is gerat, it is art, and you have to belive it".
    In all news papers and blogs that have covered the Thomas Struth exposition, there was not a single analasys, just copy/paste of the museum propaganda. That is also a bit worrying.

  2. #22
    5stringdeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    St. Louis
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    603
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by SrdjanMatejic View Post
    Andreas Gursky is different, there is an idea behind it's work that is rather provocative but also easy to understand, and i like that.



    What I have noticed as well, is that todays critics don't really say WHY a work of art is so important, they just make a statement like: "this is gerat, it is art, and you have to belive it".
    In all news papers and blogs that have covered the Thomas Struth exposition, there was not a single analasys, just copy/paste of the museum propaganda. That is also a bit worrying.
    Well that's most journalism today ...

  3. #23
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,951
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by SrdjanMatejic View Post
    What I have noticed as well, is that todays critics don't really say WHY a work of art is so important, they just make a statement like: "this is gerat, it is art, and you have to belive it".
    In all news papers and blogs that have covered the Thomas Struth exposition, there was not a single analasys, just copy/paste of the museum propaganda. That is also a bit worrying.
    All the critical essays, and discussion of Struth, Ruth, the Bechers, Gursky is back in the Uk, but is extensive - it happens to be in books, journals I've bought or subscribe to rather than bought specially..

    Any discussion of Struth's work really needs full referencing, it's easy to say you (or I) don't like it (I'm ambivalent) but without proper critical analysis comments are meaningless.

    Ian

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,180
    I liked his 'Museum Photographs' stuff. I was tempted to buy the book until I saw the prices. The 2nd hand photo books market is a source of constant frustration for me...
    Steve.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,260
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by SrdjanMatejic View Post
    Kunsthaus Zürich:

    http://www.kunsthaus.ch/en/exhibitio...thomas-struth/

    It says:

    "Working in an age characterized by an overload of highly reworked and mediated imagery, Struth has invested photography with renewed intensity and integrity."



    Now, i will probably sound negative, so if you are a fan of his work, i'm sorry.

    I have spent 2h looking at his photographs, and i just couldn't understnad where the "intensity and integrity" are hidden in his pictures.

    I was looking and looking, and questioning my understanding of photography and art, but still, all i could see were snapshots, big prints, no ideas.

    How did this guy become "famous", one of the "top 3" of our times?
    His work is so... pointles?



    What am I missing here?! It really bugs me...


    you don't like struth ... and wonder how he can be considered an artist.
    what kind of photography or art do you like ?

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,080
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    Any discussion of Struth's work really needs full referencing, it's easy to say you (or I) don't like it (I'm ambivalent) but without proper critical analysis comments are meaningless.
    But a person doesn't have to be crazy to dislike art that can't be understood without "proper critical analysis". If you're of the school of thought that art is communicative, then I think it's fair to be frustrated when a work needs a lot of specialised decoding before it communicates anything.

    I'm of two minds on that school of thought, personally. On the one hand, half the fun of communication is in the decoding; on the other, coding that's too opaque creates a hothouse environment in which a tiny group of people are communicating only with one another, and the rest of us are occasionally told by some critic somewhere that we're supposed to like it.

    As a big fan of _Finnegans Wake_, I have quite a lot of sympathy with insular intellectual communities that are unintelligible to outsiders. (But a lot of people think the Wake is a nonsensical waste of time, too, and I don't try to tell them they should read it.)

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  7. #27
    mhcfires's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    El Cajon, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    540
    Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post
    But a person doesn't have to be crazy to dislike art that can't be understood without "proper critical analysis". If you're of the school of thought that art is communicative, then I think it's fair to be frustrated when a work needs a lot of specialised decoding before it communicates anything.

    I'm of two minds on that school of thought, personally. On the one hand, half the fun of communication is in the decoding; on the other, coding that's too opaque creates a hothouse environment in which a tiny group of people are communicating only with one another, and the rest of us are occasionally told by some critic somewhere that we're supposed to like it.

    As a big fan of _Finnegans Wake_, I have quite a lot of sympathy with insular intellectual communities that are unintelligible to outsiders. (But a lot of people think the Wake is a nonsensical waste of time, too, and I don't try to tell them they should read it.)

    -NT
    I'm glad you feel that way. I personally thought that the Wake would make a good paperweight, good for flattening badly curved filmstrips. But then again, I like Bartok, and a lot of people can't stand his music.
    Michael Cienfuegos


    If you don't want to stand behind our troops, please feel free to stand in front of them.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Newport News, VA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    17
    This brought up something we used to say back in the lab at college. Not sure where it originated, but I'm sure if it's a famous quote someone will jump in and correct me...

    "If you can't do it well, do it in color. If it's still not good, print it bigger."

    I definitely appreciate seeing a photographer who can snap a shot without blowing the highlights or muddying up the shadows, but I think it's really telling when all it takes nowadays to be a "world class artist" is to snap a shot with good exposure and then print it big. To me, this is just the kind of mentality that has us all fearing the future of film.

    It's disheartening to see this kind of rampant display of mediocre camera work being heralded while local camera shops are closing their doors permanently because the word "camera" is no longer considered to be an artist's tool, but just another "gadget".

    Maybe I just don't "get it". Is his work supposed to be ironic or kitschy? Cuz that's kind of what I'm getting out of it. At least that's the best reason I can come up with that an actual art museum would hang his snapshots (I retract that... huge prints = huge money regardless of content).
    =V=

  9. #29
    patrickjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    743
    When I started doing this photographic stuff, I of course looked to Adams and Weston as guiding forces, but my opinions have changed as I have traveled farther down this crazy road, examining it along the way. I always loved Weston, and just finished reading his daybooks for the second time. The first time was about 15 years ago. I used to think he was amazing, but now that I can relate to him more, and have a better understanding of the creative process as well, my opinion of him has changed. I don't see the images in the same way. Now I think he was a philandering man with a god complex who thought every image he made was the best thing ever done, at least until the next image. Opinions change.

    Even though I used to think the New Topographics and the German school were very boring, as I have aged I have begun to understand more about what they were and are doing. At some point one has to advance beyond the image otherwise the result is just pretty pictures all the time. An Ansel image for example has very little substance behind it except for the physical beauty of the picture. What comes next? The problem with a lot of modern photography such as Struth's is that it doesn't connect well with the viewer without a lot of explanation and understanding of what has informed the photographer. More elaborate explanations make the meaning of the image more tenuous, and further alienate the viewer. Then there are the questions we ask as image makers and find it difficult to see the claimed uniqueness of the images. If Joe Blow from Kokomo made the same images no one would care because he has not "studied" with the Bechers. In most cases, the pedigree of the photographer (with whom he studied) makes the art world pay attention. This is pretty rampant throughout photography, with exceptions of course, but it is there. It is the reason why photographers always mention their associations. If Gursky was Joe Blow he might achieve some success making exactly the same images, but they wouldn't sell for $680,0000. There is a kind of piggy back effect that goes on. Think about a "famous" modern photographer. You can't read an article about Stephen Shore without the mention of Warhol for example. Every photographer with an MFA will mention the degree and school straight away, and if one of their instructors is famous, his name gets dropped as well. So while we see an image, the rest of the world is influenced by other factors. I think it is important to recognize that.

    Thoughts?

  10. #30
    eclarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New Berlin, Wi
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,916
    Images
    71
    Art is something which is constantly overthought....

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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