Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
Hi Max, Thomas,

Don't get me wrong I don't think the work was very good. My problem would be more with an argument the "genre" is tired. It probably is, but I guess my point is when I see a photograph I like, I just plain like it. It can be any genre I suppose (although I naturally gravitate to some things more than others). It doesn't matter if it breaks new ground or is a genre/style/process that has been done to death.

I seem to increasingly find myself in support of photographs that are at best ok, at worst junk. A complicated, unpopular topic for another thread perhaps.
I hear you, Michael. But what is the "genre" anyway? Can it really be boxed in or categorized as a "genre"? For me, it's simply junk photography. I'm not even analyzing it within the realm of a "genre". These days everyone is a "street photographer" (God I hate that term). So, is the "genre" tired? No, I think WE are. it's like with music. I never get tired of listening to The Beatles, EVER. And, I can appreciate others who have used them as inspiration, if the music is good. Just like with photography, I can appreciate the hard work of those who pay attention to composition, geometry, light, subject, context, regardless of the fact that HCB, Winogrand, Eisenstadt, already said it all. It's harder to find a unique trait these days because everything has indeed been said and done, but that should not preclude us from appreciating good art, no matter what it is.