| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/10/2008 07:59:55 PM · #1 |
commentary on commentary
The online world is becoming a sort of massive, monstrous camera club, an "academy" bound down by strictures and rules and mass taste. Conformity to this world is the antithesis of creativity, and it suppresses individuality. Because of the greatly accelerated degree of discourse and the de facto emphasis on competition (for attention, for audience, for approving comments), we're moving towards a point where not only will we have sorted all pictures into genera and categories of cliché, but we'll have a standard method for Photoshopping each generic category!
We know too much about how pictures look and should look. And how do you get around making those pictures again and again?" The 'net effect is that now people strive to make cookie-cutter pictures ("again and again") that embody "how pictures look and should look." Most pictures aren't pictures, they're imitations of pictures. |
|
|
|
03/10/2008 08:27:07 PM · #2 |
That more of a commentary on the state of public taste in photographic images, rather than then Internet "club" that it suggests - i.e. new media is just the delivery mechanism.
All you have to do is to consider where the public see the vast majority of their photography - in advertising. Perfect shiny tomatoes, airbrushed models, eyecandy sunsets....it all comes from mass media advertising and setting up the individual's appetite and taste imho.
N
|
|
|
|
03/10/2008 08:38:52 PM · #3 |
Well, it seems to describe DPC voting tastes to a large extent.
When you put hundreds of people together in such a way, you get the "committee effect". On any single entry, you will get a wide range of reaction, from appreciation to dislike and it usually gets watered down to something between a 4 and a 7.
To be fair, we do have a lot of incentive here for "out of the box" work, but the highest reward does go to the ones that conform to popular taste.
Message edited by author 2008-03-10 20:42:27.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2008 08:44:09 PM · #4 |
Interesting read. I liked this response by a commenter after the article:
I love taking pictures, and I love learning to take better pictures, but I've long since given up on being an artist. For me it's a craft, I'm not sure if there is a lot of art left in this craft as a whole... if you understand the distinction. As a programmer, I am intimately familiar with the distinction. There are brilliant, elegant algorithms and programs and systems which I would consider art, but programmers spend 99% of our day dealing and looking at the craft.
My photos have value to the extent that they're well-crafted and to the extent that their context concerns their audience. I've long since given up on achieving any sort of distinctive, measurable impact on the art of photography. I don't think it would be possible in this time in the history of this art no matter how hard I tried. However, if I can go on a hiking trip through a beautiful part of Canada, with people whose company I love, and, at the end of the trip, pass on some well-crafted photographs to them that they could not have taken themselves, I think that is the greatest value my personal 'art' can ever have. They will find them beautiful and amazing, but most of that is their involvement in them. I have not created anything beautiful and amazing in any universal artistic sense - I have not contributed significantly to the art as a whole; I'm just not saying anything that 99% of the world would care about - just that I love hiking to beautiful places with my buddies.
Objectively, these photographs are not special; they're echoes of echoes - however much I'd wish they were not. So... I'm left with nothing more than the value that my photographs have to me and to my friends and family. This is more than sufficient to bolster my innate joy in the mechanics and practice of the craft of photography.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2008 08:56:35 PM · #5 |
The real extent of this problem is from individuals who only use a limited exposure of photography via online sites like DPC.
To avoid this “cookie-cutter pictures” mentality photographers need to look deeper then online photography sites, they need to join camera clubs ( although I have seen similar situations within clubs) or go to art exhibitions especially fringe art festivals where freedom of expression is the name of the game.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2008 09:01:44 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
To avoid this “cookie-cutter pictures” mentality photographers need to look deeper then online photography sites, they need to join camera clubs ( although I have seen similar situations within clubs) or go to art exhibitions especially fringe art festivals where freedom of expression is the name of the game. |
I'd go one better - just shoot!!! You don't need a camera club or a website to go out and shoot the photographs that you want to. It's only when you start getting involved with other photographers that artistic directions cross...and some merge into this general concensus of eye candy, and others stick to their guns and plough on.
N
|
|
|
|
03/10/2008 09:07:58 PM · #7 |
*puts hand up*
i "steal" photos all the time - you see something you like and think "how can i do that?" and then you go and replicate it in your own little way... my current entry into the silverware competition is actually one of those shots. I dont think there are many people who take truely unique photographs.
I once had this guy tell me that a shot i took was crap because i had intentionally tried to emulate a photographer i had recently come across (in style not in photo - and i mentioned it in my comments attached to the photo hoping to educate others) and that i should seek new horizons and not be so unoriginal quoting that i should "get down to ground level and see what is around when you look close"... thing is, doing that would mean copying him - anyone see the paradox there in his argument? So i ignored him and continued my voyage of discovery of new techniques and styles. |
|
|
|
03/10/2008 09:14:19 PM · #8 |
| Bah, all these rants are started by people who wish they were good enough to excel in commercial photography. |
|
|
|
03/10/2008 09:18:17 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by LanndonKane:
Bah, all these rants are started by people who wish they were good enough to excel in commercial photography. |
I think Mike has reasonably demonstrated that that isn't where his interests lie, in the last 20 years or so of writing about photography. He might well be a frustrated teacher though. |
|
|
|
03/10/2008 09:19:52 PM · #10 |
| That's a wonderful essay. Thanks for posting it. Sometimes I think I'm mad, and it's good to see I'm not the only one in my asylum. |
|
|
|
03/10/2008 10:49:20 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
That's a wonderful essay. Thanks for posting it. Sometimes I think I'm mad, and it's good to see I'm not the only one in my asylum. |
I was wondering when you would check in on this subject. Actually, I think the asylum is pretty crowded. I hear the food is good.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2008 11:18:24 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
That's a wonderful essay. Thanks for posting it. Sometimes I think I'm mad, and it's good to see I'm not the only one in my asylum. |
I've been trying to find out whose asylum it is for some time now, but didn't get anywhere.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2008 11:35:49 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by posthumous:
That's a wonderful essay. Thanks for posting it. Sometimes I think I'm mad, and it's good to see I'm not the only one in my asylum. |
I've been trying to find out whose asylum it is for some time now, but didn't get anywhere. |
It's not mine, but I do have a lovely corner office on the third floor. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 12:32:38 AM · #14 |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 12:43:00 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by yanko:
It doesn't matter if you shoot the same subject, the same POV or the same technique. What matters is did you incorporate your own vision into the shot? Unless you're a clone your vision should be unique, |
I have to agree with this. I have found meetups to be excellent venue for showing this and learning new ways of seeing a subject. On some recent flickr meetups, I photographed the same exact subject at the same time of day and sometimes from the same angle as someone else. We still posted significantly different images later on.
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 12:45:26 AM · #16 |
| To some extent the commentary was a sort of statistical summary or surmise. I think there is way more imagination (good word, eh?) out there than we imagine, and that it will always rise. Somewhere, doesn't matter where. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 03:21:52 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by LanndonKane:
Bah, all these rants are started by people who wish they were good enough to excel in commercial photography. |
Lartigue always had an interesting point: that the best photographers are usually the amateurs - they don't have to worry about sales and mass approval. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 09:23:05 AM · #18 |
Thanks for the link -- very interesting article and inspiring, too. I've noticed my tolerance for contrivance has grown since joining DPC, perhaps because of repeated exposure. Am I being assimilated? Seriously, though, at this point (early, despite my age) in my photography "career," I'm learning how to use the camera and hopefully developing my eye at the same time. Unlike the artist, I'm not ready to reject eye candy (ugh, that term again) -- at least until I'm able to produce it myself. Then I can reject it with confidence.
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 09:33:12 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by e301:
Originally posted by LanndonKane:
Bah, all these rants are started by people who wish they were good enough to excel in commercial photography. |
Lartigue always had an interesting point: that the best photographers are usually the amateurs - they don't have to worry about sales and mass approval. |
Which reminds me, I really need to read album of a century. I think it is hard to be truly original and commercial, there's only really a market for reinvention of what's gone before. Someone has to blaze the commercially unacceptable trail for long enough before everyone starts copying it. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 09:33:29 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by citymars:
I've noticed my tolerance for contrivance has grown since joining DPC, perhaps because of repeated exposure. |
Interesting. My tolerance has gone down! I am much more critical of images now, and demand more originality, now that I've seen so many "tricks of the trade." |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 11:29:52 AM · #21 |
Infrared does suck...
Great article thanks for posting it. I'm sure I'll read it over and over for some time.
I have a good friend Cecil Taylor (famous Jazz dude) and he says to avoid the patterns of sameness (refering to himself) you have to stay away from others work...that, within reason. Almost immmpossible to do but if you get involved in straight immitation you're doomed.
Message edited by author 2008-03-11 11:49:39. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 11:41:33 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Infrared does suck...
Great article thanks for posting it. I'm sure I'll read it over and over for some time.
I have a good friend Cecil Taylor (famous Jazz dude) and he says to avoid the patterns of sameness (refering to himself) you have to stay from others work...within reason. Almost immmpossible to do but if you get involved in immitation you're doomed. |
No, no, no. I say imitate away. If you admire something to the point of restlessness, practice it, exhaust it. The more thoroughly you do, the sooner it'll be done with. And, eventually,
the various modes of imitation you go through may well combine and assemble an integer. Just, in the interim, have the decency to conceal the loot with some care and skill or acknowledge the debt outright. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 12:07:29 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Infrared does suck...
Great article thanks for posting it. I'm sure I'll read it over and over for some time.
I have a good friend Cecil Taylor (famous Jazz dude) and he says to avoid the patterns of sameness (refering to himself) you have to stay from others work...within reason. Almost immmpossible to do but if you get involved in immitation you're doomed. |
No, no, no. I say imitate away. If you admire something to the point of restlessness, practice it, exhaust it. The more thoroughly you do, the sooner it'll be done with. |
I agree. The trick is to not fall into patterns, mechanics or fixed ways of thinking that you can't shake.
For example, as a guitarist it's sometimes smart to put down the guitar for a period of time in an effort to un-learn. Clean the slate. I'd say understanding that concept in itself is almost enough. If you get too involved in immitation...playing well rehearsed lines, you run the risk of sounding like a wedding band guitarist Or the photographic equivalent.
I used Cecil as an example of someone who's been critically regarded as an original and in that light his approach is valid, maybe not for everyone, of course. I've heard that a lot in musical circles and I think it makes some sense, keeping in mind all those guys do listen to everything but they know when to step away, sever ties and do their own thing.
Message edited by author 2008-03-11 13:22:41. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 12:15:34 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Most pictures aren't pictures, they're imitations of pictures. |
"One must imitate before one masters."
-- Someone intelligent |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 02:24:24 PM · #25 |
The idea of emulating others is not new and not bad.
Piccasso, in his earlier years, emulated many of the great masters that preceded him only to go on and develop his own unique style. Its a form of creative evolution.
I myself found early inspiration in the photographers, Margaret Bourke-White (photojournalism), Ansel Adams (landscape) and Peter Gowland (glamour). Nothing wrong with striving for the greats. Just don't copy their style(s) indefinitely. Use them and evolve your own style from that point onward.
Message edited by author 2008-03-11 14:27:05. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 05:19:13 PM EDT.
