| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/20/2002 01:55:33 PM · #26 |
| Looks like Hokie is right. Out of the hundreds or thousands of members here there were 5 involved in AA1, 9 in AA2, 11 in AA3 and so far 5 in AA4. Many are the same across the 4. Oh well, I think I'll take the path less traveled . . . |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 02:34:45 PM · #27 |
| I guess I could talk about those of us reading and learning being just as involved as those waffling, but I'll bite my tongue. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 02:59:27 PM · #28 |
Personally I haven't posted anything to these threads because I've had nothing to say. I have learned from them and I feel that is participation. But for me personally, "technical skills" is still where I'm trying to improve... "Artistic Vision" is going to be a life journey for a number cruncher like myself and I don't feel I could add much here...
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 03:51:24 PM · #29 |
I've been reading but not posting to the AA threads because I haven't had time to compose something relevant and readable.
I think lisae and hokie are both correct -- one reason I put off voting until late in the week is that's when my schedule allows me enough TIME to look at the images for as long as it takes to figure out how I FEEL about them, and WHY.
Thanks for starting these threads -- they are superb. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 04:07:34 PM · #30 |
jakking - Silence implies agreement. I find that I learn more by doing than reading. How long will Lisae continue to produce these threads if no one interacts with her? There ain't no use in talk'n if there ain't nobody list'n.
myqyl - Shouldn't artistic vision and technical skill go hand in hand? What good is a technically correct photo if it has nothing to say? I concede that artistic vision is useless without technical skill since what good is having something to say without being able to say it. Either way, one is no good without the other. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 04:19:40 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by Seeker:
jakking - Silence implies agreement
Utter and complete nonsense.
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/20/2002 4:19:45 PM. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 05:11:51 PM · #32 |
Thank you for proving my point.
While I'm sure we can entertain others reading this forum by trading barbs and witticisms I'd like to suggest we return the thread to the appreciation of art. I'll respect your opinion if you respect mine. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 05:33:57 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by jakking:
Originally posted by Seeker:
[i]jakking - Silence implies agreement
Utter and complete nonsense.
[/i]
Que Tacit Consentis (sp?)
It's on our voter registration form. If you can't believe our government, who can you believe?
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/20/2002 5:32:38 PM. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 05:59:16 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Seeker:
myqyl - Shouldn't artistic vision and technical skill go hand in hand? What good is a technically correct photo if it has nothing to say? I concede that artistic vision is useless without technical skill since what good is having something to say without being able to say it. Either way, one is no good without the other.
I agree, but this is my problem... I've acquired much of the technical skills, but my artistic vision is limited at best. "Learning" artistic vision is not nearly as easy as 'learning' technical skills, but it's what I'm working on. It is, btw, why I've enjoyed these threads...
I would, however, disagree that 'artistic vision' is the same as 'having something to say'... I'm not sure where you are coming from here...
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/20/2002 6:24:41 PM. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 08:27:34 PM · #35 |
I find (I believe) that artistic vision involves the artist trying to communicate a message, belief, world view, whatever through his/her medium to their audience. Anytime I have ever pointed out that perhaps the art is an end rather than the means to an end I've been proven wrong. It is almost like the artist is leading his audience to locate something without actually giving it to them. I've found that when I work for something I tend to appreciate it more. A difficult problem solved, an obstacle overcome, the light coming on when something finally clicks are part of this discovery process. Searching for the message or meaning in an art piece would seem rather futile if there was nothing to find or understand. It sometimes leads us places we would not necessarily go.
How about you? What does artistic vision mean to you? Your post sounds as if you find it difficult to either express or understand. I ask as a means to add yet another point of view to those I presently have. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 10:15:17 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Seeker:
How about you? What does artistic vision mean to you? Your post sounds as if you find it difficult to either express or understand. I ask as a means to add yet another point of view to those I presently have.
Good question :) Actually your answer to it has me questioning my own :)
I guess I don't see 'artistic vision' as what an artist says so much as in how it's said... And I guess it relates back to how it is heard as well...
I think I have a pretty good handle on focus, dof, lighting (ok, maybe not lighting yet), and composition... I even have things I feel VERY strongly about that I try to say... But maybe I'm saying them too bluntly... Just blurting it out... Maybe Art is how you hide the message, to make the viewer want to find it? The photo that began this thread is a good example... I am still revisiting this shot every so often to see if I can find the message... A lot of messages are flirting with me on the edge of conscious thought (Lord, I can't believe I just said that... I sound like a grad student I once dated...) but I never seem to make the connection... Maybe what makes this art is that the message is whispered instead of shouted? So the viewer has to TRY to hear it?
Sheesh, I just re-read this post and I only understand half of what I said... Hey! WAIT a second!!! That means this post is ART?!?
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 11:00:33 PM · #37 |
Interesting response, thanks for giving me something else to drop in the broth.
The "Lacking in creativity maybe?" thread is also dealing with some similar issues to what we've been discussing. It has a few opinions on "art". There was a post dealing with Bernard Shaw's technically superiour but artisticly void photos. Geeze, that guy's evaluation of Shaw's photos was brutal. I hope no one ever regards my photos as better left as trees.
I also followed the link on the tutorial pages "Composition, A Primer on Positive and Negative Space" that was great. It filled in a couple of holes for me. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 11:05:36 PM · #38 |
Wow, a lot of discussion while I was asleep :).
Seeker - I don't mind if people just read and don't reply. I do that too on a lot of critique threads here, and I know why people do it. I've mostly been writing these because writing down my thoughts about something to explain them to other people forces me to do something I wouldn't normally do... it's hard to describe though... I think it's about following through each train of thought until I get to the end of it rather than just skipping from one thing to the next. That's why I keep trying to encourage other people to post some too! |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 11:47:37 PM · #39 |
Seeker, your philosophy of art is one of the key threads binding the history of western art. I know it well and hold it dear.
The history of art photography, however, never really caught my attention. Mostly I became aware that photo could be art when that craft interacted with an artist paintings, sculture etc.
My point is that in all my art training photography played a stepsister's role. Not always fully accepted as being a medium of .. shell we say 'devine inspiration'. Just a magic box that records reality imperfectly. Art photographers have had over a century now to prove that notion wrong and the world of digital manipulation makes the medium access-able. Yet it is my impression that for many photography is a craft, a skill, a hobby --- not yet maybe never an art. Maybe they think art is for intellectuals and Bohemian.
Anyway, it does not surprise me that so many shy away from these art threads. I have been participating here for 3 months now. The focus of this site is in mastering their tools and seeing who can come up with the best, cleaver, beautiful, whatever, visualization of a given topic. I can not tell you what percentage of the 300 or so active members are also consciously seeking to create ART. with meaning, or a message.
Many do seek art expression and I think most of them participate in the forums. I myself agree with the communication ideal that communication doesn't happen without feedback.
Ok back to your question. My whole purpose in being here is to learn what makes a good photo. I am trying to understand it the way I understand paintings and drawings; realistic and abstract. Of course I am also trying to learn to make good photos too. Every now and then, like in Lisae's art threads I get to speak in art terms I was taught at my mother's knees (literally). But mostly I am learning a new language. I thought focus would be obvious but it's not always so. I still struggle with grain, when is it good, when bad, how to avoid or make happen. Depth of field was something I created in drawings unconsciously, it can not be ignored here. and so on.
I am reminded of art school. I created no works of art in life drawing classes.
Well I have rambled on long enough and I will not know if I have said anything unless someone responds (feedback Ya-know.)
Heehee, figured out how to use a spell checker. morning all
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/21/2002 3:21:01 AM. |
|
|
|
09/21/2002 04:08:40 AM · #40 |
I read through this link and starting from a piece of art, we started discussing why we are discussing this and how it helps in improvising, and then why many of us are not discussing and perhaps an important part of the discussion is regarding time- why western culture does/ doesnot allow enough time to perceive somethingthat ia not so impactful in the first 2 seconds.
I agree to some and I dont agree to a lot. I feel that it is not always necessary to think... or think about how you feel. Best appreciation of nature (say a beautiful sun set) comes in when it is beyond appreciation. No words. No thoughts.
Many time we give ratings at an intuitive level and many a time we praise just for the heck of praising (also in our daily lives).
So where are we heading? Are we talking about truth in our personal lives that comes out as expression in our pictures or are we talking about the speed in our superficial (superficial because nature did not gave us Concords to fly) lives that allow us to analyse (in less than 2 seconds) from a window, a creation of someone, that has been done keeping the audiance in mind??
Can art appreciation be without literal analysis?
|
|
|
|
09/21/2002 09:45:30 AM · #41 |
I hope so. The picture I entered for next week has no Meaning.
It's just a capture, as they say. A moment in time of a pleasant spot nature and man made. All I did was shift my magic box around till some rules of composition had been met---click.
Is this art? |
|
|
|
09/21/2002 09:55:24 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by sanandan:
Can art appreciation be without literal analysis?
That is an individual question.
Some folks NEED to see more in a book, an image a movie or whatever to feel satisfied with the experience.
They get enjoyment from the intellectual pursuit.
Are their conclusions correct? Maybe. Maybe not.
Is it important that they are right...nope. Unless they want to force their conclusions on others who cares if they are playing with ideas.
Others just like something because they like it and don't need a deeper meaning. Are they right? Maybe. They are certainly correct if thats what they want from the experience.
You see..this is the argument that drives absolutists up the wall. Something must be categorized, rationalized and tagged for future reference or it lacks merit to them. That simply isn't true in art.
Its all relative. Truth be known. Art is mostly a form of private expression for the artist that the act of creation is often enough..the release of their creative juices. The appreciation of the final product is an experience seperate from the art..something for the audience to determine for themselves.
|
|
|
|
09/21/2002 04:40:51 PM · #43 |
Interestly put Hokie. The only absolute truth is that there is no absolute truth?
It would like to know if there is a way to contact the creator of the piece at the beginning of the thread to find out whether he had a statement or meaning or did he just photograph himself holding his medium. Is it just a picture?
I guess it's the engineer in me. If I can figure out how others are able to put "feeling" into their works (in this case photos) I'll be able to put "feeling" into my photos. It drives me up the wall that all I can presently manage are snapshots and an occasional photo.
sanandan - It's not the literal I'm after. Like Lisae pointed out if a photo "grabs" me I want to figure out why so I can either duplicate it or use it in my images.
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/21/2002 5:01:31 PM. |
|
|
|
09/21/2002 04:57:14 PM · #44 |
You know seeker....it used to be that intellectual pursuit was considered desirable and that ultimate conclusions were not considered necessary in order to enjoy the brilliance of a creation or idea.
But it seems that the technological age has brought a need to put in absolute terms all things in life. And not all things are absolute.
Religion is sorta like this. Absolute faith that you are right and willing to destroy entire cultures without absolute facts.
I am not saying that there are no answers. I am saying that it ain't math (and even math..under the proper physics can have variation).
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/21/2002 4:57:19 PM. |
|
|
|
09/21/2002 05:12:35 PM · #45 |
| Hokie - I completely agree with you. Math and Science are just another religion with its own group of adherents. The thing I'm trying to get at is what makes the photo more than a snapshot? As has been pointed out we can respond to things we don't understand. We can enjoy things we haven't analyzed. But for me to put something in any of my shots I need to know HOW and to know how I need to know WHY. We've all see shots that are "artistic". To me, and remember this is only my opinion, the thing that takes an artistic print to art is intent. Did the photographer MEAN to do that? Was he just lucky? I've got some artistic stuff but it was by accident rather than design. While it may appear that I'm leaning too much on the analysis aspect it is just an attempt to understand, for once I understand it then I can do it. |
|
|
|
09/21/2002 05:31:48 PM · #46 |
| Well then Seeker you are in exactly the right place because that's what we are all, in our own way, trying to do. |
|
|
|
09/21/2002 11:47:07 PM · #47 |
Seeker, you won't find an answer to the question of how to make an "artistic" photo rather than a "snapshot". It all depends on what you want to express. Again, that's the kind of thing that takes self-knowledge... listen to yourself, find out what you want to say, and then try and say that with your photos. Puppet10 posted a photo by Eggleston here a while ago that was just a "snapshot" of a bathroom, yet it has been shown in art galleries, and has been labelled "art" by a lot of people. There really is no definition of what makes something art, and no one will ever be able to reassure you that your photos are more "artistic" than a snapshot... it all comes from you.
Looking at other people's photos is definitely a good way to find out what you want to do though. See which ones make you the most excited, and then think about why they do that, and you'll know more about yourself that you can then use in your own artwork.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/13/2025 06:22:06 PM EDT.
