Are you conceited?

[ChristopherCoy]

One of the things that I often struggle with is the feeling of being conceited, vain, or narcissistic when it comes to my art. It's usually felt most when I'm looking at materials or equipment. I mean, who am I, and why do I think any of my art is good enough to last 50 years, so why should I be concerned with the cost of something based on archivability? And more importantly, why would I care whether my art is around in 50 years or more since artwork is rarely appreciated when an artist is living anyway. To me, and regarding myself only, it feels like caring whether my art is around in 50 years or more makes me a narcissus.

I'm not quite sure where I want to go with this, but I'm wondering what everyone else's take on things are. Is this something that all artists feel? Or have felt at one time or another?

 

[MattKing]

There is no conceit in wanting to ensure that the results of our labours have the chance to hang around for a while.
It always takes a while to decide whether I'm happy with something, or whether I should replace it.
If something resonates with me, and gives me satisfaction, I want to give it a chance to grow on me further. Using good technique and materials gives it a chance to do so.

 

[removed account4]

my gear is old and will not last forever
and I don't expect anything but the work I submit to archives and libraries to last a long time
my "artwork" whatever that is, I don't expect to be around forever and it doesnt'matter to me
I have been making ephemeral photographs -- un developed , unfixed for almost a decade
most of them I have thrown away because they have turned grey.
im ok with that, I don't expect to live forever either

 

[mshchem]

I grew up with a father who was a perfectionist with most things. I learned from my Dad, as we made 4x5 prints on DW Medalist. I took the Kodak Darkroom Dataguides and other EK literature as Gospel. I counted how many rolls of film went through our quart bottle of Microdol-X, used 2 bath fixing for prints, hypo clearing agent.

When I made the leap of faith to color printing within a year I had a Kodak model 11 machine with a heater. People joked about me having to stand in the dark. I still use that machine, it's the only machine that guarantees perfectly repeatable agitation, temperature, and fresh 1 shot chemistry every time.

That doesn't make me conceited. But I take joy when I look at prints I made nearly 50 years ago and they still haven't changed.

My father always used Kodak's processing lab in Chicago to process his slides today they look great.

In the New Testament the phrase "he speaks with authority" is used. Kodak, Agfa, Ilford always had good products, processes, and procedures.

There's no short cut to doing things right.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

my gear is old and will not last forever
and I don't expect anything but the work I submit to archives and libraries to last a long time

See, I couldn’t even do that at this point because I’d think “who am I to think the library would even want my stuff?” Submitting my stuff would make me think I was just trying to stroke my own ego.

 

[Barry S]

Archival processing used to be taught as an integral part of the photographic process. As with all human endeavors, people will cut corners or do the minimum--often for good reasons. In the age of chemical photography, some (most?) work was ephemeral. The small sliver of photographers working as artists were generally more concerned with archival properties, and the same reasons apply today. Some small fraction of our work will survive as purchases, gifts, or family heirlooms, and it would be good for those prints to survive. Appreciation can often skip generations. How thankful we are for the artists and craftspeople that made objects to last over centuries.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

There's nothing wrong with atta boys. We all need them. We wouldn't be human otherwise. But we all have value whether we shoot like sh!t or Ansel Adams. God doesn't make junk. While I'm proud of my work and want atta boys too, it's best when I don't focus on myself. I get a lot of joy when I give things away. I haven't; done this in a while, giving away one of my photos, to a friend or relative. In a large frame nicely printed. It's time I did it again. Thanks for reminding me. Being appreciated and seeing someone being happy with my gift is worth more than any atta boy.

This reminds me. I copied a bunch of old pictures that will mean something for my nephew if and when he gets them. It's been sitting on my desk for months and months going nowhere. Time to act. Thanks for reminding me.

 

[foc]

I don't think I am conceited but I built a successful photo business, studio and minilab over a 35 year period and I am very proud of that.

Did I produce any works of art? No
Were my images any good? Well the clients kept coming back.
Did I enjoy it? I sure did.
Did I make any money? Yep.
Did I get a big head? No because I was only as good as my last client's work and I am Irish so you will never be allowed to get notions about yourself ! ! !
I was very lucky to do something I loved and get paid for it.

 

[awty]

I thought that was a prerequisite for being an artist, that and being half crazy

 

[Vaughn]

If one really messes up and makes a incredible print -- nice to know it might last long enough to enjoy it. I was taught to take an image all the way to a mounted print...universities tended to be that way before students could not afford the matboard. It completes the work and makes a statement that it is the best I can do and I reconize it. Allows me to put it on the wall and see how it ages. Then I try to make a better photograph, as that is a measure I use to keep track of how well I am seeing.

If one is worrying about being narcissistic, they aren't.

 

[fgorga]

I make photographs because I am driven to create... I cannot not do it. I have no clue if any of my photographs rise to the level of art. That is really for others to decide. So, at this level there is no conceit.

Many, including myself, are perfectly happy with the making and have little need to go any farther. There is nothing wrong with that.

Showing one's work beyond a small circle of close friends and family does require at least a modicum of ego... enough to say, at least, "I'm proud of what I have made and hope that it might be of use to others." Again, there is nothing wrong with that.

Personally, I show work regularly in a couple of venues including our local small town library and less frequently in a few other places. I do this because I think the work is interesting and hope that it might bring some pleasure to others. Maybe there is some conceit in that, but I think it minimal.

I am a true amateur when it comes to photography.... I do it simply because I love to do it. I am certainly not trying to make a living at it. I do, on occasion sell a print here or there and I do have a few prints in the collection of one museum. The world expects prints like these to be made to the highest archival standards possible and so I make all of my final prints that way... I hope! Since one never knows where a print will end up, why not make them all to the highest standard? It really does not require more than a bit of extra effort and, in the grand scheme of things, a very little extra expense.

As for what happens to my photographs after I die... I simply don't care. I won't be around to influence the outcome, so it doesn't matter to me. I certainly don't have any expectations that my work will end up anywhere other than the dumpster. If my work ends up elsewhere that is fine by me, but this is really of no concern to me.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

I’m not insisting that the questions is solely about archivability, that was just what came to mind in my original post. But even something as simple as putting an image in the forum gallery often causes me to question myself. “Who’s going to want to see this?” And “why do I think this work is good enough TO show anyone, I’m not someone.”

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Stop beating yourself up.

 

[BobD]

Such a question would never occur to a person who was really conceited.

 

[gone]

I can't possibly be conceited. Conceit is a fault, and I don't have any...:>]

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Such a question would never occur to a person who was really conceited.

And this is what I was thinking. If you're thinking about it, then you're probably not conceited, or a narcissist. The only thing I think about is the need of negatives, prints, and gear I'll leave behind for my kids to have to deal with, after I'm done...

 

[Pieter12]

I try to make my photos to the best of my ability. That includes making prints that last. Whether they have any value to anyone beyond me is not mine to decide.

 

[DWThomas]

I seem to recall an old commercial years back ...

"JUST DO IT!"

 

[MattKing]

Stop beating yourself up.

+1

 

[removed account4]

See, I couldn’t even do that at this point because I’d think “who am I to think the library would even want my stuff?” Submitting my stuff would make me think I was just trying to stroke my own ego.

in that case im an egoist ... you have to be to survive, especially if it is your job and you are self employed.
but my personal work is exactly the opposite .. YMMV

 

[MattKing]

But even something as simple as putting an image in the forum gallery often causes me to question myself. “Who’s going to want to see this?” And “why do I think this work is good enough TO show anyone, I’m not someone.”

Of course you are someone.
You just might not be SOMEONE!
In some ways, this relates to some of your comments about Magnum, on another thread.
You don't have to be Adams, or Avedon, or Mapplethorpe or Arbus to have photographs that are interesting or incredibly good or even flawed but really worth sharing.
Have you never heard a musical artist who wasn't perfect, or groundbreaking, but still entertaining and eminently worth listening to?
And have you never looked at someone's vacation/birthday party/zoo visit photos and just enjoyed them and the people who shared them?
Perfection and groundbreaking work might very well be within your capabilities. But a really good photo of a dog (or a 6 foot alligator) is really worth sharing.

 

[fgorga]

Stop beating yourself up.

Another +1 for this.

 

[eddie]

I think the issues you've shared over the last few weeks may be paralyzing your artistic growth. You're overthinking. Take a good photograph this weekend. Next week, do the same.

 

[awty]

I’m not insisting that the questions is solely about archivability, that was just what came to mind in my original post. But even something as simple as putting an image in the forum gallery often causes me to question myself. “Who’s going to want to see this?” And “why do I think this work is good enough TO show anyone, I’m not someone.”

Thats never stopped me.
Its important to me to make things, share them and encourage others to do so. Thats it, doesn't mater if its art or not.
You should constantly challenge yourself and perceptions, throw what you have out there and pick up the pieces afterwards, dust yourself off and do it again. The deeper you go the better you'll be.
I often do self portraiture as I feel it is the most self revealing I can be, sometimes I'm in the shot sometimes im not.

 

[tballphoto]

Conceited,,,, well why are you shooting photographs? for yourself or for someone else?