• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Can't take it anymore

BWGirl said:
Confound it, Eric!!! Tony has told us... it's an OTTER...as in "I otter go take pictures of prairie dogs".
Click to expand...
Jeanette Otterwise how would we know you've been out and know the difference ??
 
Pull the otter one...
 
Helen B said:
.....I decided to just stop posting / remove work that was too far from the forum norm.
Click to expand...
Conformist! (at APUG's loss).



John.

p.s. For the record Lord of the Ring was NOT filmed in NZ.
 
 
Annette,

Getting serious for the moment I agree that not all of us are artist and this is an analog photography site not an art site.

Also it's our own work which we all enjoy for a variety of our own reasons. There is absolutely NO reason to step outside the comfort zone if we don't wish to and no-one has the right to tell us to.

The "redundant non-artist photographers" belong where they always have and that is as part of the photographic community. The definition of photography (loosely) is drawing or painting with light .... nowhere does it say that it has to be artistic, original, professional or uncomfortable.

Keep shooting what you want - the way you want - with what you want ..... IT IS YOUR PHOTOGRAPHY and never let anyone tell you any different.

Tony
 
Tony,

Thank you for the kind remarks.

If I can be this cranky after spending only 2 hours on the college campus today, can you imagine what I'm going to be like in January when I'm in classes 3 or 4 days out of the week?

 
anyte said:
Tony,

Thank you for the kind remarks.

If I can be this cranky after spending only 2 hours on the college campus today, can you imagine what I'm going to be like in January when I'm in classes 3 or 4 days out of the week?

Click to expand...
Makes a mental .... (no a written) reminder to get a thicker plate tin hat for January
 
Last edited by a moderator:
EricR said:
Oh, ya, just to clarify things, the penquin is in the garter belt not me. I'm in a real nice teddy thing.
Click to expand...

Ahhhhhh! (claws his eyes out)

Make the image stop. Please!!!!
 
I dunno, the naked-chick-on-the-rocks jobs are pretty f'n tiresome...but.........

.....as a good friend of mine said yesterday.............

...."oh my god he's takin another f'n picture of a building".......

If someone has a real passion for a certain subject this thread certainly won't dissuade them"

Matt
 
Grace:

I don't agree with you, but I'm glad you started the thread.

Look how many pages of fired up people are on here...

Some will go out and change their behavior and photograph something else. Other have defended their subjectand their style. All create photographs...and share them here. I love it!

I'm just a novice, so I too like to see variety. But I also like to see how different people treat the same subject.

So, the only thing I can suggest is to lead by example...do something different...

But remember to share it with us and to tell us beginers how you did it...
 
Looking at the galleries tonight I guess several of us have dug out pictures that maybe we wouldn't have posted here before this post. Btw if anyone wants to see pictures of copulating bugs I have to admit I have several slides from when I was photographing flowers
 
Yes Tony, and I picked up my usual quota of input too, lol! Maybe I'll get a friend to lay naked on a rock while eating a penguin...
 
Andy K said:
Yes Tony, and I picked up my usual quota of input too, lol! Maybe I'll get a friend to lay naked on a rock while eating a penguin...
Click to expand...
Andy just make sure it's a female friend, it's bedtime here (1:20am) and I'd hate to go to bed with any other picture in my head LOL
 
TPPhotog said:
Andy just make sure it's a female friend, it's bedtime here (1:20am) and I'd hate to go to bed with any other picture in my head LOL
Click to expand...
Leave that otter alone, you sicko.....
 
Hmmmmmmmmm!!!! This is a Very Good Thread. Seems like Donald and Jay had some comments a while back on this subject. At the time I did not really understand, may not now, but I think have a better understanding.

Sounds a bit like conceptual photography, not the normal stuff that is done and perhaps just a way to get everyone out of their normal, comfortable space. Personally, think everyone should do the type of photography they like - even if it digital - yeah I said the D word...will go sit in the corner later. .

For some of us, we are content to continue the path we are on, for others there is a need to expand to see in new ways. Have seen some very good work from people doing this type of work. Nudes are not one of my things, but have seen some really well done work - with lighting that makes you look for a while before you see it is a nude. Have a personal project involving churches as the subject - why? because it interest me - seems like a good enough reason, heck any personal project that someone does is good enough reason in itself.

So, while I do agree that there are many tired images that get reproduced, they are only tired to someone that has already done them, or is not interested in the subject to begin with. I like to shot doors and windows...my wife is tired of them, so it's a standing joke in our house whenever we see a photo of a door or window. .

Most of all compare the works of others in different medium, Georgia O was way out of step with the establishment when her first works were seen, Strand, Weston, Adams were all out of step with the work they did when first starting. No right or wrong, just different work. New ways of seeing things is always good, can't tell you how many photographs I have seen of the White House Ruins, but I like them all. Fella by the name of Michael Johnson has a photo from inside a barn, with the light coming through the cracks that I think is very good - have never seen one like it since.

So, where does all this rambling go .... heck I don't know ask the otter? In the meantime I hope everyone will get out burn some film and have 'Good Light'. After all if we love what we do, we should always want to go out and 'see'.

That's what the otter told me.....
 
Did I miss something? I hadn't realized that it was a requirement that everyone here MUST post only their work that was NOT repetitive, "boring", oft-done. Let's see ... we would exclude Ansel Adams (What? another landscape?); Edward Weston (What, another pepper/ nude/ smokestack?); Man Ray (How much solarization do you think we can "stand"?) ... need I continue?

I for another, am not "connected" to some of the images in the "Galleries" ... where am I guaranteed that I will be? I'm not fascinated, and I'm bored by, some of the images in the Museum of Fine Arts, here in Boston, or MOCA, or MOMA .... but what is the point? Are we - CAN we - reasonably expect that every image we experience - in any venue - is going to be exciting and inspirational?

Let's "bend" a bit and go along for a while ... what images DO fit the criteria? What am I *supposed*- or allowed -to post?

Now, here you go, a weird, strange, foreign opinion, "Out of the Box": I say we are ALL "Artists" here, without exception. I don't think it is even our choice!!!

Could it be that someone else's definition of "artist" is different than mine? What *is* yours? - that you say you are NOT? Let's compare.

Before you challenge me to go first, I will:

I start with a raw undefined, blank "page" and when I am done, I have an image that was not there before - one that represents something of my inner passion/s, my pre-conditioning, my view of the world. That is "being an artist" - to me.

....And youse guys???

BTW ... When I express praise of some images, I have no desire to lie - I do that because that is what I honestly think of them. If I choose NOT to make a critically negative remark about a photograph I think sucks, I will do that too - for whatever reason. That is *MY* choice -and no one elses.
 
Ed Sukach said:
Could it be that someone else's definition of "artist" is different than mine? What *is* yours? - that you say you are NOT? Let's compare.
Click to expand...

Agreed. For me my desire is to illustrate the beauty of the natural world as I see it, in a way that is pleasing. If you were to come to my desk you would see that I have photographs and post cards from all over the world; all landscapes, because that is what drives me.

However, I really enjoy looking at the work of other people, like mrcallow (his street photography is outstanding, IMO), because their images speak to me, and I know that I will never have same passion that they have for what they do.
 
roteague said:
However, I really enjoy looking at the work of other people, like mrcallow (his street photography is outstanding, IMO), because their images speak to me, and I know that I will never have same passion that they have for what they do.
Click to expand...

Geez 'o pete mister I'm gunna blush.
 
I'm can't shoot another fish type image, sushi to popular and they are always eat the props. I guess I'll never get out of the box!
 

Attachments

  • Fen Fen 2.jpg
    36.4 KB · Views: 218
There is sushi and then there is sushi. Would a picture of sushi in Hawaii made with Spam be a different image? Just a question as I don't have one to post, but perhaps Roteague could do one for us in early morning light with Velvia? Perhaps an image of a Spam sculpture of a naked man with large pecs in a landscape would be better?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register