Commercialism - and the dirty people who practice it

[Michael A. Smith]

Before I get attacked again I thought I should clarify. I wrote, "I do not know one photographer working as an artist who ever makes a photograph just to make money. I'm not alone here."

I should have written. "I do not know one photographer working as an artist who ever makes a photograph as art for themselves who makes it just to make money. I'm not alone here."

Many photographers who work primarily as artists also do commercial photographs. And as I wrote above, I welcome every opportunity that comes my way.

 

[Cheryl Jacobs]

It seems that Michael (Blansky) has taken an interpretation that someone said that commercialism was wrong for that particular person as a blanket indictment of commercial photography in total. I did not gather that from what anyone said in any manner.

Hmm, well, I certainly hear that a lot and can therefore understand where Michael was coming from. Personally, I saw nothing offensive about his post. I'm guessing he's grinning right about now at seeing several people jump to the defense/offense (depending on where you're standing.)

Can't deny the guy can write.

 

[127]

Some might sell themselves taking photographs.

The alternative is to sell yourself making burgers, or answering phones for a fraction of the reward.

Everyone sells something of themselves in exchange for something else they want (like food and a roof over their heads). Those who work 6 days a week slaving on minimum wage are selling far more of themselves than someone who does something they love. If you can work as a photographer for someone else two days a week, and have five days to do your own thing then you're doing better than most and deserve respect...

Ian

 

[Ed Sukach]

I have NO respect for paparazzi. Once again it's a character flaw. paparazzi-photography lacks style, content, and quality. Not to mention purpose. It exists merely for the sake of greed. I despise it.
.... the lines are so fuzzy that my opinion is uselss.

Last things first: NO, I disagree with the idea that your opinion is "useless". I value it - and I'll use to form some sort of framework of "you". Your opinion is certainly to be rated on an objective scale as "high" as mine. Why shouldn't it be?

Now ... Paparazzi ... In a former life, when I still had good knees and better feet...

After the "Princess Diana" tragedy, there was a panic-knee-jerk reaction directed toward ALL "Paparazzi". All of it was based on false assumptions - if anyone had ever been so engaged, the stupidity of the accusations were so obvious that it was difficult to argue against them.

One "High on the Scale Actor" was most vehemently denouncing Paparazzi. Their answer was to give him exactly what he said he wanted: they ignored him. No one to wait with a camera as he left the plane, no one to "catch" him coming out of a Night Club, or "Being Seen with ..."
It didn't take long for his PR people to react - there were numerous "leaks" and "Ooops - I didn't mean to let that information out ..." It was only after the violent attacks on them subsided, and things quieted down, that the "Pappa" once again returned, and the PR people could relax.

I know what the stereotype of Paparazzi is -- and like all Stereotypes, it is really inaccurate. The relationship is FAR more "symbiotic" than most of the RAMs would suppose it to be.

OK ... If you have a negative opinion of Paparazzi ... how do you feel about those who "do" Spot News?

Once upon a time ... There was an aspiring "Starlet", and the local guys were leaked the information that she would be walking down a certain Boardwalk, at a certain time.
The time came for the Starlet to walk, and she did - and at the proper place, "fell" out of the top of her bathing suit. Predictably, cameras clicked. She turned toward the guys and started her rampage ... "You guy are ..." Pappa #1 interrupted: "Damn camera screwed up - I didn't get anything." Papa #2 -"So did mine. Film advance problem", #3 - nearly the same....
The Starlet went back to the starting point and retraced her steps. Astoundingly, at the *same" spot - the *same* accident happened - she fell out - again. Once more - "Camera Problem ... no photos" - etc.
Once again she retraced her steps ... fell out ... and realized that, in fact, the cameras were more reliable than she had been led to believe. No rant this time ... just a lot of laughter.

 

[Donald Miller]

It seems that Michael (Blansky) has taken an interpretation that someone said that commercialism was wrong for that particular person as a blanket indictment of commercial photography in total. I did not gather that from what anyone said in any manner.

Hmm, well, I certainly hear that a lot and can therefore understand where Michael was coming from. Personally, I saw nothing offensive about his post. I'm guessing he's grinning right about now at seeing several people jump to the defense/offense (depending on where you're standing.)

Can't deny the guy can write.

Your viewpoint does not surprise me in the least. I am fully aware of the primary emphasis of your work.

 

[Francesco]

"I, and a few others here take IMAGES ( I just said that to piss people off)"

Why do you want to piss people off?

"Can't deny the guy can write."

I do not agree at all! He must write in code!

I personally think that there is an envious tone to the start of this thread - it seems like someone is trying to justify their raison d'etre. When you have to do so in writing and publicly, it speaks volumes. Show us your work and let it speak for itself.

 

[Foto Ludens]

Ed, what I meant to say by "my opinion doesn't matter" is that it reflects my prejudices. My prejudices should not be the basis for anyone else's actions/opinions. This does not go for myself alone, but for everyone else as well.

If we accept the fact that no two of us are alike, that is, accept the fact that the difference exists even if you disagree with the difference, this whole argument wouldn't exist in the first place.

And now to everyone else (read the lines below as good hearted suggestions)

Don't be pissed because people have different opinions from yours, be thankful. If everyone though like you, odds are they would act like you. Shoot & print like you. Your pictures would no longer be yours, they would be everyone else's. What would be the point of shooting, then? Self discovery is useless if you know the outcome.

 

[photomc]

Sean, for some reason this thread is going nowhere..this horse is dead....

 

[Aggie]

I bumped up an old thread of Blansky's that he did a beautiful job of writing about ansel Liebowitz. Time to get back to the fun and puruse his first attempt at creative writing for apug.

 

[Donald Miller]

Sean,

I've enjoyed all of this that I can stand. Color me gone.

Donald Miller

 

[Cheryl Jacobs]

Your viewpoint does not surprise me in the least. I am fully aware of the primary emphasis of your work.

Actually, Donald, you're not aware of the primary emphasis of my work if you believe it to be portraiture, which I have picked up in the last few months. If you took time to actually find out what the primary emphasis of my work was, you might be a bit surprised.

All the same to me, though. I've no time for people who take themselves so seriously.

- CJ

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Lighten up, folks. I think by now most people should be able to appreciate the fact that Blansky writes these missives with a certain degree of irony. If you're getting worked up about them, you've missed the point.

 

[Ed Sukach]

My prejudices should not be the basis for anyone else's actions/opinions. This does not go for myself alone, but for everyone else as well.

But what if I WANT them to be the basis for my opinion? It is entirely possible that what you have said in your opinion does have a significant effect - and I will start to think differently.

In truth, that doesn't happen frequently - but ...

What I am saying is to "Be Free" - select whatever "place" you want, for ANY reason you want.
Tell you what - I won't apologize for my opinions if you don't apologize for yours. And no one will attack - or demand a change - for anyone else's, either.

We ARE all different - AND we are all equal in importance - which is a LOT.

Not a very good way to start a Flame War, is it?

 

[bjorke]

IMO it's impossible to separate an artist selflessly devoted to their art from an artist selfishly devoted to themselves.

 

[jd callow]

IMO it's impossible to separate an artist selflessly devoted to their art from an artist selfishly devoted to themselves.

Does that work for a philosopher selflessly devoted to the persuit of truth, or the Doctor selflessly devoted to finding a cure, or a detective selflessly devoted to finding the criminal and so on or is it just artists?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Does it matter? Bad people sometimes produce good work, and good people often produce bad work.

 

[Foto Ludens]

My prejudices should not be the basis for anyone else's actions/opinions. This does not go for myself alone, but for everyone else as well.

But what if I WANT them to be the basis for my opinion? It is entirely possible that what you have said in your opinion does have a significant effect - and I will start to think differently.

Then use my prejudices at your own risk

I always put a disclaimer by my comment; I've found that it's better to be safe than sorry

 

[bjorke]

Callow, I suggest you consider the paradox inherent in the concept: "selflessly devoted to their art"

their art?

 

[jd callow]

Boy has this thread been educational. I learned that all those hundreds of hours studying 1000s of works of art across the epoch of humankind and the 10s of thousands of words written about them by what I thought were some of the greatest minds was a waste of time. The Art no better than Avedon, and the words, copious elitist quasi-intellectual masturbation.

Wow, To think whilst I was learning about a culture’s rise and fall by studying their art I could have been selflessly defending the hobbyists privilege to expose film (however imperfectly), Just like Mikey and make boatloads of money to boot.

The saddest thing I learned was what a crass waste of a life it is to be devoted to art. Here I thought I was trying to record something of significance, add some value, but all I was doing was being selfishly devoted to myself.

God I hope my wife doesn’t find out.

 

[David R Munson]

...and the words, copious elitist quasi-intellectual masturbation.

Glad I could be of service.

While I may rail against art society a fair amount, I still believe in the concept of fine art and the arts in general. There is nothing wrong with devoting one's life to art - what bothers me is the pretentious attitude and assumed superiority that comes along with it. Maybe I'm just extra-aware of it because I'm mostly involved in commercial applications of photography, but there is a definite bias against commercial work in much of the fine art community. I can understand where people are coming from sometimes, because there is some pretty worthless commercial work out there. But there's also commercial work that is every bit as valid from the standpont of fine arts as straight up "fine art" photography. It just happens to have a secondary purpose. The fact that one makes money off of an image in no way negates its artistic validity, as I see it. I remember a few years back someone relating on one of the Photo.net forums hearing an art critic on NPR criticizing a Boston art museum for having a show of Herb Ritts' work because, as far as the critic was concerned, a commercial photographer has no place in a museum of fine art. That is the sort of thing that pisses me off.

 

[Leon]

Apug really does my head in sometimes (to coin a colloquial english phrase)! It's only opinions - does it really matter? There are way bigger fish to fry.

 

[Juraj Kovacik]

If you know how badly I envy you the fact, that you can live with photo all your life. Why do you think that somebody can assume that making money by .. analysis, for example ... is better then making money by taking pictures of children or making photo for add? And if somebody DO this assumption, ask him for what he is paying for.

A life of a "weekend photographer" is usually split in two uncomplementary parts what could be fine for study of schizophrenia but what doesn't look as the best way how to find a satisfaction, regardless what your definition of satisfaction is. I really don't think there is something you have to complain about.

And btw, hockey World champion is going in Prague and I hope for Saturday's final match Slovakia against USA (tomorrow is semifinal match Slovakia - Canada). And I'm afraid that could be source of new frustration for you, Michael, because we are going to beat you. JK

 

[KenM]

And btw, hockey World champion is going in Prague and I hope for Saturday's final match Slovakia against USA (tomorrow is semifinal match Slovakia - Canada). And I'm afraid that could be source of new frustration for you, Michael, because we are going to beat you. JK

Sorry, you've got it all wrong. Canada vs USA in the final on Sunday.

I'm afraid you're the one who'll be frustrated

Cheers!

-klm (who's trying to lighten the atmosphere around here)

 

[Juraj Kovacik]

Dear Ken, hold your dreams while you can. They are going to be finished tomorrow... Canada is a nice country, how one can see on www.acanadianplace.com, but you forgot how to play a good hockey. Tomorow you will have a lesson so you can learn something...



.. only joking, hope it would be a good game... JK

 

[mark]

All this hockey talk is offensive. I do not think this site should be used to promote blood sports