fame

[tballphoto]

Driving away a member of the first family of photography seems counterproductive for a photography website.

That was posted in a different post by a different member. It hit me in a way that i could not reply to in that thread.


What makes some people go fanatical about any photographer in particular, so many times simply because the person in question is merely related to a famous photographer? Or even worse, simply based upon one single photograph?

You may make a retort with "why the fame of each generation of chippendale chair maker" but that is easily rebutted with "each generation spent decades learning the craft from the previous and expanding upon it in their own manner".

 

[btaylor]

Driving away a member of the first family of photography seems counterproductive for a photography website

You mean Kim Weston. I certainly agree with you, what in the world would motivate some people to do that? Not only is it incredibly rude, it makes no sense to me at all. It just seems mean.

 

[tballphoto]

You mean Kim Weston. I certainly agree with you, what in the world would motivate some people to do that? Not only is it incredibly rude, it makes no sense to me at all. It just seems mean.

I assume you thought i was agreeing with the person i was qouting from, Im not. Sure it is bad to drive away people who want to make photographs, and to enjoy photography. But do we really, truly, need to create a system in which a person can expect fame and power simply by beign the child of a famous photographer?

Look at Paris Hilton, extremely rich, and for most of the 2000 to 2011 era, completely famous adn influential for merely being a billionaires child. Do we really want that?

 

[radiant]

We need idols and gods.

It is much easier to bow to known direction compared to searching for new god from the forest.

 

[tballphoto]

We need idols and gods.

It is much easier to bow to known direction compared to searching for new god from the forest.

Even when said god and idol havent actually done a thing to deserve such accolades?

 

[radiant]

Even when said god and idol havent actually done a thing to deserve such accolades?

Which one you choose: buy a wooden table from shop or first grow the tree from seed?

We humans are lazy as hell. Merit is secondary. We just need someone on the podium.

 

[tballphoto]

Which one you choose: buy a wooden table from shop or first grow the tree from seed?

We humans are lazy as hell. Merit is secondary. We just need someone on the podium.

When one is the only man in the room with a gun, he becomes king. When a king decides to use the gun to enforce his demands, he becomes a god by default.

So in essence, anyone with an instagram feed is worthy of being heralded as a living king of photography? Even if they cannot surpass the quality of a jc penny catalog or the grumpy cat calenders?

 

[radiant]

When one is the only man in the room with a gun, he becomes king. When a king decides to use the gun to enforce his demands, he becomes a god by default.

So in essence, anyone with an instagram feed is worthy of being heralded as a living king of photography? Even if they cannot surpass the quality of a jc penny catalog or the grumpy cat calenders?

I cannot understand the logic here.

Not anyone, but someone. We pick someone from any media, may it be Instagram or anything else. However I would argue that the quality (mostly entertainment) is much higher on social media gods. On social media The Algorithm helps in picking the god. The principle is same however; whatever works.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I assume you thought i was agreeing with the person i was qouting from, Im not. Sure it is bad to drive away people who want to make photographs, and to enjoy photography. But do we really, truly, need to create a system in which a person can expect fame and power simply by beign the child of a famous photographer?

Look at Paris Hilton, extremely rich, and for most of the 2000 to 2011 era, completely famous adn influential for merely being a billionaires child. Do we really want that?

Your post reeks of envy. The Weston family has certainly had a leg up. That does not negate the work they did to achieve their status as successful photographers. In my opinion they have earned their place. You seem to view it as they simply said "I'm a Weston" and the images magically appeared. I believe it may be harder to be the child of a famous artist and choose to follow them in the work. Standing in that giant shadow must make the work harder. It's not as if they were producing someone else's work and profiting.

 

[removedacct1]

Your post reeks of envy. The Weston family has certainly had a leg up. That does not negate the work they did to achieve their status as successful photographers.

Imagine suggesting that any of the Westons achieved a degree of recognition simply because they are offspring of Edward Weston, as if they simply inherited their fame, like some kind of empty headed Hollywood celebrity who is "famous for being famous". How petty.

I'm taking note of the fact that "sturmovik' joined Photrio three days ago and has generated 55 posts already, the majority of which are decidedly negative and/or sour in attitude. I can see this person is going to be a valued contributor to the community.

 

[eddie]

Since you're quoting me, I'll respond.
I think many members are interested in the history of photography, not just in creating our own. Having someone who lived it, and has much to contribute to the site, should be seen as an incredible opportunity for us all. We should be welcoming.
I also feel the same about driving away less famous members of our community. In the time I've been here, many talented and knowledgeable image makers have decided this site is no longer worth their participation. I keep in touch with some of them, so I know it isn't because they've lost interest in photography.

 

[AgX]

Well, I even never heard of The first Family of Photography.

 

[eddie]

Well, I even never heard of The first Family of Photography.

While I've heard it before, I don't think of it as an "official" designation. Still, can you name a family with the generational impact on photography the Westons have had?

 

[gone]

This is the first I've heard of any of this so I'm not involved, but this being a public internet forum..........It is what it is. People have had these issues ever since the first forum began simply because they're open to anyone.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Well, there are advantages of being a child of a successful person in art or business. You might have their genes to do as well, even better. Plus you get the advantage of having a great teacher. Learning the pitfalls and the hidden paths of success from a parent improves your chances a lot. So I wouldn't discount the skills or talent of offspirng.

 

[Arthurwg]

[QUOTE="sturmovik, post: 2498778, member: 98011"
Look at Paris Hilton, extremely rich, and for most of the 2000 to 2011 era, completely famous adn influential for merely being a billionaires child. Do we really want that?[/QUOTE]


I can't follow th logic in this thread. But in the case of Paris Hilton it helps if you are stunningly beautiful.

 

[AgX]

While I've heard it before, I don't think of it as an "official" designation. Still, can you name a family with the generational impact on photography the Westons have had?

My point is that unless reading several follow up posts I had not the slightest idea what this thread is about, and still I am confused.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I like to learn something from everyone. One day it was about to double knot a very long shoe lace and the five or six year old came running up shouting "No, no, no!" He bent over and took the very long bows and instead of double knotting them, he used them as though each was a shoe lace and he tied a bow with them. It was a nice tight compact package that stayed together and did not flop around. I made sure that I took the time with him to thank him and tell him that he had taught me valuable lessons:

1. a solution to my problem and
   
2. that someone much younger than me can always teach me something important.

 

[MattKing]

If you are equating the fame enjoyed by Paris Hilton with any fame enjoyed by the surviving Weston family photographers, you aren't well versed in the varieties of fame.
Kim Weston is a fine photographer in his own right, as well as being a worthy protector of the photographic values espoused by his grandfather, father and uncle.
And while I am absolutely sure that being a member of that family has lots of advantages in the photographic world, I'm equally sure that it could also bring with it some tremendous and incredibly unfair burdens of expectation.
The OP is currently struggling mightily with getting up to speed in a printing darkroom. It is superbly ironic that what the OP lacks most in those endeavours is someone nearby who could show him the basics of what to do and how to do it.
That, more than anything, is the advantage that people like Kim Weston had/have and others often lack.
That and access to a surrounding world of inspiration.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Sadly, this site has a history of driving people away...

 

[Sirius Glass]

While Kim Weston had the advantages of a great coach and mentor, he had to work much harder than the rest of us to get noticed in his own right. He deserved the respect that he has earned.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Sadly, this site has a history of driving people away...

It only takes a few self proclaimed experts to insult people and drive them away from here. The moderators work hard to stop them in the act, but it helps if each of use would reach for the Report Button when we see it happening to stop it sooner.

 

[Truzi]

I don't think it is fame, per se. It is natural for people to seek out those connected with a person they admire, especially if that person has passed. They want information about that person. If those with a connection are also active or knowledgeable in the field, and even notable, all the better. The ability to actually interact with them in-person, like on a BBS, can be wonderful. It's Just human nature, really.

We should remember that, like all of us, they are their own people, and would likely prefer to stand on their own merits, not merely be a connection to the past.
We owe a debt of gratitude to the family/connected people for their willingness to answer such questions.

I'm here for technical reasons, so am not really into any individual photographer. There are people in other areas of my interests I'd love to talk to if given the chance, like the widower of James Randi. I'd like to think I'd not make him feel like nothing more than a walking encyclopedia. I think some people here are thrilled to talk to a Weston, and forget the whole "human being" aspect.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

It only takes a few self proclaimed experts to insult people and drive them away from here. The moderators work hard to stop them in the act, but it helps if each of use would reach for the Report Button when we see it happening to stop it sooner.

OK. It's time for me to come clean. I'm really the grand nephew of Ansel Adams. I've stayed incognito to avoid insults.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Fame itself is a derivative of a number of things that need to take place before it can be characterized as such. I have no problem with fame and implied role it plays in non-famed minds to build from, get inspired by, perhaps become also successful from following it.

The problem I DO have with fame is how it can, by itself, easily distort purported quality behind it. So it is important to watch out and not fall into the fame trap.