Genius or insane. What do you think of this guy's work?

[Craig75]

Some of the negatives you can see emulsion sliding off the base, others are very distorted street shots. It just seems to depend on state of that specific roll and how it was processed.

And chill when speaking to me please.

 

[larfe]

This is a print I did a while ago, of my mother's school class of the 1950s.

It was printed with an intentionally damaged neg, although I did not have a negative to begin with. As you can see there is nothing that is identifiable on the frame save for a little girl's face, who happens to be the only one of the group to be dead... which is kind of spooky.

It might not be pin-fat look alike but then I'm sure he wouldn't be able to replicate mine either.

nuff said

 

[Craig75]

Thats a great print and similar (but different) to things i saw in fanzine but very different from pabaiga. Personally i dont find pabaiga look very easy to obtain at all although im open to suggestions. I have about 8 metres of 16mm "safety" film (kodak i think) with a very high base fog (takes about 2mins under enlarger to get an 8x10 as opposed to aroind 40s with new stock) and some 16x12 oriental seagul so have at me people to get a pabaiga cover shot

Lovely print tho larfe. I like that a lot.

 

[removed account4]

I don't know, John. I'm thinking about the experiment you propose and I disagree. But I do agree in principle that some non representational art is technically and creatively very challenging. I don't limit myself one way or the other. My photography is always representational, while my paintings are (currently) non representational.

im glad you don't limit yourself michael
and that you are open minded
unfortunately, a lot of people
are dismissive and it is too bad .. folks could
easily learn a thing or two about everything
from camera work, to composition to printing by looking
at and making those types of images.
btw, duct tape will leave residue on the film and you will
have to re-tape it from time to time and rubber cement won't do any good ..

 

[benjiboy]

I'm not qualified to make judgements as to a person's sanity or genius, my opinion would be worthless..

 

[faberryman]

Why so quick to judge work that doesn't conform to Pictorial Standards?

It's not a question of genius or insanity, or of conforming to pictorial standards. I look at the images and feel... meh. However, they may appeal to others. Surely a lack of affinity for someone's work should not be deemed dismissive.

 

[cliveh]

Photographic art moves through fashion and those images in the OP are typical of thousands of images produced by HE photographic students about three years ago. You don't have to follow the fashion, but it's what the vogue commands and will always be changing.

 

[removed account4]

hi cliveh

i don't think the work presented by the OP
has anything to do with what is in vogue or fashionable as "art"
its like suggesting the eerie/haunting images that depect swarms of people
at subway stations ( i cant' remember who did them but i remember them )
had something to do with fashion or in-vogue photography..
when i do things similar to what the OP presented, it is a personal thing
and has absolutely nothing to do with conforming or not conforming to
whatever norms the "art world" depects as art worthy .. i can't speak for
the person whose book is linked to.

 

[faberryman]

...those images in the OP are typical of thousands of images produced by HE photographic students about three years ago.

HE photography students?

 

[cliveh]

HE photography students?

Your point is?

 

[faberryman]

Your point is?

I have no idea what "HE photography students" are.

 

[cliveh]

In the UK it refers to Higher Education.

 

[blockend]

It's interesting work, and fits the book format very well. I don't think a gallery wall will do it any favours, but that's true of much photography. The problem is avoiding mannerism, an accusation that was once levelled at Moriyama, someone else who worked experimentally in the book form. In the end style alone is insufficient to maintain a body of work, no matter how engaging. It requires strong content to last the test of time. The content here seems quite random. I like the democratic nature of it, and its freedom, but couldn't see myself buying more than one book by such a photographer.

Stephen Gill is an example of a highly experimental photographer who works in the book form, but whose work evolves with each project.

 

[David Luttmann]

Very interesting work. Thanks for sharing the link.

 

[gr82bart]

Neither. Maybe bored?

 

[larfe]

Oldish thread

Just grabbed a copy of this from a bargain bin, 75% off. Can't say I really get the thing, also someone else has mentioned how some of the images are cut in half by the gutter of the book which kinda ruins the experience. I agree with that.

 

[larfe]

Some of the negatives you can see emulsion sliding off the base, others are very distorted street shots. It just seems to depend on state of that specific roll and how it was processed.

Where do you see the emulsion sliding off the base?

have at me people to get a pabaiga cover shot

I really don't get what special thing you see in pabaiga? is it in the tonal range or the sort of visual distortion thingy?

 

[Helge]

WRT OP

Looks like something that would have slipped under the grunge/David Carson cookie cutter shortcut to “art” twenty five years ago.

Just obviously deeply mediocre and outmoded.

 

[removed account4]

I’m not surprised to see there are some dismissive remarks aimed at this person’s work, given the oft-narrow stylistic scope of work this community produces. Dismayed, but not surprised.
I'm curious: where do you draw the line between Gem and Junk? Pinhole imagery? Photograms? Kirlian photography? X-ray images? Collage? Why so quick to judge work that doesn't conform to Pictorial Standards?



Good lord, why would anyone make stuff if the goal isn't to make money??!! (*sarcasm*)

couldn't agree more paulbarden !
i guess as it usually ends up
its a "tribal" thing ...

 

[CMoore]

I’m not surprised to see there are some dismissive remarks aimed at this person’s work, given the oft-narrow stylistic scope of work this community produces. Dismayed, but not surprised.
I'm curious: where do you draw the line between Gem and Junk? Pinhole imagery? Photograms? Kirlian photography? X-ray images? Collage? Why so quick to judge work that doesn't conform to Pictorial Standards?



Good lord, why would anyone make stuff if the goal isn't to make money??!! (*sarcasm*)

Maybe i do not understand what you are saying, but..........why would you be Dismayed or Surprised.?
There is a link to a bunch of pictures, and the OP asked if people like them or not. The title is..... Genius or Insane. Do you like this guys work.?
Perhaps i am not looking close enough, but 95% of the photos......I can't even tell what they are a picture OF.

 

[MattKing]

Perhaps i am not looking close enough, but 95% of the photos......I can't even tell what they are a picture OF.

They aren't pictures of anything (in most cases).
They are "things" - artifacts created using photographic techniques with the intention that they be perceived and experienced rather than understood.
Like much abstract art.
I don't do much abstract work, but this is sort of the same idea:

 

[CMoore]

Hey Mat -
Yeah...Right.
Abstract art (for the most part).
Created with Old/Expired Film i guess.
I was just wondering why the one or two members were surprised that Some/Many would not see the "worth" in photos like these.
Seems like yet another situation that has no "Right or Wrong" answer.

 

[Dismayed]

I think it's crap. But, then again, I really enjoyed Tom Wolfe's, "The Painted Word".

http://www.tomwolfe.com/PaintedWord.html

 

[Arthurwg]

I'm open to this kind of thing but these are mediocre at best. I wouldn't want to spend much time looking at them, and they don't really give me pleasure. Some of our members here do much better abstract or semi-abstract work, pictures that are actually very beautiful. These are not.

 

[removed account4]

I was just wondering why the one or two members were surprised that Some/Many would not see the "worth" in photos like these.

hi cmoore
i might be one of the people you refer to ? not sure
as i said i can understand why a lot of people who are here don't enjoy this type of work
it isn't their cup of tea, my comment has got nothing to do with someone saying they don't like things
i dont' like a lot of things but i don't suggest the person making them are mediocre at best, ripping someone else off
or a talentless hack.. my comment has to do with the
typical " its so easy even a kindergartner could do it "