Thank you I think it has been a very interesting thread too
On the whole I feel that this has been a very interesting discussion and there is a lot of really good critique in this thread. If I were a photography or an art teacher I could take this thread and turn it into a lesson plan on art, photography and critique of same.
Even worse, they're very likely the inner workings of a large language model.
I find it quite interesting how you often seem to alternate, from thread to thread, between a poorly concealed unwillingness to fully appreciate these photographers and a deep desire to really do so. The Atget 'appreciation' thread is a glowing example of this.
I grew up in a house with Carrell's 'Bach the Borrower' on the bookshelf. Steal, transcribe, borrow, whatever. Those organ pieces are programmed today as Bach, not Vivaldi, but really it doesn't matter. We know the original, we understand how Bach handled it. Maybe Stokowski took it even further, I don't know. My point was that Vivaldi's compositions are undiminished in the process, and Bach's mastery unsullied by knowing the original. There are scores (forgive me) of other musical examples: Pergolesi/Stravinski, Purcell/Britten, Blow/Bliss, ...Bach didn't steal anything. He transcribed some of Vivaldi's concertos, and transcribing other people's work was common practice at the time. He was open to other musicians 'stealing' - as you put it - his music, too: his scores are famously open ended and open to interpretation, so much so that people have often 'stolen' (->transcribed) several of his Klavier works - Busoni's transcription of the Chorale Prelude BWV 659 and Kempff's transcription of the Chorale Prelude BWV 734 are particularly noteworthy, though I'm sure there would have been people transcribing his work already in his time.
Gosh, I hardly know what to say. Those two photographers HCB and Atget have been a lifelong love of mine. But I'm interested to understand them, to figure out how the magic works for me, and why it doesn't appeal to everyone. I like to discuss. This forum is one of very few places where one can do that. Is that very terrible?I find it quite interesting how you often seem to alternate, from thread to thread, between a poorly concealed unwillingness to fully appreciate these photographers and a deep desire to really do so. The Atget 'appreciation' thread is a glowing example of this.
To @snusmumriken support I remember quite well the 'Atget' thread and he never showed an unwillingness to appreciate Atget. On the contrary, given a photographer who is not evident and easy at all (just go to 90% of art photography schools and they
Those two photographers HCB and Atget have been a lifelong love of mine. But I'm interested to understand them, to figure out how the magic works for me, and why it doesn't appeal to everyone. I like to discuss. This forum is one of very few places where one can do that. Is that very terrible?
If you're really a human being, and I am sure you are, my personal impression is that you're trapped in a certain mindset that constrains you and ultimately creates a distance between you and your audience.
I think it would do you so much good to unshackle yourself from this framework and rethink of what exactly it is that makes you passionate about something (in this case, photography) with completely fresh eyes.
I don't know if this is your cultural upbringing, your photography teacher, your community, 90% of those photography schools speaking through you, but you come across more a some sort of spokesperson for someone else, for an entire ideology perhaps, than as someone who genuinely believes what they're saying as the culmination of their own lived experience.
I know very well what I love about photography and which parts of photography lets me totally indifferent.
I can look at HCB all day, I am genuinely happy when I see his photos.
But I cannot convince someone or explain it. This is somehow felt. The reason I approached HCB with a "psyche" is not to project myself and emotions to it but because I believe this is the best way to approach photography as an art - in a poetic way.
But I can very well stop it if it annoys people here.
Then we can happily spend the evening discussing S-curves, golden ratios, and interesecting lines
nikos79, don't beat yourself up. Just enjoy what images you like.
In the art photography schools they approach Atget as a figure important for the history of photography not as an artist.
I just can't for the life of me understand why you care so much about how 'the art photography schools' (which? where? when?) approach Atget.
But if these two photographers are some of the ones you love, I'll be looking forward to your contributions on those you intensely dislike
I don't know about @snusmumriken but trust me you don't want to hear mine
I can’t imagine intensely disliking any photographer. I just ignore the ones that don’t appeal to me.
Yes he did view things upside down and inverted right/left, left/right. These are only a giude. Also, your photography MO does not have to have a label.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?