Loss of fine art photography tradition

[Ken Nadvornick]

Given your fascination with the female form, I expect you would enjoy seeing Chris' father at work .

See the link in Chris' post #8.: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Boy did I ever get into the wrong line of work.



Ken

 

[StoneNYC]

As a 23 year old who does much the same as Chris, I too resent the earlier remark. I know several young people who prefer film. However, as you stated they have not amassed the equipment like Chris and I have but they would like to.

Kristoffer

I don't know why you resent it, Matt's post proves my point, that his privilege is what allowed him to learn more than most about photography as a legacy, also having access to all that equipment, so he's a huge exception. I'm not saying he didn't take that legacy and do something with it, he did, and how has his own place. But, if I had that kind of access, I sure as hell wouldn't be 30 and have had to move back home to my parents...

I don't exactly resent people of privilege, but I also don't like when they flaunt it. Talking about all his darkroom equipment and camera gear awesomeness, not because he was excited about it because he struggled for it and earned it, but because he was showing off. I guess that rubbed me the wrong way, and I reacted to it.

I'm a good photographer, at least good enough I should be making money from it even for small publications, but because I have no access, no privilege, I'm nobody. And that admittedly gets under my skin. I guess that shows pretty obviously.


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Steve Smith]

As a 22 year old.....

That said, most people of my generation are ignorant fucking dumbasses when it comes to just about anything with a history longer than ten minutes.

I disagree. I have a son just a bit younger than you, and while it seems that everyone of that age is a dumbass, the reality is that it's only those you hear about doing stupid things. You usually don't get to hear about the majority of normal, intelligent people so opinions are formed from what information you do get.


Steve.

 

[Chris Lange]

I'm privileged only in having a supportive and encouraging family who happen to be creatives as well.

People that refer to themselves as good photographers in a public conversation rarely are.

-

I do think many previously stated points in here are valid. I think modern contemporary photography is convoluted and overwrought with a masturbatory sense of "this is a photograph about a photograph about photography", or some other bs excuse for not being able to actually take a decent photograph. MoMA is currently exhibiting a wonderful Bill Brandt exhibition (for 3 more days...), yet adjacent to it is their New Acquisitions gallery, and there is a 100 foot roll of 42" wide color paper that has had chemicals dumped all over it at random intervals after having all been exposed with a number of different negatives along the entire length. It looks like the c-print version of a printer jam. It seems heretical to have such a thing in view of original prints by Brandt.

 

[Chris Lange]

I don't know why you resent it, Matt's post proves my point, that his privilege is what allowed him to learn more than most about photography as a legacy, also having access to all that equipment, so he's a huge exception. I'm not saying he didn't take that legacy and do something with it, he did, and how has his own place. But, if I had that kind of access, I sure as hell wouldn't be 30 and have had to move back home to my parents...

I don't exactly resent people of privilege, but I also don't like when they flaunt it. Talking about all his darkroom equipment and camera gear awesomeness, not because he was excited about it because he struggled for it and earned it, but because he was showing off. I guess that rubbed me the wrong way, and I reacted to it.

I'm a good photographer, at least good enough I should be making money from it even for small publications, but because I have no access, no privilege, I'm nobody. And that admittedly gets under my skin. I guess that shows pretty obviously.


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

I get excited about the photographs I make using my tools, not about the tools themselves. My "flaunting" was more a response to the idea that young people who shoot film are clueless and make poor, dirty RC prints or make trite Lomo pictures and never move past that, remaining unaware of what is possible (on the production side) with the creative process. My equipment is my own, save for a few odds and ends, but I appreciate the assumption that I've been handed everything. I acquired most of my equipment via getting to know the right people who had a lot of nice stuff and weren't using it any more, and wanted it to go to a good home where it would be appreciated. I often spend a fraction of market price on my gear, the only exceptions being my M2 and Summicron, which I have only thanks to a scholarship and grant.

The only reason I know that my temperature control/filter assembly is medical grade is because the plumber I got it from happened to have gotten it from a guy who had just moved from his house into assisted living, and no longer needed the dialysis regulation. I did not just go out and buy a medical instrument for my darkroom...but even if I had, that hardly would have been a basis for judgment.

You can whine about where you would be if you had a famous daddy, but you should be complaining about Richard Avedon's grandson and not me if that's the tree you want to bark up.

 

[StoneNYC]

I get excited about the photographs I make using my tools, not about the tools themselves. My "flaunting" was more a response to the idea that young people who shoot film are clueless and make poor, dirty RC prints or make trite Lomo pictures and never move past that, remaining unaware of what is possible (on the production side) with the creative process. My equipment is my own, save for a few odds and ends, but I appreciate the assumption that I've been handed everything. I acquired most of my equipment via getting to know the right people who had a lot of nice stuff and weren't using it any more, and wanted it to go to a good home where it would be appreciated. I often spend a fraction of market price on my gear, the only exceptions being my M2 and Summicron, which I have only thanks to a scholarship and grant.

The only reason I know that my temperature control/filter assembly is medical grade is because the plumber I got it from happened to have gotten it from a guy who had just moved from his house into assisted living, and no longer needed the dialysis regulation. I did not just go out and buy a medical instrument for my darkroom...but even if I had, that hardly would have been a basis for judgment.

You can whine about where you would be if you had a famous daddy, but you should be complaining about Richard Avedon's grandson and not me if that's the tree you want to bark up.

To you're other post point, I didn't say I was a great photographer, just a good one, I did say good enough to do small publications, not large ones.

You don't have to list all your tools to prove you're not ignorant about photography, having those tools doesn't actually prove anything.

I don't know your entire life, but I'm sure having access to your father and his experience and his contemporaries as connections (perhaps some of the people getting rid of old equipment) got you more doors than you may realize.

Since joining APUG I have had a few experiences where people have been generous with me and have gifted things to me, but that's only the past year, before discovering this site I didn't know anyone who shot film, not a single person, I've met one person in this state one time from APUG, but that's it.

Access is everything "it's who you know"

I'm not saying you didn't earn more by using those connections, but you had a few legs up on most people in general, and and of your generation.

I'm also on my phone so I haven't looked at your images, and I don't know if you've looked at mine, but I wasn't commenting on your photographic skills good or bad, and I don't think you should comment on mine without taking a look. (Speaking of the "people who say they are good photographers rarely are" comment).

I also don't dislike you, I'm just pointing out that you had a huge advantage to lean film so you're not really a good example of the younger generation knowing about film. That's my main point.


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[markbarendt]

Access is everything "it's who you know"

Stone, I'd actually suggest that that little nugget be rephrased a little: "it's who you are willing to get to know".

I'd also suggest that that is far from the whole story. The flow of life is pretty random; to use nautical metaphors there are tidal forces and waves that push us all around in very unpredictable ways.

 

[MattKing]

Stone:

Chris may be fortunate, but not because of the equipment he has or has had access to. There are huge numbers of people of your generation out there who are similarly fortunate, in that they have had the opportunity to learn from readily accessible film photography resources.

I am a couple of generations older than you, but I really don't have any equipment or materials now that originated with my personal resource - my father (and all those he knew and worked with in the photographic industry).

What I do have is a lifetime of information, along with many past opportunities to learn from entry level experiences. /My access to a few of those entry level experiences were aided by my father's connections, but mostly I earned them on my own. And then, of course, I eventually decided to pursue something else as a vocation.

I understand the problem of not getting what you need from the community you are a part of. The solution is to seek out the community that does have what you need, and try to:
1) listen to those who are there; and
2) contribute to it.

APUG is not that community. It does, however, have a lot of people on it who are part of that community, so it can help you find it.

You don't need much equipment to be part of the community. But if you become part of the community, it can help you advance far enough to be able to start making a living from your interests, if you want that, and have the abilities to be a success at that. Almost none of those abilities are technical photographic skills.

 

[StoneNYC]

... if you become part of the community....

....Almost none of those abilities are technical photographic skills.

My point exactly....

I don't have those other skills or resources, all I have is a vague semi-skil at photography lol

Such is life...

Anyway we are sort of way OT at this point. Back to the subject!



Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pioneer]

History is something we are doomed to repeat.

I believe it has always been rare for young people to think that history is anything but boring. Most young people have no idea of the history of their own digital toys. To many of them Apple and Nintendo has always been and Steve Jobs is an old guy who died recently and someone wrote a book about him.

As some have already said, most people don't know the history of important world events that have occurred in the past 50 years. It should be no surprise that the names of some relatively obscure photographers would not ring a bell. Face it, there is a ton of important photographic history that most of us do not remember, if we ever knew. George Eastman is the well known founder of Kodak but does anyone know the two people who were his very important early partners, without which it is doubtful that Kodak would ever have come about. And just what was George Eastman's first product?

 

[Chris Lange]

History is something we are doomed to repeat.

I believe it has always been rare for young people to think that history is anything but boring. Most young people have no idea of the history of their own digital toys. To many of them Apple and Nintendo has always been and Steve Jobs is an old guy who died recently and someone wrote a book about him.

As some have already said, most people don't know the history of important world events that have occurred in the past 50 years. It should be no surprise that the names of some relatively obscure photographers would not ring a bell. Face it, there is a ton of important photographic history that most of us do not remember, if we ever knew. George Eastman is the well known founder of Kodak but does anyone know the two people who were his very important early partners, without which it is doubtful that Kodak would ever have come about. And just what was George Eastman's first product?

It is this exact sentiment that I take issue with! The biography on Jobs has been read by a huge number of my friends, because we admire the work and legacy of such an innovative man (whether you agree with Apple's business approach or not is irrelevant, honestly). Nintendo was originally a playing card company in the previous century. People are so quick to judge...

I remember the Apple II, and I remember the first iMac, and what a change in the computing world it made. I remember when broadband changed the scope of the internet and I probably had a myspace and facebook acccount before many of you did (surely before it was the in vogue thing for literally everyone to have.)

The old ways will only be brought into the new era if people like myself choose to appreciate the variety of methodologies available to the creative process. It is this precise reason why the vast majority of young film users are the 16-25 segment, and not the 26-35 segment. We are sick of being pandered to by faceless corporations that want us to believe that a $500 DSLR and $99 18-55/3.5-5.6 or 50/1.8 is the best thing since sliced bread. We don't want our cameras to tell us what to do, just as much as we don't want our parents/teachers/advisors/etc to tell us what to do. If you can't respect the fact that when more than half of the members of this board will be dead in the next 40 years, the only people giving a shit about the traditions of fine-art photography will be those of my generation, I don't know what to tell you. If that scares you, then instead of belittling the next person who asks you about your Crown Graphic wondering how many megapixels it has, offer them a peek under the hood and let them try to shoot a frame. Film is cheap, and the knowledge that you might have turned a 17 year old into a future Rolleiflex/Graflex/Nikon F user should more than compensate you for the astronomically expensive loss of a 75¢-$2.00 sheet of film.

For all it's worth, I have never, ever, ever encountered someone who thought less of me as a photographer because I choose to use film for my personal work. If anything it has garnered me greater respect from those who don't know the intricacies of the medium.

Film doesn't make you special, it just makes you wait. Digital doesn't make you special, it just lets you be impatient.

As to Stone's sentiment, forget privilege, my friends use Hasselblads and Leicas too, and we're all poor (former or currently enrolled) art students. The best film gear on the planet can be had for less than the cost of a mid-range DSLR if you know what you're after. Stop whining and make work, or don't say anything at all.

You're not going to change the contemporary sensibilities in photography (which I primarily think are total bullshit), but if you want people to appreciate the craft and value of the darkroom the last way to do it is by belittling whatever methods they have chosen to work with up until that point. As far as I'm concerned, any young photographer that isn't versed in both sides of the medium (that is digital and traditional chemical processes) is a substandard candidate for any sort of creative job. If you aren't as comfortable with your eye in a D800E as you are behind an F3 or a Rollei, or a M6, or RZ67, much less in front of a Saunders 4550XLG or Focomat V35 as you are in Lightroom 5, then you have no place in the modern photographic fine art world.

Unapologetic, but true. People that ignore the old ways and only focus on the new are short-changing themselves, and those that ignore the ways of the future and choose to live in the past are going to miss out on a hell of a lot of great evolution in the medium.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Kicking butt and taking names... I like it.



Ken

 

[StoneNYC]

It is this exact sentiment that I take issue with! The biography on Jobs has been read by a huge number of my friends, because we admire the work and legacy of such an innovative man (whether you agree with Apple's business approach or not is irrelevant, honestly). Nintendo was originally a playing card company in the previous century. People are so quick to judge...

I remember the Apple II, and I remember the first iMac, and what a change in the computing world it made. I remember when broadband changed the scope of the internet and I probably had a myspace and facebook acccount before many of you did (surely before it was the in vogue thing for literally everyone to have.)

The old ways will only be brought into the new era if people like myself choose to appreciate the variety of methodologies available to the creative process. It is this precise reason why the vast majority of young film users are the 16-25 segment, and not the 26-35 segment. We are sick of being pandered to by faceless corporations that want us to believe that a $500 DSLR and $99 18-55/3.5-5.6 or 50/1.8 is the best thing since sliced bread. We don't want our cameras to tell us what to do, just as much as we don't want our parents/teachers/advisors/etc to tell us what to do. If you can't respect the fact that when more than half of the members of this board will be dead in the next 40 years, the only people giving a shit about the traditions of fine-art photography will be those of my generation, I don't know what to tell you. If that scares you, then instead of belittling the next person who asks you about your Crown Graphic wondering how many megapixels it has, offer them a peek under the hood and let them try to shoot a frame. Film is cheap, and the knowledge that you might have turned a 17 year old into a future Rolleiflex/Graflex/Nikon F user should more than compensate you for the astronomically expensive loss of a 75¢-$2.00 sheet of film.

For all it's worth, I have never, ever, ever encountered someone who thought less of me as a photographer because I choose to use film for my personal work. If anything it has garnered me greater respect from those who don't know the intricacies of the medium.

Film doesn't make you special, it just makes you wait. Digital doesn't make you special, it just lets you be impatient.

As to Stone's sentiment, forget privilege, my friends use Hasselblads and Leicas too, and we're all poor (former or currently enrolled) art students. The best film gear on the planet can be had for less than the cost of a mid-range DSLR if you know what you're after. Stop whining and make work, or don't say anything at all.

You're not going to change the contemporary sensibilities in photography (which I primarily think are total bullshit), but if you want people to appreciate the craft and value of the darkroom the last way to do it is by belittling whatever methods they have chosen to work with up until that point. As far as I'm concerned, any young photographer that isn't versed in both sides of the medium (that is digital and traditional chemical processes) is a substandard candidate for any sort of creative job. If you aren't as comfortable with your eye in a D800E as you are behind an F3 or a Rollei, or a M6, or RZ67, much less in front of a Saunders 4550XLG or Focomat V35 as you are in Lightroom 5, then you have no place in the modern photographic fine art world.

Unapologetic, but true. People that ignore the old ways and only focus on the new are short-changing themselves, and those that ignore the ways of the future and choose to live in the past are going to miss out on a hell of a lot of great evolution in the medium.

Fair enough, (tip o' the hat).

PS did Lightroom 5 actually come out? I thought it was on ore-order... Lol


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Katie]

Holy shit, that's good. You give me hope...

 

[Bill Burk]

I personally have no worry for the future generations of photographers. I worry a little about their technique, but not their enthusiasm. I took a walk with a young man (family friends taking a walk together) who held a small digital camera at arms-length to take in the sun coming through spots on the ocean. I could have wished he had a tripod, or that he caught the light from a more illuminating angle. But it was reassuring to see him experience the pure joy of capturing the scene before him.

At least two young men/women I know have an interest in film and recently got 35mm SLR's. Haaa, I just realized. I have black and white pictures of both of them, I remember now - the young woman at a friend's barbecue and the young man at the Eagle Court of Honor.

 

[Pioneer]

It is this exact sentiment that I take issue with! The biography on Jobs has been read by a huge number of my friends, because we admire the work and legacy of such an innovative man (whether you agree with Apple's business approach or not is irrelevant, honestly). Nintendo was originally a playing card company in the previous century. People are so quick to judge...

I remember the Apple II, and I remember the first iMac, and what a change in the computing world it made. I remember when broadband changed the scope of the internet and I probably had a myspace and facebook acccount before many of you did (surely before it was the in vogue thing for literally everyone to have.)

The old ways will only be brought into the new era if people like myself choose to appreciate the variety of methodologies available to the creative process. It is this precise reason why the vast majority of young film users are the 16-25 segment, and not the 26-35 segment. We are sick of being pandered to by faceless corporations that want us to believe that a $500 DSLR and $99 18-55/3.5-5.6 or 50/1.8 is the best thing since sliced bread. We don't want our cameras to tell us what to do, just as much as we don't want our parents/teachers/advisors/etc to tell us what to do. If you can't respect the fact that when more than half of the members of this board will be dead in the next 40 years, the only people giving a shit about the traditions of fine-art photography will be those of my generation, I don't know what to tell you. If that scares you, then instead of belittling the next person who asks you about your Crown Graphic wondering how many megapixels it has, offer them a peek under the hood and let them try to shoot a frame. Film is cheap, and the knowledge that you might have turned a 17 year old into a future Rolleiflex/Graflex/Nikon F user should more than compensate you for the astronomically expensive loss of a 75¢-$2.00 sheet of film.

For all it's worth, I have never, ever, ever encountered someone who thought less of me as a photographer because I choose to use film for my personal work. If anything it has garnered me greater respect from those who don't know the intricacies of the medium.

Film doesn't make you special, it just makes you wait. Digital doesn't make you special, it just lets you be impatient.

As to Stone's sentiment, forget privilege, my friends use Hasselblads and Leicas too, and we're all poor (former or currently enrolled) art students. The best film gear on the planet can be had for less than the cost of a mid-range DSLR if you know what you're after. Stop whining and make work, or don't say anything at all.

You're not going to change the contemporary sensibilities in photography (which I primarily think are total bullshit), but if you want people to appreciate the craft and value of the darkroom the last way to do it is by belittling whatever methods they have chosen to work with up until that point. As far as I'm concerned, any young photographer that isn't versed in both sides of the medium (that is digital and traditional chemical processes) is a substandard candidate for any sort of creative job. If you aren't as comfortable with your eye in a D800E as you are behind an F3 or a Rollei, or a M6, or RZ67, much less in front of a Saunders 4550XLG or Focomat V35 as you are in Lightroom 5, then you have no place in the modern photographic fine art world.

Unapologetic, but true. People that ignore the old ways and only focus on the new are short-changing themselves, and those that ignore the ways of the future and choose to live in the past are going to miss out on a hell of a lot of great evolution in the medium.

Well said Chris, and you obviously enjoy history. You have taken the time to learn why things are the way they are, and where they came from. You believe that someone cannot realize their full potential until they understand their past and appreciate the future.

But, sadly, you and your friends are not the norm in our world. Of course that unwillingness to learn and move forward effects all ages.