Photographer posts; photographers seeking "validation"

[jtk]

Why are you raising a big middle finger to the next generation of photographers, telling them that if they don't use your preferred media the way YOU want them to, then they can go piss off and die? .

"the next generation" is the children of millennials. Those millennials are at least as wonderfully creative with digital and other photo media as earlier generations (especially boomers) so I'm optimistic about those children.

Personally, I don't advocate ANY particular "media" because that's not my job. I am, however, amused by the prevailing nostalgia of most film shooters in Photrio's "media" section...and as an old man I like a lot of it. And I'm thrilled to see what a few are doing with phones.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Actually, I think it is the other way around. I have only so many years left as an active photographer. So my interest in film availability is relatively short term. It is the younger folks who ought to be worried about the long term availability of film. They had best not rely on the older generation of photographers to continue shooting film to sustain the industry. And it's fine if film resonates with the under 30 crowd; if not, that's fine too. Things change. Why all the drama?

It wasn't you I was responding to with that comment. My bigger point is, because we are in one of those moments of change, if we the current generation of film and wet darkroom practitioners want to see our tools and media remain available and affordable, the next generation needs to find them and fall in love with them, and decide that they can use them to communicate THEIR message, whatever that is. If kids raised on iPhones, Photoshop, and CGI discover film and paper, do some whacky stuff with it, and post it online only to get told "it's not valid because it doesn't look like an Ansel Adams print", at best they'll give the people saying that the giant finger and stop listening to them, and at worst they'll say "well, if my ideas don't work in this medium, I'm not going to use it". And then film, paper and photo chemistry will wither away and become an extreme niche industry with exorbitant prices for the few items that remain. Film photography will become the buggy-whip industry. Sure you can still find buggy-whips (and even whole buggys), but from boutique suppliers at ridiculous prices. I love photography, and wet-darkroom photography, too much to want to see that happen to it, especially in my lifetime when I have some ability to influence that.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

What an ugly thing to say, I am merely saying that if they have already decided on a course of action contrary to the ways that not me but Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, Foma, etc. etc. etc. etc. say will work why post for validation? What is the point in someone just getting started, posting something along those line. No photos, no results, just "this is the way I am doing it".

Why not experiment? So what if it flies in the face of what manufacturers say is best? if the experiment is a failure, it fails, you learn and move on. If it succeeds even if only from an aesthetic point of view, then you've created something others will appreciate and want to emulate.

The manufacturers are producing a product to a specification. That specification exists to define normal, predictable parameters of performance - if you use X film, and expose it at Y ISO setting, and develop it in Z developer at A dilution for B minutes with C seconds of agitation per thirty seconds, use D stop bath and E fixer at F dilution for G minutes, then the Air Force Resolution Target you photographed will reproduce identically to the actual Air Force Resolution Target. That's all their specifications are there for.

Neither Ilford nor Kodak published the Zone System - it in fact defies manufacturer specifications. Any serious Zonie will tell you that they are not exposing their film at box speed, or processing it at box recommendations. Same with alt-process folks - if I want to make a good platinum print, I'm sure as shit not developing my film to make a standard print on grade 2 silver gelatin paper.

 

[faberryman]

Why not experiment? So what if it flies in the face of what manufacturers say is best? if the experiment is a failure, it fails, you learn and move on. If it succeeds even if only from an aesthetic point of view, then you've created something others will appreciate and want to emulate.

The manufacturers are producing a product to a specification. That specification exists to define normal, predictable parameters of performance - if you use X film, and expose it at Y ISO setting, and develop it in Z developer at A dilution for B minutes with C seconds of agitation per thirty seconds, use D stop bath and E fixer at F dilution for G minutes, then the Air Force Resolution Target you photographed will reproduce identically to the actual Air Force Resolution Target. That's all their specifications are there for.

Neither Ilford nor Kodak published the Zone System - it in fact defies manufacturer specifications. Any serious Zonie will tell you that they are not exposing their film at box speed, or processing it at box recommendations. Same with alt-process folks - if I want to make a good platinum print, I'm sure as shit not developing my film to make a standard print on grade 2 silver gelatin paper.

What could possibly make you so angry? Pursue photography in whatever manner you deem appropriate, and let others do the same. Let your images speak for themselves. Unless asked, there is no reason to go into how an image was achieved. Nothing wrong with a little mystery. And you won't need to be so defensive all the time if you are doing something differently.

 

[Bill Burk]

I think we should be encouraging and helpful. At least that’s what my ego wants. I’m happy to explain how I did something because I’m pleasantly surprised how the more you think about something, things sometimes work out as planned... and sometimes a picture comes out OK.

 

[mdarnton]

I've thought about these questions a lot, since I'm in a relatively technical field. I am not sure if we are seeing the failing of education, especially in technical matters now that everything is done by pushing a button and not understanding what is behind the button, or whether it's just that the people who have always failed have become more visible, thanks to the internet.

Perhaps the old photo magazines filtered out the really bad questions we get to see now. I'm no longer surprised to see posts something like "I understand developers are alkaline, and lye is strongly alkaline. If I develop my film in lye will it be really fast?", but were those people always around? I'm not sure. I do know that bad photographs and bad ideas have always be around.. My own specialty has been infested with pseudoscientists trying to inappropriately leverage technology as a shortcut to knowledge ever since the birth of the Industrial Revolution, literally, so I suspect that bad ideas have always existed, but that the internet has given everyone a self-publishing platform, where everything is more visible. I see a lot of people who can't tell shit from Shinola believe we need to hear from them.

In direct response to some of the posts above, I have noticed that sometimes people with the really worst ideas are very defensive about them: "Don't fence me in, you bully," they say. A lot of the time, not always, they've learned defensiveness as a strategy because they're idiots and naturally get attacked a lot. This isn't always the case, but it happens enough, especially on the internet. Dunning-Kruger Effect comes to mind. . .and they have a way of taking over the discussion, if permitted.

 

[removed account4]

I knew I was going to regret clicking on this thread. What a drag, indeed. So many harsh judgements.

yup

 

[jtk]

IMO it's a sure sign that we're trying to lead people astray when we start comparing "us" to "them" or negatively comparing one generation to another.

 

[eddie]

I think we should be encouraging and helpful.

Yes, we should. We, as a community, should be accepting of anyone expressing a desire to pursue film photography, regardless of their level of experience.

 

[removed account4]

I think we should be encouraging and helpful.

Yes, we should. We, as a community, should be accepting of anyone expressing a desire to pursue film photography, regardless of their level of experience.

yup ..
as i said too bad the gatekeepers keep hassling people !

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

What could possibly make you so angry? Pursue photography in whatever manner you deem appropriate, and let others do the same. Let your images speak for themselves. Unless asked, there is no reason to go into how an image was achieved. Nothing wrong with a little mystery. And you won't need to be so defensive all the time if you are doing something differently.

I'm actually NOT angry. Not about my own work anyway. I'm very secure in what I do, whether it conforms to standards or not. I'm making a philosophical point about giving people the freedom to experiment and screw up and succeed, and share that, which is something that the OP and some others on this thread seem to have decided is not acceptable - I'm just saying a "so what?" to folks arguing for conformity. It's certainly no skin off my hide if someone else develops their film in coffee, and tones their prints in urine, or whatever strangeness they want to try, and it shouldn't be any off anyone else's either. If I don't like the look, I move along. If I do, then I ask questions about how they did it so I can try for myself.

 

[trendland]

I have only marginal awareness of Vestal. Pop Photography? I used to see that magazine in dentists offices. I'm not much of an athlete, but various sports magazines, found in auto repair shops, are dominated by better photos than that magazine

I shouldn't be such a wise guy about Vestal, but I do think preoccupation with photo toys and techniques is a negative influence on photographic art.

Pop Photography ? Nothing to say against "New Color Photography" for example. Many bw photographers argue against those protagonists in the midt/late 60th.
Today you have to spent many many bugs to own one of that kind of an original print.
with regards....

 

[removed account4]

I shouldn't be such a wise guy about Vestal, but I do think preoccupation with photo toys and techniques is a negative influence on photographic art.

i don't really know how you define a preoccupation with photo toys and techniques ... but it seems that 90% of the people who participate in any sort of photography "group"
whether it is a local meet up at a coffee shop, alt.rec.photo newsgroups, websites like this one and others, photo clubs, library chats &c are all about toys and techniques ...
very few have anything to do with images photography or talking about aesthetics or "art" ... but more like " how did you get those bubbles to glisten so much" or
"how did you get bright highlights on you portrait sitter's hands, or the background to do that or ... "
not sure why magazines catering to people who like tech-talk and "how did you do that " stuff would be any different

 

[gr82bart]

Funny thread....

 

[Bill Burk]

I have only marginal awareness of Vestal. Pop Photography? I used to see that magazine in dentists offices. I'm not much of an athlete, but various sports magazines, found in auto repair shops, are dominated by better photos than that magazine

I shouldn't be such a wise guy about Vestal, but I do think preoccupation with photo toys and techniques is a negative influence on photographic art.

I first heard of him when his darkroom was up for sale. It was a sad way to be introduced but his “things” were all humble and useful, (lots of paper), as you might find in many of our home-cobbled dark rooms. He drew a graph diagramming the relationships of influences of a bunch of well-known photographers that amazed me.

 

[mike c]

There was more to him than just the articles he wrote for the magazines, all ways thought Vestal and Ctien could write very boring or very interesting articles.

 

[rpavich]

... "I have never done this before but this is the way I plan to do it by golly, what do you think, and please don't be negative." As I said , not really seeking advice just validation.

I've seen it in many forums. Woe to the person who dares to tell the truth...they will be flamed by the noob and all of the internet-sheriffs that come to his/her aid.

 

[rpavich]

What an ugly thing to say, I am merely saying that if they have already decided on a course of action contrary to the ways that not me but Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, Foma, etc. etc. etc. etc. say will work why post for validation? What is the point in someone just getting started, posting something along those line. No photos, no results, just "this is the way I am doing it".

I understood what you were saying. The irony is that folks here who are bitterly against telling noobs what to do and how to do it don't seem to have a problem telling you what to do and how to do it! Hahaha...

 

[rpavich]

Actually, I think it is the other way around. I have only so many years left as an active photographer. So my interest in film availability is relatively short term. It is the younger folks who ought to be worried about the long term availability of film. They had best not rely on the older generation of photographers to continue shooting film to sustain the industry. And it's fine if film resonates with the under 30 crowd; if not, that's fine too. Things change. Why all the drama?

I think a lot of it is the basic culture we've been conditioned to.

60 years ago an adult was looked upon as someone who had acquired wisdom and knew more just by virtue of being around longer. Noobs respected that and listened. Just take a look at the Andy Griffith show, it's assumed that respecting elders was the norm, and kids who didn't, were corrected.
But since then the culture has shifted to the idea that "it's all about YOU! YOU matter, YOUR feelings! What YOU want, what YOU think...that's what matters! Just take a look at television and movies that reflect society, the parents are bunglers who are upstaged by the kids who always get the last smart remark and must "enlighten" the parents who were narrow minded and wrong. Commercials, movies, TV....all do it.

Kid's are fed it in school, everyone gets a trophy, the teacher isn't always right, you have the right to challenge any authority...and on and on.

We are just reaping the reward of a self centered culture..that's all.

 

[rpavich]

yup ..
as i said too bad the gatekeepers keep hassling people !

Do you think it's wrong that one person tell another person that they should stop doing what they are doing?

 

[blockend]

Photography is only important to people it's important to. No one else should feel obliged to care. I recently bought a superbly bound and printed 4 volume set of books containing black and white images of US gas stations, taken in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Nobody should care about such a subject, but I thought it was great. I could muster no serious argument against those who thinks it's boring, trite and expensive, but I could spend hours looking at the pictures.

When people are young they are easily influenced and need guidance and encouragement, not criticism. When they're older they shouldn't care what anyone thinks. My photographic tastes run to the obsessive, my own and other people's. As Martin Parr said when an interviewer asked him whether he was a little obsessed - the problem with most photographers is they aren't obsessed enough.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Kid's are fed it in school, everyone gets a trophy, the teacher isn't always right, you have the right to challenge any authority...and on and on.

Yes, as a matter of fact you DO have the right to challenge any authority. If that were not true, then we'd all still believe the earth is flat and 6000 years old, and that the sun and the stars revolve around it. I've seen far too many instances where kids were told something by a teacher that was patently false, and then forced to kowtow to the teacher to appease their ego in spite of the truth. To give you one example, a friend of mine is a certifiable mathematics genius (He took 1st place in the World Mathematics Competition (under 21 category) as a senior in high school. He had his pick of Harvard, CalTech, and MIT, full free ride on academics. Now he's a tenured professor at Princeton University). He was working on a Masters' thesis in advanced theoretical math as a senior in high school. He had to turn in his Masters' thesis to his high school advisor to make sure he was actually working when off-campus. The teacher gave him an F. The reason? The teacher was too stupid to understand what he was writing about. Fortunately his university professor stepped in with the high school and tore the principal and the teacher a new one. The high school advisor reluctantly reconsidered and gave him a B. Only B in math he ever got.

There is a difference between questioning authority and disrespecting authority. Do by all means do the first. That's how we learn. The latter, not such a good idea, because when authority IS wrong (which it can frequently be - they're just as human and prone to mistakes as the rest of us) , they often don't take kindly to being told they're wrong, and they have the power to do something about it (see the high school math teacher above).

 

[rpavich]

Yes, as a matter of fact you DO have the right to challenge any authority. If that were not true, then we'd all still believe the earth is flat and 6000 years old, and that the sun and the stars revolve around it. I've seen far too many instances where kids were told something by a teacher that was patently false, and then forced to kowtow to the teacher to appease their ego in spite of the truth. To give you one example, a friend of mine is a certifiable mathematics genius (He took 1st place in the World Mathematics Competition (under 21 category) as a senior in high school. He had his pick of Harvard, CalTech, and MIT, full free ride on academics. Now he's a tenured professor at Princeton University). He was working on a Masters' thesis in advanced theoretical math as a senior in high school. He had to turn in his Masters' thesis to his high school advisor to make sure he was actually working when off-campus. The teacher gave him an F. The reason? The teacher was too stupid to understand what he was writing about. Fortunately his university professor stepped in with the high school and tore the principal and the teacher a new one. The high school advisor reluctantly reconsidered and gave him a B. Only B in math he ever got.

There is a difference between questioning authority and disrespecting authority. Do by all means do the first. That's how we learn. The latter, not such a good idea, because when authority IS wrong (which it can frequently be - they're just as human and prone to mistakes as the rest of us) , they often don't take kindly to being told they're wrong, and they have the power to do something about it (see the high school math teacher above).

I guess I could have said "disrespect authority"...it was a choice of words. I didn't mean that we never give it any thought our evaluate what we are being told. I think that we should evaluate and ponder and think through things.
PS: I do think that the world is 6000 years old, however no, it's not flat and the planets and stars don't revolve around the earth...that was what the scientists of the day who were touting, not the church.
FYI: The Bible does not teach that the Earth is flat, and virtually no one in the history of the church taught this. In fact, the belief in a flat Earth is a 19th century myth that was concocted to discredit critics of Darwinism. The supposed lesson of this myth was that the Church got it wrong before, so the Church has a chance to redeem itself by getting it right on the issue of evolution. This false lesson has been indelibly impressed upon common perception.
As for Geocentricism; The church at the time made the mistake of following the science of the day and thus supported geocentrism. Their error was going along.

However those are conversations for another time.

 

[mdarnton]

I see that this discussion is bordering on discussing creativity, which is another contentious topic. What I have noticed is that the most talented people are the most insecure about what they do, and also the best at processing information. When I see someone confident who also makes a lot of intellectual errors, it's a warning. That's why I'm always frustrated that those people, the BS artists, are usually the ones who won't show their work, because I do a lot of checking of the credentials of people who post.

I doubt the reality of the idea of a wildly creative person not harnessed by normal thinking as representing some sort of norm. When you look behind the greatest artists you often find much more substance than they want you to see. I was, for instance, surprised to find how many jazz musicians had solid technical grounding in classical music schools, and when I found one who didn't make sense, that would be one of the self-taught ones.

 

[faberryman]

Do you think it's wrong that one person tell another person that they should stop doing what they are doing?

It depends on what they are doing.