Photographic Snobbery & Other Annoyances...

Shawn Rahman · Apr 13, 2007

Please feel free to add to the list. I'll get things started:

- Referring to lenses as “glass”.

- Referring to film developing as “souping”.

- “Photography means nothing – it is life that interests me”, or something like that. With apologies to HCB, far and away my favorite photographer.

- The merits of shooting RAW v. JPEG. Digital, I know, but what is more boring than listening to such drivel?

- The merits of today’s FB v. RC papers. Seriously folks, does anyone actually think an RC print won’t archive as well, all else being equal?

- Closet-gearheads who profess that the equipment really doesn’t matter.

- On Photography, by Susan Sontag.

- No-name photogs who think anyone would possibly want to dish out hundreds or thousands of dollars their “limited edition” prints. Check any issue of B&W for a reference.

- The idea that photographs must "say something". PLEASE. Most of the photographs I love most say nothing to me. I just like looking at them.

clogz · Apr 13, 2007

What's the use of getting annoyed? The light is right at the moment so I'm going out to shoot...eh...sorry take some pictures

Hans

jstraw · Apr 13, 2007

hkr said:
Please feel free to add to the list. I'll get things started:

- Referring to lenses as glass.

- Referring to film developing as souping.

The world is too filled with real outrages for me to find photographers using photographers' vernacular an issue.

hkr said:
- The merits of shooting RAW v. JPEG. Digital, I know, but what is more boring than listening to such drivel?

As opposed to discussing the merits of staining v. non-staining developers?

hkr said:
- The merits of todays FB v. RC papers. Seriously folks, does anyone actually think an RC print wont archive as well, all else being equal?

Wrong question. I don't (and can't) know that they will. And that's the point.

hkr said:
- The idea that photographs must "say something". PLEASE. Most of the photographs I love most say nothing to me. I just like looking at them.

Just because you can't hear it, doesn't mean it's not talking.

TheFlyingCamera · Apr 13, 2007

hkr said:
Please feel free to add to the list. I'll get things started:

- No-name photogs who think anyone would possibly want to dish out hundreds or thousands of dollars their limited edition prints. Check any issue of B&W for a reference.

At one point in time, even St. Ansel qualified for this opprobium. Richard Avedon was once an unknown. I find this item insulting to the efforts of so many different folks here who are trying to build a career as an artist. Frankly, this sounds like just a bit of jealousy from someone who must have tried, but failed, to sell anything, and so resents those folks who are selling work for more than his failed to sell for.

Roger Hicks · Apr 13, 2007

Um...

Where's the snobbery in any of this?

Looking down your nose because someone else doesn't use your brand of expensive camera is snobbery.

Looking down your nose because you don't think expensive cameras are worth the money is reverse snobbery, and arguably even more tedious.

But from your list, outmoded slang and occasional delusions of grandeur are hardly worth getting excited about.

Cheers,

R.

Jim Jones · Apr 13, 2007

hkr said:
Please feel free to add to the list. I'll get things started: . . .

- On Photography, by Susan Sontag.

Yes, indeed. I was compelled to read this in a college course. A book on photography without any photographs is immediately suspect. Living with a notorious photographer did not qualify Sontag as an expert on the subject. On Photography is proof that an otherwise successful author can write almost anything on any subject, and suckers will buy it.

Pinholemaster · Apr 13, 2007

Everyone has a name, and if they can convince someone to part with 100K, more power to them.

As far as Sontag, the book is more about her failed relationship with Richard A then about 'photography.' It was her "Screw you Richard rant." The funny thing is years later she fell for another photographer. Go figure.

So, it really doesn't matter to me about the gear. This morning's walk with the dogs, I grabbed some glass just in case I needed to celebrate life, and later I plan to have my lab soup the film for me 'cause life's too short to worry about FB or RC when all I'm doing is enjoying the scene.

Someday I'll convince the world not to shoot Jpeg - RAW all the way baby.

Ian Leake · Apr 13, 2007

Every field has it's special jargon and slang so it's not worth worrying about. Learn the words and use them or not depending on your own preference.

Many people have different opinions about what is important. I don't have to agree with everything that other people believe, but I've also learnt plenty by listening to others' opinions.

jstraw · Apr 13, 2007

Pinholemaster said:
As far as Sontag, the book is more about her failed relationship with Richard A then about 'photography.' It was her "Screw you Richard rant." The funny thing is years later she fell for another photographer. Go figure.

Hmm...I wonder what Annie L thinks of "On Photography."

removed account4 · Apr 13, 2007

clogz said:
What's the use of getting annoyed? The light is right at the moment so I'm going out to shoot...eh...sorry take some pictures

Hans

hans -

i think you mean
burn some film 8D

hkr --

life's too short to be annoyed
useless-link

--john

Robert Hall · Apr 13, 2007

hkr said:
Please feel free to add to the list. I'll get things started:

- Referring to lenses as glass.

Guilty!

hkr said:
- Referring to film developing as souping.

Guilty!

hkr said:
- Photography means nothing it is life that interests me, or something like that. With apologies to HCB, far and away my favorite photographer.

Guilty!

hkr said:
- The merits of shooting RAW v. JPEG. Digital, I know, but what is more boring than listening to such drivel?

Huh?

hkr said:
- The merits of todays FB v. RC papers. Seriously folks, does anyone actually think an RC print wont archive as well, all else being equal?

Uh, yes.

hkr said:
- Closet-gearheads who profess that the equipment really doesnt matter.

The right tool for the right job.

hkr said:
- On Photography, by Susan Sontag.

- No-name photogs who think anyone would possibly want to dish out hundreds or thousands of dollars their limited edition prints. Check any issue of B&W for a reference.

Guilty! (well, thousands only if they really feel they have to.)

hkr said:
- The idea that photographs must "say something". PLEASE. Most of the photographs I love most say nothing to me. I just like looking at them.

Agreed!

copake_ham · Apr 13, 2007

Sorry to go a bit OT but does anyone here know the root and etymology of the word: snob?

bdial · Apr 13, 2007

Actually, I think that a book about photography with no photographs is sort of a refreshing notion.

c6h6o3 · Apr 13, 2007

hkr said:
- The merits of todays FB v. RC papers. Seriously folks, does anyone actually think an RC print wont archive as well, all else being equal?

I know that it won't. Not that I mind, since RC prints don't look as good as fiber based ones anyway.

reellis67 · Apr 13, 2007

copake_ham said:
Sorry to go a bit OT but does anyone here know the root and etymology of the word: snob?

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=snob&searchmode=none

the best I can do at work (no print references here...)

- Randy

Rolleiflexible · Apr 13, 2007

c6h6o3 said:
I know that it won't. Not that I mind, since RC prints don't look as good as fiber based ones anyway.

Plus they feel icky.

colrehogan · Apr 13, 2007

I tried to read On Photography, but lost interest and haven't finished it yet.

Dan Fromm · Apr 13, 2007

My, we're all bored today. Cranky, too.

DougGrosjean · Apr 13, 2007

Two quotes:

"A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet."

"The proof of the pudding is in the tasting."

The things you're complaining about are just words / terms. If the photographer is producing good work, or learning his / her way, or having great fun in the process, I don't care what vocabulary he / she uses. I included having fun because you want new people coming up the ladder. They're the ones having fun, but maybe tossing some odd language about.

However - if the photographer doesn't actually know what he/ she is doing, isn't producting good work in spite of using flowery / snobbish language, and isn't even having fun - then I'd be the first to laugh at him / her for being a poser instead of an enthusiast; poser being somebody for whom the hobby is just a lifestyle accessory.

Beware - sometimes it's very hard to tell the difference.

big_ben_blue · Apr 13, 2007

hkr said:
- The idea that photographs must "say something". PLEASE. Most of the photographs I love most say nothing to me. I just like looking at them.

I dunno; may I suggest scheduling a visit to a respected phychoanalyst if you hear voices coming from a photograph again . Do they tell you to do things or come with divine messages attached? If the photographs are mounted on a wall, it's probably just your neighbors stereo set at high volume:rolleyes: .

- On Photography, by Susan Sontag.

While cleaning out a storage room during my college days, I came across that book, and being completely naive and ignorant to both subject and author, I set forth reading it cover to cover. Wasn't that impressed by it (maybe due to the fact that I didn't understand much to begin with); much bloated artsy talk and no substance (kinda like a bland low-carb diet). But at least I managed to finish it .

Chris - it's Friday the 13th today

Curt · Apr 13, 2007

http://kevxml2a.verizon.net/_1_E2ET...1&qcat=usnews&ran=30992&passqi=&feed=ap&top=1

Early Riser · Apr 13, 2007

hkr said:
Please feel free to add to the list. I'll get things started:

- The merits of today’s FB v. RC papers. Seriously folks, does anyone actually think an RC print won’t archive as well, all else being equal?

RC paper is not as archival and for a very simple reason. The RC base does not expand and contract like the emulsion does, so eventually the emulsion with the image on it, peels off of the RC base or cracks.

removed account4 · Apr 13, 2007

Early Riser said:
RC paper is not as archival and for a very simple reason. The RC base does not expand and contract like the emulsion does, so eventually the emulsion with the image on it, peels off of the RC base or cracks.

i dunno -

according to kodak and the image permanency institute,
rc photographic paper is more archival than fiber based paper.

Roger Hicks · Apr 13, 2007

Early Riser said:
RC paper is not as archival and for a very simple reason. The RC base does not expand and contract like the emulsion does, so eventually the emulsion with the image on it, peels off of the RC base or cracks.

Are you sure about this?

Cheers,

R.

Leon · Apr 13, 2007

copake_ham said:
Sorry to go a bit OT but does anyone here know the root and etymology of the word: snob?

http://www.joppeluiten.nl/snob.htm

Apparently

Photographic Snobbery & Other Annoyances...

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency