Showing your work, slide projection and why you photograph in the first place

[faberryman]

I think it is absurd to think you are benefiting humanity by posting photos to Photrio or having a Flickr account or foisting off a slide show of your latest photographic noodlings on unsuspecting guests.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I think it is absurd to think you are benefiting humanity by posting photos to Photro or having a Flickr account or foisting off a slide show on unsuspecting guests.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I take lots of pictures I don't show anyone. But that's actually irrelevant. What I was talking about was the activity of making art, and how personal that is for many people, and how many people never bother to show anyone the end result - and, for a lot of those people, it is the act of making the art that is important. Once it's finished, the artist is done with it - the fun is over.

It's not just photography. It's every artistic activity. Some people feel the need to do it yet don't feel any need to put it out in the world. Just go revisit some of what @VinceInMT had to say, above.

But Don, you've posted your pictures in the media section. Why did you do that? One of them you captioned: "My favourite photo on moldy film." That sounds like pride. Despite your insistence to the contrary, you apparently have an ego. Be proud of it.

The Hole in Reality.jpg

My favourite photo on moldy film.

www.photrio.com

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Not the ones I participate in because I supply useful information and avoid politics. Your case may well be quite different.

It's not everyone who can supply 46K posts of useful information like yourself. I;ve only been able to come up with 7K.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I think it is absurd to think you are benefiting humanity by posting photos to Photrio or having a Flickr account or foisting off a slide show of your latest photographic noodlings on unsuspecting guests.

I doubt if Vivien Maier thought her work would impact the general public. But look how much effect it has on people since it was discovered? In any case, the point I was making is that we all want to feel that we benefit humanity by our just being here. We do many things in life, some important and most maybe not so important. But why denigrate what you create just because you're not famous? If one of your pictures just puts a smile on someone's face, wouldn't that be worth something?

 

[koraks]

So not only are our pictures worthless but we are too? No point to any of it. Sounds very depressing.

That's not what I said, and I don't agree. I do see why you'd jump to this kind of conclusion, which exactly illustrates my point that many people wouldn't want to "go there". But the problem here is sloppy reasoning, first and foremost.

Again, it's off topic, so let's not pursue the matter any further. I'm also saying this because allowing further exploration of this train of thought would involve an obligation to allow people to include religion into the argument. Quod non.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Peace.

 

[Don_ih]

But Don, you've posted your pictures in the media section. Why did you do that? One of them you captioned: "My favourite photo on moldy film." That sounds like pride. Despite your insistence to the contrary, you apparently have an ego. Be proud of it.

Alan, what made you think I was talking about me? I said, "What I was talking about was the activity of making art, and how personal that is for many people, and how many people never bother to show anyone the end result." I didn't say that was me.
And "favourite" doesn't imply "pride" - not that it would matter if it did. If I have a favourite flavour of ice-cream, it's not a matter of pride. In terms of the photo, that that one was favourite was a matter of ranking it amongst the others - and it (that photo) I liked better than the others.

 

[VinceInMT]

Why would you spend thousands of dollars and years in art school just to lock up your work in the attic? Sure, it might not be as important as having children or caring for a sick relative. But it's part of us, has meaning, and should be shared.

I just reread that comment and although I already responded to it, I only did so to the first part. As to the second, you said “But it's part of us, has meaning, and should be shared.”

No, it’s not “part of us,” it’s part of the artist, is personal, and so is its meaning. This isn’t group therapy where disclosure is encouraged but rather where each artist is allowed to decide what and if they want to say something about themselves to others through their art.

Perhaps you are familiar with the discipline of art therapy. While it has several modalities, some that work with psychoanalysis, others use “art as therapy” where the creation and process of making the art is used to work on a variety of issues such as self-esteem, cognitive and emotional issues, and just plain personal growth. The products that come out of this are not “…part of us, has meaning, and should be shared.”

IMO, many artists, and I would include myself in this, might not be working with a therapist but, to some degree, make their work with a nod, even indirectly, to “art as therapy” and find that it can boost self-esteem and lead to a range of personal growth opportunities. It’s not necessary to show the work to others for these positive outcomes to take place. The reflects the fact that we all create things for a wide variety of personal reasons.

As for this “pride” issue that has come up, let me comment on that. Some people couch pride as some kind of negative emotion, perhaps something that leads to boasting, etc. But, IMO, a healthy pride is the result of self-satisfaction that comes from a personal accomplishment as in a job well-done. There is no shortage of false pride around. I hear that all the time when people harp about being proud of where they were born. How is an accident of birth something to be proud of? What did they do to contribute to that outcome other than to show up?

However, creating something, such as a piece of art, is something that the artist can be proud of, having achieved a goal, and the artist may want to share that with their community of others who also create work and achieved their own personal goals. Whether they choose to do so is, as I’ve alluded, highly personal and certainly not required by society.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I agree. Having pride in your accomplishments and sharing it with others is healthy as long as it doesn't lead to braggadocio.

Of course if you don't want to share it that's okay too.

The one time I think it is important to post though is when you're recommending or describing a process that you use. Showing samples is helpful to readers.

 

[koraks]

The one time I think it is important to post though is when you're recommending or describing a process that you use. Showing samples is helpful to readers.

Given the choice:
1: A person making a technical recommendation or process description. No image attached.
2: Same person keeping his mouth shut because an image is expected and they don't feel like including one.

Which would be the most useful?

PS: there's also a massive difference between offering a technical illustration and showing photos for the sake of exhibiting them. The former is off-topic in this thread as far as I'm concerned (which doesn't mean it can't be discussed).

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Given the choice:
1: A person making a technical recommendation or process description. No image attached.
2: Same person keeping his mouth shut because an image is expected and they don't feel like including one.

Which would be the most useful?

PS: there's also a massive difference between offering a technical illustration and showing photos for the sake of exhibiting them. The former is off-topic in this thread as far as I'm concerned (which doesn't mean it can't be discussed).

3. Showing samples.

 

[Don_ih]

3. Showing samples.

Which amounts to #2 if a person has no or cannot show (for whatever reason) examples.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I just reread that comment and although I already responded to it, I only did so to the first part. As to the second, you said “But it's part of us, has meaning, and should be shared.”

No, it’s not “part of us,” it’s part of the artist, is personal, and so is its meaning. This isn’t group therapy where disclosure is encouraged but rather where each artist is allowed to decide what and if they want to say something about themselves to others through their art.

Perhaps you are familiar with the discipline of art therapy. While it has several modalities, some that work with psychoanalysis, others use “art as therapy” where the creation and process of making the art is used to work on a variety of issues such as self-esteem, cognitive and emotional issues, and just plain personal growth. The products that come out of this are not “…part of us, has meaning, and should be shared.”

IMO, many artists, and I would include myself in this, might not be working with a therapist but, to some degree, make their work with a nod, even indirectly, to “art as therapy” and find that it can boost self-esteem and lead to a range of personal growth opportunities. It’s not necessary to show the work to others for these positive outcomes to take place. The reflects the fact that we all create things for a wide variety of personal reasons.

As for this “pride” issue that has come up, let me comment on that. Some people couch pride as some kind of negative emotion, perhaps something that leads to boasting, etc. But, IMO, a healthy pride is the result of self-satisfaction that comes from a personal accomplishment as in a job well-done. There is no shortage of false pride around. I hear that all the time when people harp about being proud of where they were born. How is an accident of birth something to be proud of? What did they do to contribute to that outcome other than to show up?

However, creating something, such as a piece of art, is something that the artist can be proud of, having achieved a goal, and the artist may want to share that with their community of others who also create work and achieved their own personal goals. Whether they choose to do so is, as I’ve alluded, highly personal and certainly not required by society.

How can your art say something to others if you don't show it? Sure, you have a right not to show it. But what is he point then? What better place to show your photographic art then on a photo forum.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Which amounts to #2 if a person has no or cannot show (for whatever reason) examples.

If he has no samples, how does he even know it works? That lessens its acceptability to the reader. How many people would buy a garment on the web if there's no picture of it? That's a hard sell.

 

[Don_ih]

If he has no samples, how does he even know it works? That lessens its acceptability to the reader. How many people would buy a garment on the web if there's no picture of it? That's a hard sell.

On this site are people with a vast amount of experience of all kinds of things. They can possibly remember the best way to do something but might not have done it in a long time. If you want to disregard what they say because they have no photos to show, feel free to do so. But making them feel their opinions are worthless to everybody because they fail to provide what you want is contrary to the best interests of the whole.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

On this site are people with a vast amount of experience of all kinds of things. They can possibly remember the best way to do something but might not have done it in a long time. If you want to disregard what they say because they have no photos to show, feel free to do so. But making them feel their opinions are worthless to everybody because they fail to provide what you want is contrary to the best interests of the whole.

Their suggestions would be stronger if they provided samples.

 

[Mike Lopez]

How can your art say something to others if you don't show it? Sure, you have a right not to show it. But what is he point then? What better place to show your photographic art then on a photo forum.

Nobody owes you an exhibition of their work, Alan. How many times, by how many people, and in how many different ways must this be said?

 

[Mike Lopez]

I agree. Having pride in your accomplishments and sharing it with others is healthy as long as it doesn't lead to braggadocio.

Of course if you don't want to share it that's okay too.

The one time I think it is important to post though is when you're recommending or describing a process that you use. Showing samples is helpful to readers.

Pick a lane already.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Nobody owes you an exhibition of their work, Alan. How many times, by how many people, and in how many different ways must this be said?

You're right. And I don't have to accept their opinions. There are loads of people on social media who don't know what they're talking aout, make claims to all sort of stuff they've never actually done. Of course, over a period of time, you get to trust certain posters. But many people throw something out there with nothing beyond their opinion.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Why would anyone buy any garment of alleged value they can't even feel or try on, or see directly with their own eyes? People ask for proof of this or that on web forums like this one. But when it comes to discussing qualitative issues and technique, a fifty cent postcard might look just as good over the web as a masterpiece print four feet wide. It's simply too low a common denominator of image reproduction to be taken as serious "proof" of anything. If people enjoy sharing their images in that manner, that's fine. But the sad thing is that it's the only medium many people know.

This thread began with the topic of slide projection, and doggone it, at least as far as still images go, an old-fashioned slide show sixty or more years ago put to shame any current web presentation. Seems the current standard of visual communication ain't so hot after all. And why would I want to insult my own prints by posting them in that fashion?

Yeah...Pretty soon I'll start digitally cataloging these for sake of my heirs, but that's not how I intend for them to be sold or appreciated. It will simply be for sake of knowing where to look for the real deal, and how many of them there are, and in which sizes.

 

[VinceInMT]

How can your art say something to others if you don't show it? Sure, you have a right not to show it. But what is he point then? What better place to show your photographic art then on a photo forum.

Where did I say that my art says something to others when I don’t show it? You are building a strawman and this is not the first time.

You also said “What better place to show your photographic art then on a photo forum.”

Perhaps a place where people would be willing to purchase it off the wall.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Where did I say that my art says something to others when I don’t show it? You are building a strawman and this is not the first time.

You also said “What better place to show your photographic art then on a photo forum.”

Perhaps a place where people would be willing to purchase it off the wall.

Well sure. If you sell your photos, unlike me, that makes sense.

 

[koraks]

And I don't have to accept their opinions.

Sure. But this is your problem, not the problem of people who don't give an illustration. And since it's your problem, you get to solve it. Good luck.

 

[Helge]

Antropologists and connected sciences pretty much agree that the whole reason art exists in the first place is sexual selection. Therefor showing off your art is deeply intertwined with making and thinking about your own art, whether you are aware of it, and whether you want to admit it.

A common and good strategy is to hold back in showing off your art, until you have attained proficient skill or accumulated a large body of work, to maximise impact.
Anyone who has ever presented a stack of lab prints from a whole roll, or several rolls to someone, will know the sting of having them leaf through them quickly and change the subject. While conversely two or three frames from the same stack will get a much better response.
In other words self criticism, and self curation is very valuable to any artist.

Holding back too long and too much can become a "pathological" state though, as witnessed with for example Vivian Maier.
Even she allegedly had unfulfilled fantasies about an exhibition.

Insecurities and perceived lack of a receptive audience can be a catalyser of this state.

What I'm saying is just that, even if we as humans are different individuals, looked at through a high pass filter, when run through a low pass filter we are remarkably alike.

Any artist or indeed any human has a deeply ingrained need to show off their deeds and work. It's about survival in the short run and in the genetic race.

We will not always put the above into those words or think about it that way, but essentially that is what it's about.

Is that a cynical and reductive view of art? Not at all!
There is nothing more wonderful and complex than the interplay between humans in the known universe.
The only reason art "works" is because there is a highly sophisticated recipient that co-creates the art every time it's experienced.
Sometimes that recipient is even yourself, after some time.
And perhaps especially after feeling others reaction to your creation.