What is beauty?

Jim Chinn · Nov 22, 2008

I am so busy these days I rarely have time to post anymore and when I check out APUG I find a few thousand posts staring me in the face. But I felt compelled to respond to this one.

I see a certain beauty in my own work, although perhaps it is best to let others be the ultimate judge. Maybe better word for me to apply is satisfaction with the end result and a feeling of joy during the whole process.

I have been thinking about beauty lately. Just after sunset look to the southwest and you can see both Jupiter and Venus in the sky close together. Late this month and December 1st you sill see the pair closer still accompanied by a crescent moon. A very rare convergence that is beautifull and yet so simple. In somewhat troubling times such as these I find the best medicine for me is to look to the sky and find eternal beauty in the heavens and ponder the simple truths that lie somewhere beyond.

Nicholas Lindan · Nov 22, 2008

dpurdy said:
Beauty is a lame human concept...

A refutation: Dead Link Removed, C. S. Lewis.

jpeets · Nov 22, 2008

Some of the discussion has an Orwellian flavour to it - "Ugly is beautiful".

Unfortunately we live in an age where "art" is so loosely defined as to be meaningless. If you asked 100 people whether a given image was beautiful or not, there would tend to be a consensus: however, we have drifted into a relativistic world where people, especially academics and self-described "artists" feel free to define anything as anything.

For me, a successful image is an image that is beautiful in content and execution. I will admit that journalistic images of the non-beautiful can be thought-provoking, stimulate an emotion, etc. but they are not beautiful, no matter how nicely printed.

If we lose the ability to be repelled by violence, horror and destruction, we lose a part of that which defines our humanity. If we are attracted, we should seek counselling or medication.

Domenico Foschi · Nov 22, 2008

The concept of Beauty, like many others, is one that has been re-interpreted many times, often by the wrong people.
Beauty, is far from being only a visual experience but it also has an intangible characteristic that you cannot see but feel at a deeper level.
Beauty, with the Capital B, is also a synonym for Truth, Love, God.
This is why when we look at a stunning image of something we perceive as tragic or even downright "ugly", we are compelled to say :that is a beautiful image.
It is the Job of the artist to show that this Beauty is in effect everywhere through the magical alchemy of the work of Art, be it a photograph, a painting, a sculpture or any other media.
It is an invitation to live Life in a deeper a more meaningful way, living Life not just by our more immediate sensory organs but also what we call instincts, or Faith etc.
After all even science agrees with that with Quantum Physics.

Then of course there is Kincade....

sun of sand · Nov 22, 2008

A photograph like that capa I think is beautiful and it's not entirely dependent on how well the print was made or its composition
How can a person say its ugly and yet continue to war? That dude getting shot -or not- is beautiful because it shows you what war is about
we all think we know what war is about
but this shows us that it's all about death
Whichever side dies more and you have the loser

I think you either love the photo or you wish you didn't have to see it
Just by looking at it you know nothing of what has occured in real life for this man in that instance so developing a reaction to it is completely based on how much of the story you can gather up
With the story comes its ugliness but I do doubt that people can say its ugly without being a bit complicit in his death and so -to me- it begs for an answer to this
Is this ugly
or am I ugly
I believe people are much more inclined to say something else is ugly so they can believe forever and ever they're free of guilt

War has to be beautiful ..if it were not would it still occur?
War "saves us" from something "ugly" or gives us something we did not have before and people equate having things -whatever those things are- as beauty/beautiful
wide hips, big breasts, square chin, muscles, jewelry, money, fame, knowledge

Is sex beautiful? The act? Or is "making love" beautiful because it gives you something
"make love"
?
You get what love is partly, you get a child
Is childbirth beautiful? The act? Or is it beautiful because of what you ultimately get out of it?
A son or daughter

These things don't just come about
To love one thing, I believe, means you have to love everything about the process. I don't believe anyone can say that love (beauty) is sometimes an ugly thing.

What about the comet/asteroid that wiped this planet down to essentially a clean slate? It gave us us
Horrific for those on the ** end of it
but I think you have to say it was beautiful if you believe childbirth is in any way beautiful

Is spanking beautiful? If spanking helps bring about a better, more beautiful society ...
Is 2+2=4 beautiful?
Was the first __ fruit that "adam and eve" ate beautiful? Was their first ** beautiful to them? Was your first breath beautiful?

Beauty doesn't exist in the world

However, if you want to make beauty a real thing
You have to accept that everything is beautiful, IMO
You can create a ranking system if it makes you feel better about yourself
We all do

If everything isn't beautiful to you
live without what is ugly for a while

eddym · Nov 22, 2008

jpeets said:
For me, a successful image is an image that is beautiful in content and execution. I will admit that journalistic images of the non-beautiful can be thought-provoking, stimulate an emotion, etc. but they are not beautiful, no matter how nicely printed.

So by your definition, would this photo by W. Eugene Smith from his Minimata series be beautiful or not?
http://masters-of-photography.com/S/smith/smith_minamata_full.html

Thomas Bertilsson · Nov 22, 2008

That image is beautiful due to the parent-child (?) relationship. Love is present.
It is also sad, due to the situation of this person. A less than enviable state of life that makes me truly appreciate how lucky I am and have been.

- Thomas

Bobby Ironsights · Nov 22, 2008

Are you guys all high? Pass the bong, cheech and chong!

Beauty is like porn, you know it when you see it, and it doesn't have to be explained to any adult, regardless of education or training.

Of course photographs don't have to be beautiful to be successful, you'd have to be pretty strange cookie to only pursue beauty. War photography informs, product photography sells, and technical photography documents and illuminates...it just goes on from there.

All of these examples pale in comparison to the majority of successful photography. Pictures which document. Snapshots of aunt Ethel or baby Thomas aren't very often beautiful, but they are very important, the bulk of photography has almost always been, and probably always will be, the family snapshot.

Even artists should know that. I mean, what kind of idiot would choose a fine print of Ansel Adams over the only remaining 4x6 of thier mom, or dad, or grandparents, if they've passed away?

I don't really wish I had anything in MoMA. I wish I had a picture of Snoopy. He was my dog and my best friend and I haven't seen him since I was 12.

Frank Szabo · Nov 22, 2008

Beauty?

Varying combinations and types of patterns and symmetry.

jimgalli · Nov 22, 2008

Yes, I do labor to make beautiful photographs. But that is almost laughable in today's world of art. Make it shocking, make it big. Beauty is out. Beauty is retro and of little interest. Beauty is bourgeois.

I'll tell you why, you can all have your laugh, but don't bother commenting.

Beauty is that which glorifies the creator of beauty, God. Sometimes the light which HE also created can make the most Dead Link Removed beautiful. Again, the Glory is His.

This world and it's inhabitants have rejected the Creator. Since we don't want him around, and beauty just reminds us of Him, we reject beauty and replace it with shock value. Ugliness is in.

Domenico Foschi · Nov 23, 2008

Bobby Ironsights said:
you'd have to be pretty strange cookie to only pursue beauty.

Could you explain that thought?

Bobby Ironsights · Nov 23, 2008

Domenico Foschi said:
Could you explain that thought?

I'm disappointed, I thought I explained it pretty well, and now I'm sad I didn't. I see you're from L.A., but are you a modern day Narcissus that I have to explain it further?

Seriously, photography is a powerful medium in use in every field of human endeavour from Astronomy, to Zoology and everything in between. Photographs which aren't pretty at all, topple governments, start wars and inspire everyday acts of human kindness. There's a very long list, and I don't think I have to waste any more pixels on all the things that aren't pretty, and aren't shallow.

Fashion shoots, tasteful nudes, still life's and picture postcards? Everyone likes a pretty picture, I like a pretty picture, but the people who take those pictures day in and day out and nothing else, do it to pay the rent, or are a little peculiar.

Domenico Foschi · Nov 23, 2008

I fail to remember where I could have insulted you, but by the way you express yourself I am not giving to your words much weight.
If what you say is right then people like kertesz, Atget, Watkins, Brassai and many, many more were all cookies since they felt compelled to spend their lives in the pursuit of Beauty.
The same goes for painters like Shiele, Cezanne,.... sculptors like Rodin or Moore,...all strange fellows that all they did in their lives was to do Art.
When you say pretty, do you use the word as a synonym of Beauty?
Because if you do, then you have never experienced the real power of Beauty.

Ian Leake · Nov 23, 2008

Bobby Ironsights said:
Fashion shoots, tasteful nudes, still life's and picture postcards? Everyone likes a pretty picture, I like a pretty picture, but the people who take those pictures day in and day out and nothing else, do it to pay the rent, or are a little peculiar.

Goodness me. Where to start...

Of course there's a role for snapshots of family; even snapshots of cats, puppies and drunken friends. Documentary, scientific, product, fashion, and other pretty pictures also have an important role to play in society. But I didn't think anyone was talking about these. I know I wasn't - that's why I used the word 'art' in my original post. None of the artists I know do what they do in order to make money - they do it because they have something important to say. If that's, "a little peculiar," then so be it.

As Jim says, it does seem unfashionable to want to make beautiful art nowadays (although I don't subscribe to a religious motivation for this). Having said that though, I spent a few minutes with one of Van Goghs Sunflowers yesterday. Judging by the number of people in the gallery theres still an appetite for beauty amongst the general public.

IloveTLRs · Nov 23, 2008

Many photos that I find beauty in, other people don't .. and vice versa. Go figure. Guess it means I suck. :confused:

Chuck_P · Nov 23, 2008

eddym said:
So by your definition, would this photo by W. Eugene Smith from his Minimata series be beautiful or not?
http://masters-of-photography.com/S/smith/smith_minamata_full.html

This is a different kind of beauty for sure-----how the woman feels for the boy is very evident, the emotional bond is clearly seen here and it does not require a "fine print" quality for that to be revealed.

But other things in photography seem, at least for me, to be heavily depenedent on the quality of the finished product. Some photography can rest on subject matter alone and the "moment" of capture---------but IMO, much of photography can't.

Ian Leake · Nov 23, 2008

CPorter said:
But other things in photography seem, at least for me, to be heavily depenedent on the quality of the finished product. Some photography can rest on subject matter alone and the "moment" of capture---------but IMO, much of photography can't.

That's interesting. Can you give some examples?

Chuck_P · Nov 23, 2008

Ian Leake said:
That's interesting. Can you give some examples?

Ok, I'll try, but I'm no art historian or anything like that---it's just how I feel about it and hope I get it across.

Most here would recognize the photograph from the Vietnam war when the South Vietnamese (spelling?) officer executed an individual right there in the street, put a gun to his head and pulled the trigger. Wow, I believe that was a Pulitzer winning photograph, was it not? That is a captured moment in time that is as expressive today as it was then------it can't be denied. No one here in there right mind would criticize any technical aspect of that photograph; the skill and the fortuitous positioning and perspective of the photographer at that very moment is not to be questioned. It's value lies elsewhere, IMO, either to society or whatever. I've never spoken to another photojournalist about this particular shot, but I would be interested in knowing where the "beauty" lies with him/her.

In contrast as I see it, and I realize it may be narrow-minded, most other photography has to rest on other laurels. I don't think for a second that any of the work of Adams, Weston, Sexton, Loranc, and on and on (i.e., those photographers that I particularly enjoy) could soley rest on the "moment" of capture that is some of their greatest work. There is much more involved in bringing that "beauty" to the surface of the paper on which it is printed. Their skill behind the camera (i.e., their "seeing", etc.) and in the darkroom combine so magically to create what it is that we see and it is in that sense where this discussion of "beauty" becomes completely esoteric to me and very singular in meaning and irrelevant of subject matter.

This probably not a good explanation but.............

Bobby Ironsights · Nov 23, 2008

Domenico Foschi said:
I fail to remember where I could have insulted you, but by the way you express yourself I am not giving to your words much weight.
If what you say is right then people like kertesz, Atget, Watkins, Brassai and many, many more were all cookies since they felt compelled to spend their lives in the pursuit of Beauty.
The same goes for painters like Shiele, Cezanne,.... sculptors like Rodin or Moore,...all strange fellows that all they did in their lives was to do Art.
When you say pretty, do you use the word as a synonym of Beauty?
Because if you do, then you have never experienced the real power of Beauty.

Please don't get bent out of shape, Dom. We're just talking here. If I was sharp in my last reply; please forgive. I'm running on the ragged edge, as it's a week from exam time for us Univ. students.

No, I beleive there are more important things than beauty, perhaps I haven't felt the "power".

Funny thing comes to mind, now that you mention famous artists, there was a study done, can't remember the name of it, looking at the correlation between profession and mental illness. Artists rated most highly and amoung artists, visual artists rated lowest on the scale, but still higher than the general populace. sculptors had the highest rate of all. I think it was like 60% among sculptors. I've never looked at a sculpture since without being reminded of that.

I did a quick search on the 'net couldn't find the study. It might be true that you can find almost anything on the internet, but I've found that if you don't know the right search terms, and have limited time...you're xxxx out of luck.

cowanw · Nov 23, 2008

Frank Szabo said:
Beauty?

Varying combinations and types of patterns and symmetry.

I find myself embarrassed by this, but a coworker brought in a pile of WW2 photo's taken by an American soldier who documented his tour of duty. Included were Consentration camp photo's. In those was a photo of the gas chamber composed with the drain, the shower head and the smears of blood or feces on the white washed wall perfectly balanced in form and tone.
I blurted out loud what a beautiful photo this was. Terrible but beautiful.
The reality of the what it represented was forgotten in the appreciation of the light and shadows; patterns and symmetry.
Briefly forgotten, as I recovered my morality in a few seconds.
But people were looking at me strangely.
I still wonder at myself.
I wanted to catalogue and copy the negatives and approach the army division historical section but the owner never took me up on that.

cowanw · Nov 23, 2008

eddym said:
So by your definition, would this photo by W. Eugene Smith from his Minimata series be beautiful or not?
http://masters-of-photography.com/S/smith/smith_minamata_full.html

By the way, Smith gave the rights to this photo to the family and they have requested that it not be reproduced.

tinyfailures · Nov 23, 2008

Beauty is obviously subjective, but for many owes its allegiance to classical concepts. In your work, late-Greek to early-Roman proportions seem to dominate. In your print work, it's the attention to technical detail. More broadly, I think we perceive beauty in a context of both classicism and modernism. (I mean the Western ideals.) Forms that are simplified to the level of Bauhaus necessity that still display classical proportions are often commonly accepted as beautiful.

naknak · Nov 23, 2008

Most of the time,when I hear the phrase "it's a subjective issue",I feel that it comes from immature people. If we are asked to give an answer in difficult situations,such as the question about beauty,we either have to give our viewpoint or simply say that we don't know.Beauty is obvious to every one and I don't think helpfull trying to explain the "what" . "How" and "why" come first to me. In that way we can jump over our subjectivism and come into the field of objectivity. We will certainly give our subjective answers to the issue but whatever they are,they will be recognized by all those who are mainly interested not for what they are (flesh,bones and blood cells) but the way they are. And I mean the way they exist.

Once I was asked from my children why they were born without their will,without asking them before. And I answered: You were nothing and now you are something. Its up to you to be something or become to nothing. What do you want? What do you prefer? They didn't answer.

Kyprianos

jpeets · Nov 23, 2008

eddym said:
So by your definition, would this photo by W. Eugene Smith from his Minimata series be beautiful or not?
http://masters-of-photography.com/S/smith/smith_minamata_full.html

It is probably one of the more powerful and masterful images I know, and tears at the heart, but beautiful - no. To me, beauty cannot coexist with such pain.

Frank Szabo · Nov 23, 2008

IloveTLRs said:
Many photos that I find beauty in, other people don't .. and vice versa. Go figure. Guess it means I suck. :confused:

That's a good one!

Beauty's definition is similar to what art's would be - It's very subjective. There are as many opinions as there are elbows.

Three words and all these attempts at a definition - I'm find it rather comical that the shape of the table can't even be agreed upon let alone all of us find an answer.

I must suck too. Maybe after I'm not around ...

What is beauty?

Are your photos beautiful?

All my successful photos are beautiful

Most of my successful photos are beautiful

Some of my successful photos are beautiful

None of my successful photos are beautiful

I don't care about beauty

Jim Chinn

Nicholas Lindan

Advertiser

jpeets

Domenico Foschi

sun of sand

eddym

Thomas Bertilsson

Bobby Ironsights

Frank Szabo

jimgalli

Domenico Foschi

Bobby Ironsights

Domenico Foschi

Ian Leake

IloveTLRs

Chuck_P

Ian Leake

Chuck_P

Bobby Ironsights

cowanw

cowanw

tinyfailures

naknak

jpeets

Frank Szabo

What is beauty?

Are your photos beautiful?

All my successful photos are beautiful

Most of my successful photos are beautiful

Some of my successful photos are beautiful

None of my successful photos are beautiful

I don't care about beauty

Advertiser

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency