What is consider a photograph?

[eddie]

Innovative or creative effort stands side by side with time and difficulty.

I completely disagree. Some people have better imaginations than others. Some have easier times with abstract concepts. For them, creativity requires less effort, as it's ingrained in their DNA.

 

[MattKing]

Portrait to me is a visual art. It should stand on it's own merit as a visual message.

That is certainly a perfectly valid way of defining something as a "portrait". It is a fairly traditional definition though, and there are other ways of defining portraits.

To pick an example from the painting world, I think that Diego Velazquez's – "Las Meninas" is both definitively a portrait, while still being much more than just a visual message.

And just about any of Jane Bown's famous portraits are enhanced greatly if you know even the slightest amount about her subjects - Samuel Beckett being a perfect example:

 

[Craig75]

Innovative or creative effort stands side by side with time and difficulty. I fail to see the stand apart creativity in this work.

it really doesnt. People were producing incredible results just using a pendulum and a flashlight over film. Neither intrinsically difficult nor time consuming but... results were spectacular.

A lot of experimental darkroom and photography techniques could be taught in 5 mins but the mindset.... thats another thing altogether

 

[removed account4]

Having a person scribble on a paper during tea time and then turning it in as a portrait feels to me like playing the judges. If the judges want to make an artistic point they will go after the strangest thing. Art is in the eye of the beholder but the community is very insular and will accept things from one of their own that would be laughed at if a non insider would attempt.

It's a very haughty attitude that I've bumped into over time. I am not one of you so I can't play your game. It's high-school all over again.

sorry it really has nothing ot do with high school or haughty attitudes.

 

[Cholentpot]

That is certainly a perfectly valid way of defining something as a "portrait". It is a fairly traditional definition though, and there are other ways of defining portraits.

To pick an example from the painting world, I think that Diego Velazquez's – "Las Meninas" is both definitively a portrait, while still being much more than just a visual message.

And just about any of Jane Bown's famous portraits are enhanced greatly if you know even the slightest amount about her subjects - Samuel Beckett being a perfect example:

View attachment 183560

I don't know who Samuel Beckett is but I still find that to be a striking portrait regardless.

I don't disagree that a portrait can be enhanced by an explanation but the visual should take the bulk of the experience and the explanation should enhance but not become the primary.

 

[MattKing]

I don't know who Samuel Beckett is

I like this reference:
Beckett is most famous for his play En attendant Godot (1953) (Waiting for Godot). In a much-quoted article, the critic Vivian Mercier wrote that Beckett "has achieved a theoretical impossibility—a play in which nothing happens, that yet keeps audiences glued to their seats. What's more, since the second act is a subtly different reprise of the first, he has written a play in which nothing happens, twice."
Spoiler alert: Godot never arrives .

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... "...he has written a play in which nothing happens, twice." ...

I liked the Jackie Chiles character.

 

[removed account4]

That is certainly a perfectly valid way of defining something as a "portrait". It is a fairly traditional definition though, and there are other ways of defining portraits.

To pick an example from the painting world, I think that Diego Velazquez's – "Las Meninas" is both definitively a portrait, while still being much more than just a visual message.

And just about any of Jane Bown's famous portraits are enhanced greatly if you know even the slightest amount about her subjects - Samuel Beckett being a perfect example:

View attachment 183560

but matt

is that really him or a mask he wears so we might think it is who we believe he is ?

 

[MartinCrabtree]

She had an idea and chased it to completion. I like the photo and concept. Wouldn't do it myself..........out of fear no one would like it.

 

[jim10219]

They said the same things about Picasso, Pollock, and Rothko. Whenever something new comes out that pushes the definitions of what is valid in the art community, there are more people who push back who don't understand it. Great art is rarely understood or appreciated by the masses in its time, whereas the art that is understood and lauded by the masses during its time is usually destined to be forgotten.

Personally, I like it, but don't love it. It's definitely a refreshing change in a category that has shown very little innovation since it's inception. The chaos of the texture juxtaposes the concept of the subject. The colors are unsettling, yet harmonic. I get a good sense of the moment from which it was "taken", which is a large part of what photography is all about. But I don't yet see much room to expand further along this path without it too suffering from repetition. I would be excited to see this developed into a series and see if it works beyond just this one.

In any event, the number of responses this has generated across the internet thus far is proof of its power. It is, at the least, thought provoking.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I don't know who Samuel Beckett is

Shame Shame He was one of the leading writers and playwrights in the English language.

 

[Vaughn]

...I don't disagree that a portrait can be enhanced by an explanation but the visual should take the bulk of the experience and the explanation should enhance but not become the primary.

I think the work of Duane Michals might point the other way. The words are as an important part of the work as the images.

http://www.dcmooregallery.com/artists/duane-michals/series/photographs-with-text

 

[Cholentpot]

Shame Shame He was one of the leading writers and playwrights in the English language.

Welp, guess I gotta get educated.

I'm just here throwing out my heavily weighted opinions. I'm not apprehensive about admitting that first impressions are what stick. If I am not wowed buy any piece of art by it's initial impression than I am more than likely to dismiss it. Picasso, Pollock, and others did do this. They did have the stopyouinyourtracks. But for the rest of us, the most we can hope for out of our work is 'That's lovely.' When I see the winners and top artists I want to see bold ideas and bold implementation of these ideas. Humdrum banality that does not embolden and set fire to minds, in my opinion should not be at the forefront.

 

[MattKing]

Shame Shame He was one of the leading writers and playwrights in the English language.

Which is ironic, given that several of his most appreciated works were written first in French!

 

[ced]

Graph yes, photo yes so guess it must be a photograph. This will open the floodgates heralding the extinction of cameras & giving life to film for another purpose...

 

[removed account4]

what i fail to understand in this thread, and many others i have read over the years is why
when someone takes a straight forward photograph of some sort of scene, that might be hackneyed, clichéd or not really
that takes effort and know-how and more than just being there with zyx camera and xyz lens abc paper and film &c
they are demonized if/when they are acclaimed, and when someone interprets a situation and makes some sort of abstract creative project from it, that might have taken
years to perfect ( like with this portrait or similarly in case and serrano's massive 7 or 8 foot tall photograph ) , and they win some sort of an award, get an honor, or $$ for their efforts
they are also demonized.
it seems as a photographer trying to make it in any sort of way
no matter what happens they are destined to get kicked down the street.
one might think that photographs gaining acclaim ( especially ones made with film &c )
help the medium get more acceptance as an artform
whether that artform is straight forward, or creative.

not sure if it is back stabbing, sour grapes ( i could have done that ) or a general dislike for anyone
who has somehow gotten recognition for their efforts. it makes me think twice about
ever posting about anything i have been involved with or presentations/shows i have seen &c..

its pretty sad

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

For me, there is a danger of thinking that I know about photography though I've been shooting for over 35 years. It's important for me to challenge my assumptions and it's OK for me to ask question that might not have an answer. The world as well as the world of photography is changing, having a static view of what a photograph or a good photograph is just being stuck and not growing my art of choice. Remember Ansel Adams railed against pictorialism? Over a hundred years ago, when Alfred Steiglitz hung photos in his gallery, there were discussions whether a photograph is even art.

 

[Craig75]

Aesthetics is a personal belief system though. It would be a strange world if everyone said "ah marvellous" to everything as then no one would have any taste or personality. If you arent offending someone you arent doing anything

 

[removed account4]

i understand what both of you are saying and i am in agreement,
but IDK when somene sells work for x$ and they are
called a hack, and someone else does something
out of the ordinary and they are drawn and quartered
by an angry mob claiming art schools have ruined the world
its a bit much ...

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

i understand what both of you are saying and i am in agreement,
but IDK when somene sells work for x$ and they are
called a hack, and someone else does something
out of the ordinary and they are drawn and quartered
by an angry mob claiming art schools have ruined the world
its a bit much ...

People who create art are not as dangerous has politicians and criminals. Art at it's worst is a waste of your time. No body got hurt nor killed. Maybe the viewer got insulted. Good art on the other hand is transformative. We all have to take the good with the bad. Time will take care of bad art. It's simply forgotten or used as an example of bad art.

 

[ntenny]

i understand what both of you are saying and i am in agreement,
but IDK when somene sells work for x$ and they are
called a hack, and someone else does something
out of the ordinary and they are drawn and quartered
by an angry mob claiming art schools have ruined the world
its a bit much ...

"Drawn and quartered" seems a little strong, don't you think? I see people saying "I don't like it", people seeing "I see no creativity here", but I missed the part of the thread where anyone called for a bloody vengeance upon the transgressing artist.

I dunno, to me it seems a basically healthy debate. Art can be polarising, and maybe art *should* be polarising. How would we ever have misunderstood geniuses if there were no one ready to misunderstand them?

-NT

 

[removed account4]

"Drawn and quartered" seems a little strong, don't you think? I see people saying "I don't like it", people seeing "I see no creativity here", but I missed the part of the thread where anyone called for a bloody vengeance upon the transgressing artist.

I dunno, to me it seems a basically healthy debate. Art can be polarising, and maybe art *should* be polarising. How would we ever have misunderstood geniuses if there were no one ready to misunderstand them?

-NT

hi nathan
this thread is rather benign but in other threads over the years
things were pretty frightening, and it wasn't a pretty thing to watch.
i don't mind polarizing, or arguments, boasting or commentary
but it was about 10x worse than that and ... it wasn't that and a bit much.
thankfully, the haters are off hating someplace else