What is the value of Art school?

[removed account4]

What, Flying Camera - you're not even giving Carravagio credit being an actual murderer, a fugitive for awhile, and depicting his own damnation in the corner of one of his paintings? But some of the great art patrons of that era were also infamous murderers, especially the Pope more commonly known by his family name of Borgia. And Carravagio could paint.
Someone once brought me a fake Carravagio to sleuth. I'm no expert on that topic, but even I could tell from clear across the room it was a fake. It indeed looked like a very very old painting, and had all the correct symbolism for a Carravagio; but the brush technique was, well, err... So I convinced the owner to allow me to photograph it with infrared film for a few hundred dollars, rather than going to an expert and potentially spending thousands for their split second condemnation of it. And sure enough, there was some underpainting which looked 1920's vintage. People, including me, make fun of all kinds of artists. Some people ask why so much money can be spent to obtain just a few squiggles by someone like Picasso. Part of the answer is that they have money to throw away to begin with, and I don't. But Picasso earned his credentials as an incredible draftsman first. He could do it all. But then I look at the glorified vandalism of Jean-Michel Basquiat, whom Warhol championed, which indeed, for sheer speed of production (assisted by terminal drug abuse), did contain a lot of interesting hue and shape relationships, but leaves me asking, could he do anything else to warrant such fame and prices, like actually draw anything else???? So frankly, they should take some of that obscene quantity of money and start sandblasting and repainting over all that illegal spray paint vandalism he put onto public and private property. ... Now, hopefully, somebody on this forum actually admires him, and I truly hope I have BBQ'd their sacred cow. But it really doesn't matter, because as long as there is art and pretentious art photography, there will always be an abundance of questionable examples of that, and we'll all have something to poke fun at.

No titanium white ? That is the usual tell... people make a lovely in the style of with paint
That sadly didn’t exist. ....

 

[DREW WILEY]

Great artists used only lead white pigment; but it never turns up on their canvases because they ate it first.

 

[KenS]

It seems to me that Community Colleges tend to be more like trade schools...teaching technique and practical aspects, geared more to careers in commercial photography and commercial art, less about fine art.

Pieter,
After many years as a "Pro' (with Board certification as a 'specialist') and 60+ years under the dark-cloth I 'answered my PhD-type daughter's "Challenge" to go and 'do' my BFA at the nearby university (as a means of staying out of the rocking chair and 'away from day-time television' where I found that 'meaning' and 'context' of one's image was more important than 'how well' it was made (think 'craftsmanship'). Digital manipulation became more important than 'control' of the hardware by which the image was 'recorded'. (It always 'helped' to vocalize your admiration of the professor's 'art-works')

It was almost enough for me to 'walk away' without 'seeing it through to the end'

Ken
(without the 13 'letters' I am 'allowed' to put after my name)

 

[Pieter12]

Pieter,
After many years as a "Pro' (with Board certification as a 'specialist') and 60+ years under the dark-cloth I 'answered my PhD-type daughter's "Challenge" to go and 'do' my BFA at the nearby university (as a means of staying out of the rocking chair and 'away from day-time television' where I found that 'meaning' and 'context' of one's image was more important than 'how well' it was made (think 'craftsmanship'). Digital manipulation became more important than 'control' of the hardware by which the image was 'recorded'. (It always 'helped' to vocalize your admiration of the professor's 'art-works')

It was almost enough for me to 'walk away' without 'seeing it through to the end'

Ken
(without the 13 'letters' I am 'allowed' to put after my name)

There are slews of well-made, and quite boring, images. The challenge is to make one with meaning and context.

 

[DonJ]

Pieter,
After many years as a "Pro' (with Board certification as a 'specialist') and 60+ years under the dark-cloth I 'answered my PhD-type daughter's "Challenge" to go and 'do' my BFA at the nearby university (as a means of staying out of the rocking chair and 'away from day-time television' where I found that 'meaning' and 'context' of one's image was more important than 'how well' it was made (think 'craftsmanship'). Digital manipulation became more important than 'control' of the hardware by which the image was 'recorded'. (It always 'helped' to vocalize your admiration of the professor's 'art-works')

It was almost enough for me to 'walk away' without 'seeing it through to the end'

Ken
(without the 13 'letters' I am 'allowed' to put after my name)

if you’re going to keep reminding us about the 13 letters, you may as well use them. False modesty is the worst kind.

 

[jtk]

There are slews of well-made, and quite boring, images. The challenge is to make one with meaning and context.

How do you make context?

 

[Pieter12]

How do you make context?

Elements that enable the viewer to better understand or interpret the action or subject of the photograph.

 

[KenS]

if you’re going to keep reminding us about the 13 letters, you may as well use them. False modesty is the worst kind.

O Ye wha are sae guid yersel, sae pius and sae holy, ye've naught ta dea but mark and tell yer neighbour's fa'ts and follies'

(R.Burns in his address to the unca guid)

Ken

 

[jtk]

Elements that enable the viewer to better understand or interpret the action or subject of the photograph.

We differ: Context is the intellectual, emotional, and physical situation in which the "subject" exists or is placed...not merely intentional "elements that enable the viewer" ... I don't make photographs for the viewer.

When I built environments for elaborate food photographs the "context" wasn't what I was building, the context was financial (money) and interpersonal (the client and art director etc) and the era in which we were working. Most of the time I admired the art director and was always eager to help him/her achieve the image we were attempting to create together. The environment in the image (table settings, rising steam etc) was only a small part of the context. The fact that highly skilled people were working together at that time in our lives was the most important part of the context.

I was working with my food stylist on a portfolio photo for her. We learned that John Lennon had been killed. I played mandolin for a while. The food stylist was weeping. Her history included funny stuff, like her ridiculous family's annual exploding cakes. We assembled crystal and china and silverware and sponges and all sorts of kitchen fluids and made a bizarre portfolio photo that brought business for both of us. That's context.

 

[removed account4]

I might be way off in my own private Idaho but I always believed the only context needed for “art “ is its context within the “discourse” viewers only bring their own experiences and contextualize in a personal way. I might be wrong to say this jtk but the context you described might be “hidden” to those who weren’t involved. Like the context of things I am currently making have to do with post colonialism, exploitation and the spirit world ( as well as the difficulties faced making glass images, making self made photo emulsions, not using a darkroom &c ) but that’s hidden from viewer unless i make it the context of the images. To most people who look at the images all they see are what their experiences tell them.

Artz weird stuff...
Hope you and yours are safe

 

[jtk]

I might be way off in my own private Idaho but I always believed the only context needed for “art “ is its context within the “discourse” viewers only bring their own experiences and contextualize in a personal way. I might be wrong to say this jtk but the context you described might be “hidden” to those who weren’t involved. Like the context of things I am currently making have to do with post colonialism, exploitation and the spirit world ( as well as the difficulties faced making glass images, making self made photo emulsions, not using a darkroom &c ) but that’s hidden from viewer unless i make it the context of the images. To most people who look at the images all they see are what their experiences tell them.

Artz weird stuff...
Hope you and yours are safe

I enjoy your perspective. Two sides of same coin? Hidden (germinal) Vs blatant (label at gallery).

Weird stuff is better than not-weird.

I want to see (or read) more about "post colonialism, exploitation and the spirit world".

As to the plague... Got it, apparently passed thru it (no sleep for days). Coughing like mine might quickly suffocate somebody with COPD.

 

[jtk]

.

 

[jtk]

Photograper and prostitution...another perspective: https://quoteinvestigator.com/category/ad-reinhardt/

 

[Pieter12]

It is true that the context in which the photo is made is not always apparent, nor relevant. I believe this subject came up as part of a discussion of art, not commercial photography. Most don't give a rat's ass about the context of a food shot, certainly not the behind-the-scenes context. And when there is apparent context in commercial shots it's generally heavy-handed. However, a war or crisis photo, for example, certainly takes on more meaning to the viewer when there is some apparent context. Sometimes context comes from a series or body of work, the way the photos tell a story or illustrate some aspect of the subject. Sally Mann's family photos, for example.

“We look at the world and see what we have learned to believe is there...”
--Aaron Siskind

 

[jtk]

It is true that the context in which the photo is made is not always apparent, nor relevant. I believe this subject came up as part of a discussion of art, not commercial photography. Most don't give a rat's ass about the context of a food shot, certainly not the behind-the-scenes context. And when there is apparent context in commercial shots it's generally heavy-handed. However, a war or crisis photo, for example, certainly takes on more meaning to the viewer when there is some apparent context. Sometimes context comes from a series or body of work, the way the photos tell a story or illustrate some aspect of the subject. Sally Mann's family photos, for example.

“We look at the world and see what we have learned to believe is there...”
--Aaron Siskind

I don't think it's useful or logical to impose distinction between "art" and "commercial" partially because so many self-identified "art" photographers so obviously yearn for commercial success (and are bitter about failure...eg due to digital photography), and because so many commercial photographers (I've known many) are recognized in galleries as "artists" and wouldn't be recognized as "commercial" unless that was mentioned in bios.

Are Sally Mann's family photos (those we've all seen in publication) necessarily more "art" than "commerce"? Many are aware of the mass signature production that Salvador Dali did, on "originals" he'd never actually done.

As well, casual use of "meaning" tells me that someone is not looking at a photo. Aaron Siskind, as a famous case (whose work I love), eventually photographed against meaning.

 

[Pieter12]

OK. Traditionally, commercial photography is defined as being made for a client, for a fee. In-house photography also qualifies as commercial. Art photography is made for the photographer's own use, most hope to be able to exhibit, sell or publish a book of their photographs. The fact that money is being made by either classification does not make it all "commercial." Many photographers who are known for their art photography have done commercial assignments, some commercial photographers produce a bit of art. There is cross-over, mostly in the photojournalism/documentary field and in the fashion world, but even then there is discussion whether fashion photos should be considered "art."

 

[Vaughn]

...Art photography is made for the photographer's own use, most hope to be able to exhibit, sell or publish a book of their photographs....

...or perhaps made as mental floss or as a way to explore one's connection with light. Art is amazing adaptable to an artist's aims.

There was a change in the Art Department of my university -- at one time, training artists was its major goal...then sending the best off to grad schools. There was a graphic design program that was more job orientated. Created in the early 50's and run by professors who were practicing artists themselves, many were war vets...Masters of Art was the terminal degree. I took my first photo class there in 1977 or early 78, graduated in 81 (not in art), volunteered in the darkroom until 1991 when I became the paid Darkroom Tech. Got transferred out after a couple of decades or so to make way for digital. But somewhere in there, as the old guard retired or died in the yoke, the art historians moved in...and having piled it higher and deeper than anyone else, took control of the place. For better or worse is a judgement call I suppose.

 

[btaylor]

Art historians, art critics, yea the horse hockey can get pretty deep! There is always the tension between the artists and those that write about it. Decades ago my wife and I made a video- we kinda ambushed an art critic friend of ours- it was a satire on “My Dinner With Andre.”
Critics think they are smarter than the artists, artists think “all you can do is write about it”.

 

[jtk]

OK. Traditionally, commercial photography is defined as being made for a client, for a fee. In-house photography also qualifies as commercial. Art photography is made for the photographer's own use, most hope to be able to exhibit, sell or publish a book of their photographs. The fact that money is being made by either classification does not make it all "commercial." Many photographers who are known for their art photography have done commercial assignments, some commercial photographers produce a bit of art. There is cross-over, mostly in the photojournalism/documentary field and in the fashion world, but even then there is discussion whether fashion photos should be considered "art."

I think the distinction is entirely useless. The photographers who make cheap catalog photographs and even wedding and travel snaps are artists and the photographers who deny they want to make money are no more valid as artists.

 

[removed account4]

As to the plague... Got it, apparently passed thru it (no sleep for days). Coughing like mine might quickly suffocate somebody with COPD.

yikes !

OK. Traditionally, commercial photography is defined as being made for a client, for a fee. In-house photography also qualifies as commercial. Art photography is made for the photographer's own use, most hope to be able to exhibit, sell or publish a book of their photographs. The fact that money is being made by either classification does not make it all "commercial." Many photographers who are known for their art photography have done commercial assignments, some commercial photographers produce a bit of art. There is cross-over, mostly in the photojournalism/documentary field and in the fashion world, but even then there is discussion whether fashion photos should be considered "art."

its ALL a commercial endeavor ( except when its not ) ... and these days with instagram et al.. not only is it about getting paid ( cause after all nike and other big names won't hire you without 100,000 followers ) its about making bank, being noticed / "fame", and regarding the interns who search and scrape work of people who don't have 100,000 followers its about getting the work for 100$ instead of 10,000$ ... even if it is a snapshot if a KFC Bucket from a vacation

 

[jtk]

We've gotten this far without anybody mentioning Jacques "Jimbo" Derrida. I have no idea what he went on about.

 

[mohmad khatab]

I have been a photographer for twenty years, without a degree.
I am 45 years old
If I had the chance to get an Academic Photography Education Grant I would be one of the happiest people in the world.
It does not matter if a document called (Certificate) is obtained.
The important thing is to quench my scientific thirst.

 

[BradS]

Big cats in my back yard....

 

[Vaughn]

Normally no claw marks with mountain lions. Big dog?

 

[BradS]

Normally no claw marks with mountain lions. Big dog?

Hmmm...damn. I was thinking bobcat. But could be a really big dog. I've seen the bobcat back there but that was probably five years ago. He was lounging in the shade of one of my old oak trees.

Maybe big dog. Darn.