What would they say?
-
- Thread starter Eric Rose
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Nikkor lenses and Nikon accessories
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Trade 9 Leica IXMOO reloadable cans.
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
Sold Olympus XA
- Started by RoboRepublic
-
For Sale Mint Nikon AI-s Lenses
- Started by Barlow
Forum statistics
MattKing
Moderator
You must really like rocks and, in particular, trees.
Dunno...but they may be wrong. I don't shoot photos for others, I shoot them for me. So what someone thinks of my photos does not enter the proverbial picture.
They may surmise that since most of my work involves people, I like people. I don't. I just like photographing people, but don't like them much. I'm not out to change the world with my photos, I'm just out to document it. I don't do social change photos, I do social documentary photos. When you are after an agenda of social change your work get tainted by the direction you keep pushing.
I don't do staged, table top work or mental masturbation photos. I just document life. Some of that life is ugly and may seem bizarre. Some is not. It is just a mix of the human condition...preferably up close. Concise, up close, in your face candid work is a common theme with my photography. Many times my candid work looks like posed portraits, so people are wrong right there.
They may say I am bold since I do candid, up close photos. OK, I am somewhat bold, but I am more highly skilled at candid work, so boldness is not the deciding factor as much. I'm old in my 60's, so not as bold as when I was a kid. But have developed much more skill than I had as a kid photog. Still, I have a good deal of boldness coupled with skill that allows me to get the candid shot.
They may surmise that since most of my work involves people, I like people. I don't. I just like photographing people, but don't like them much. I'm not out to change the world with my photos, I'm just out to document it. I don't do social change photos, I do social documentary photos. When you are after an agenda of social change your work get tainted by the direction you keep pushing.
I don't do staged, table top work or mental masturbation photos. I just document life. Some of that life is ugly and may seem bizarre. Some is not. It is just a mix of the human condition...preferably up close. Concise, up close, in your face candid work is a common theme with my photography. Many times my candid work looks like posed portraits, so people are wrong right there.
They may say I am bold since I do candid, up close photos. OK, I am somewhat bold, but I am more highly skilled at candid work, so boldness is not the deciding factor as much. I'm old in my 60's, so not as bold as when I was a kid. But have developed much more skill than I had as a kid photog. Still, I have a good deal of boldness coupled with skill that allows me to get the candid shot.
Weegee ..."You can't be a nice Nellie and do (street) photography."
They'd probably say I don't like people or people don't like me, because few of my photos have people in them (other than incidental strangers in the background). Many of my photos are landscapes, cityscapes, trees, rivers, mountains, and flowers.
However I've made some really excellent portraits of co-workers and a young woman friend.
However I've made some really excellent portraits of co-workers and a young woman friend.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,833
- Format
- Hybrid
im involved with several different themes
but they are all the same,
ive shown work to strangers and
they read me like a book
they probably have a pretty good idea who i am
but they are all the same,
ive shown work to strangers and
they read me like a book
they probably have a pretty good idea who i am
Last edited:
They're just cars.....
If they're not photographers themselves, they'd say "You must have a really nice camera". If they are photographers themselves, they'd say "I could do better".
At least that's my experience. I'd hope no one would be foolish enough to try to judge me as a person by my work. There's no discernable correlation between the quality of a person's work and the quality of the person who created it.
At least that's my experience. I'd hope no one would be foolish enough to try to judge me as a person by my work. There's no discernable correlation between the quality of a person's work and the quality of the person who created it.
I was watching The Crown last night (Netflix) and there was an interesting exchange between the artist who painted Churchill's official portrait and Churchill. They were talking about Churchill's paintings and the painter made some really interesting observations and insights into why Churchill kept revisiting this one pond in his paintings. In the show Churchill was struck with his analysis and rather drove things home for him. It was an emotional moment for Churchill in the show.
I was wondering if people see things about us in our photos that we don't recognize ourselves. I am sure an astute observer could deduce all kinds of things that would surprise us. Our own analysis unless we could somehow detach ourselves from what we were thinking when creating the photo would be flawed.
It might be interesting to ask some friends to look at a large selection of your images and tell you what they might "see".
I was wondering if people see things about us in our photos that we don't recognize ourselves. I am sure an astute observer could deduce all kinds of things that would surprise us. Our own analysis unless we could somehow detach ourselves from what we were thinking when creating the photo would be flawed.
It might be interesting to ask some friends to look at a large selection of your images and tell you what they might "see".
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,833
- Format
- Hybrid
eric
thats what the art historians do, but often times they are dead wrong ..
==
added later
it ends up them not reading me but reading themselves
like a woody allen marshall mcluhan scene in annie hall
thats what the art historians do, but often times they are dead wrong ..
==
added later
it ends up them not reading me but reading themselves
like a woody allen marshall mcluhan scene in annie hall
Last edited:
if enough people review a body of work and come up with the same or similar conclusions, independent of each other, then they probably are right. A one off has a 50/50 chance of being valid.
I've had several people tell me pretty much the same things about recurring themes in my photography and what it might mean on a deeper level. These conversations were both instructive and illuminating. One must be able to put their ego on the self for such things or nothing is gained.
I take photographs for myself and my friends. I do not care what anyone else thinks.
I'd be kinda curious to hear what others would guess, but I don't know what they'd say. Maybe that I seem to spend a lot of time in the woods?
This is what I was thinking too. I don't know and do not care what strangers think or might think of me.
When people see my prints, they really like them, but that does not matter to me since I am my hardest critic.
MattKing
Moderator
I do care what people think. Not because of a need for validation, but because I consider photography to be a communicative process, and I am interested in how my efforts to communicate are doing.
I'm not sure any of my images could/should be 'analysed'. Too many faculty in "fine art" departments seem to be more interested in the "concept" and the "meaning' rather than the content/composition/tonal range and how well it has actually been 'presented' for the viewer.
Ken
I welcome constructive criticism of my work. Psychoanalyzing me on the basis of my work is best left to the professionals.
In my final year of school, there was a girl who walked into the photo lab who said she was working on her Masters in Psychology/Art Therapy. She needed to analyze the work of someone she didn’t know. I was the only person in the lab’s common area, as I was the lab aid that morning. I was marking up some proof sheets, and she asked me if I’d volunteer. I agreed. There were a lot of images of doors and windows on the sheets.
I went ( anonymously) to her presentation, which had my work projected for all to see. She then gave a lecture on how the artist was obsessed with the unknown ( doors/ windows into the unknown) as well as being obsessed with sex and death ( also unknowns). Afterwards she asked me what I thought of her presentation. I told her I thought being obsessed with sex and death was OK, as long as it was in the correct order.
I went ( anonymously) to her presentation, which had my work projected for all to see. She then gave a lecture on how the artist was obsessed with the unknown ( doors/ windows into the unknown) as well as being obsessed with sex and death ( also unknowns). Afterwards she asked me what I thought of her presentation. I told her I thought being obsessed with sex and death was OK, as long as it was in the correct order.
Last edited:
-
- eddie
- Deleted
I don't take pictures for random group of people to form their opinions. I'm just not into cheesy and simple to digest pictures. Even people who knows me well and for long time would get what is in the picture in 1 from 4 ratio.
Like this one, I showed it for two daughters and wife. And only daughter studying early childhood education was able to get it:
On Russian speaking forum for mostly film rangefinders users we have multi-staged completion. Each month five photos get voted from three participants. You win then your photo gets most of the votes.
I won first two. I looked at what people preferred on this forum and selected most easy to digest, basically, no braininess eye candies.
First time winner:
Second time winner:
So, if you want to be judged by random group of people who don't know you, select photos for primitives... Do this and they will tell what you are good photographer.
Like this one, I showed it for two daughters and wife. And only daughter studying early childhood education was able to get it:
On Russian speaking forum for mostly film rangefinders users we have multi-staged completion. Each month five photos get voted from three participants. You win then your photo gets most of the votes.
I won first two. I looked at what people preferred on this forum and selected most easy to digest, basically, no braininess eye candies.
First time winner:
Second time winner:
So, if you want to be judged by random group of people who don't know you, select photos for primitives... Do this and they will tell what you are good photographer.
They would look at my gum prints and say they can make just as nice inkjets.
mental masturbation, which some feel is valuable in-and-of-itself...
Well if you have to ask then there is no point
So, you are unable or unwilling to articulate the point of the question but....
... you slam everybody who tried to play along for, "missing the point of the question".
????
Last edited:
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |