Mike George
(K=3429) - Comment Date 11/2/2004
|
Interesting topic Bill. If I may I'll interject a few thoughts from a amature. In many ways I see your point. If you look at most of my pictures, except for blurring backgrounds or foregrounds, I like sharp photos. I always figured it was just my taste. Often I see on Usefilm, photos that are grossly out of focus, very heavy in shadow or light. Most I don't click on to see in larger detail. Same is true, generally, with me and B&W. Generally I don't like it. The world I see is vivid in colors. I like to capture that world. Occassionally I will shoot B&W or convert a color to B&W but not too often.
I chalk this up to my taste. My taste is no better or worse than yours or anyone elses'. I don't like ballet you might. Some folks consider the heavy grained, heavy shadow and/or out of focus as being artistic. I don't but in a recent lighting class I took, many did. Mostly they were younger kids, fresh out of high school or in their second year of college. To them, this is very avant-guard. To me, most of the work was boring, all looked the same. By the same token, they considered my vibrantly colored shots as too busy or distracting. Again it is a matter of taste.
I am just an amature who likes to get better. I like crisp sharp color pictures. Perhaps they aren't as artistic to some but that is what I like and thus since nearly all photos I take are for me, who cares. I share them with others, like here on Usefilm, for your enjoyment and help in getting better. I am not offended if I don't get a lot of praise. I don't offer it on stuff that doesn't impress me. I never considered myself in fashion or up to date on what's hot. In fact, I just bought my first dvd player Sunday and only because my favorite video store says that within a year they won't have them to rent. They've been out how long now. I figure I'll let others give their opinions on stuff regardless of what I see without ridicule. Frankly, it is work like yours, Mitch Green, Per Johansen and others that I enjoy and am inspired by. Basically, I don't reward the types of shots you refer to (or the ones I mentioned) with any type of response. I was raised that if you cannot say anything good, say nothing at all. If you are some one who knows me and asks for constructive criticism, I will give my opinion. I don't know why folks make the comments on those shots other than perhaps they really do like them. Again a matter of taste.
Sorry for my long winded response.
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/2/2004
|
Hi Mike ......Good reply.. I like it alot. You are very up-front. I understand all the issues you presented.. and they are very well taken. Yes, it is .. I guess, a matter of taste ,however I mean the posted Image that is not ment to be Artsy .. but serious and it is very much too soft. It's like saying she is half pregnant !!... you're either pregnant or you're not. ..The Image is either sharp(and ment to be) .. or it's soft ( not ment to be) by the photographer. So, why would he post it? He post it because everytime he posted other Images "like same" .. he got rave reviews. Tis not fair to this photographer .. to lead him on .. in this manner.
There are many.. many photographers on this site.. that up and coming photographers should set their sights on: .... For macro/closeup .nothing tops"Peter's Portrait" by Innocent... Now that's a lesson in focusing.
So.. Mike .... yes . there's taste .. and then there's fine photography.
Many thanks for your reply Mike.
~~~~~~~~~~~ Regards ....... Bill Mahler
|
|
|
|
Ray Heath
(K=4559) - Comment Date 11/2/2004
|
g'day Bill, I have tried to upload this reply many times, I have a computer problem, maybe I'm on somebody's shit list
-----------------------------------
G?day Bill,
I totally agree and have myself raised these issues on several occasions.
Firstly, it?s typical that this post has been up for some time without a reply. If you?d posted some lame arse question like ?... should I get the xx or should I get the zz, or should I blah, blah, gee I just can?t make a decision. What do ya'all think, cause I don?t, it?s just too darn hard ...?. Wow you?d have twenty answers come in while the jug boiled. As for my excuse, I?ve been here, done this and thought I?d let someone else have a go. Apparently no takers.
When I see an image that is obviously less than it could be, I like to provide critical help and advice. Thinking, as I did, and still do, that they would want to do better next time. I don?t use crap ?gee I?m sorry, please excuse me? phrases like IMHO. Obviously what I post, is my opinion. So, the fellow photographer takes my advice as a personal affront, nitpicks my images, as, I guess, a way to ?get? back at me. Then the other brain dead, no opinion light weights get on the line and tell the first no talent how wonderful their work is.
This site should have a bullshit filter/rating on each member. Then I?d know if a particular artist wanted help/advice/comment/discussion or just mindless stroking of their delicate, sensitive ego.
And they get awards! What is that about? I may be cynical, (crap I am cynical) but is it just me who wonders, how and by whom these ?awards? are decided? I seem to recall that at times the ?award? has even gone to photographers who have some official connection to the site.
Maybe these delicate souls have never seen a good image, have never tried to create something special, have never put in any effort, have never learnt that it takes time to learn and grow and develop as an artist, may be they have never learnt respect and humility.
I care about photography, it is what I do.
|
|
|
|
Ray Heath
(K=4559) - Comment Date 11/2/2004
|
g'day Bill, I've tried many times to answer your question, I'm having trouble uploading from clipboard
my reply was quite long, here is a shorter version
I agree with your statements and my experience has been that the delicate little souls on this site do not actually want to improve, they just want, or need, to be told how wonderful they are, they must get mindless stroking of their sensitive, immature egos, anyone who posts a 'negative' comment is subject to nitpicking of their own work as a way of 'getting back'
as to the 'awards', who decides? what is the criteria? why are obviously 'bad' images awarded and displayed as works to be applauded? is it ok that the 'award' sometimes goes to photographers who also have some official or organisational position on the site?
why do you and I care?
photography is important to me, it is what I do
|
|
|
|
Dai Hunter
(K=2028) - Comment Date 11/2/2004
|
OK... You may fire when ready
|
|
series: One Careful Owner - found objects - Copyright2004 Hunter
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Hi Ray ..... Thanks for your reply. You are much bolder then I .. and I do believe you have hit the nail on the head. These issues have bothered me from the begining .. but was thinking I was the only one. Thanks for steping up to the plate.
~~~~~~~~~~~~ Warm Regards ...... Bill Mahler
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Hi Dai,......I am confused. You say you are an Independent Photojournalist ... yet I see no work posted by you. .. What do you want from me? Do you want a comment on the empty cans?.. Is this your one "shot" into UF? .. What's going on? Were you saying to me... "fire away"?.. Or to the readers? . Tell me what you want me to do.
Warm Regards....... Bill Mahler
|
|
|
|
Timothy Kemp
(K=208) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Bill,
Excellent talking point. I have a few of my own to add:
I think you can separate technical criticism from artistic/aesthetic appreciation. If an image is soft, has blown highlights or so on then anyone can objectively make that observation and the photographer should find it helpful in preventing future mistakes.
If you just plain don't like something then that's entirely different: it's a subjective opinion vs. an objective fact. However, I believe that a critique should include both to be useful.
I've come to the conclusion that the real criticism on this site is like a masterclass: you have to demonstrate a certain level of skill and talent before your images are worthy of someone's time to write a decent critique. This is, after all, a free site and not a school.
I guess we agree. I'd rather see no comments at all than an unhelpful (and probably false) "good one".
I've posted a few images here in the hope of learning something. I'm not very good and don't pretend to be. I need to know what's wrong with my images in order to improve. "Nice shot" or "Good capture" doesn't help much! It's encouraging, for sure, but fairly useless. With the exception of a couple of very helpful constructive criticisms nearly all the comments I've received have been of this nature.
Clearly the commenters liked the thumbnail enough to click it and write a two word note. That in itself tells me I'm doing something right, but appealing to someone trying to build their karma quickly by commenting on a few hundred images won't make me a better photographer.
For me, writing a critique of a good photograph is a way to learn in and of itself. I have to think in detail about what I like, what I think could be done differently, how it was achieved and so on. Slowing down to really analyse someone else's image makes me think much more deeply about my own efforts.
Regards,
Tim
|
|
|
|
Mike George
(K=3429) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Bill, I gave this more thought overnight. Perhaps for those who would really like to help others get better, this might be a workable solution. What if the following concept was used
A sample post....
Hi Joe Photographer. I viewed your image. I have some comments but not all of them might not be positive. I think you might benefit from them. If you would like me to proceed please post that you would like me to do so. I promise to give you honest feedback and some suggestions to improve the shot.
Bill, do you think this type of approach might bridge that gap that you and I see in some shots quality? It would give the person the opportunity (should they be somewhat sensitive or whatever) to say no. I happen to agree with you that false positives don't make us better. I also, respect others opinions--even those whom I think are wrong--and that applies to the folks who think some shots that I find poorly done as good shots. I choose not to comment on them generally. I am hardly a accomplished photographer and therefore don't find it my place to try and teach others. I, like you, have often considered giving my two cents on some shots that I didn't understand why they were posted.
As I have grown very fond of this site, I really didn't want to create any grief for anyone (especially me) by getting someone upset. For the record, I do welcome honest critiquing of my shots and suggestions on making them better.
|
|
|
|
Dai Hunter
(K=2028) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
BILL MAHLER - starting proposition:
Now .. with that said: .. My question is..If I see blurry... out of focus Images... don't you? Why do I view so many Images like I have described with outstanding comments of .. Wow.... great capture.... excellent sharpness and lighting...When in fact ..the Image is of such poor quality ..It should have been thrown away. And to make it worse.. it also recieves an award.
and in follow-up:
BILL MAHLER (Donor) (K:5,707) - Nov 3, 2004
Hi Dai,......I am confused. You say you are an Independent Photojournalist ... yet I see no work posted by you. .. What do you want from me? Do you want a comment on the empty cans?.. Is this your one "shot" into UF? .. What's going on? Were you saying to me... "fire away"?.. Or to the readers? . Tell me what you want me to do.
Warm Regards....... Bill Mahler
The point IS... I don't want you to do anything. I don't need the criticism for I am my own worst critic. Some others here are different in that respect and need reinforcement from their peers. I seldom post whole bodies of work here, or anywhere else for that matter. I don't splash my work over my own website either - because I don't have a website. The main thrust of photo-journalism is in story telling with words and pictures not photographic "art," but some journalistic work can and does, of course, convey an artistic bent and have artistic merit. Much, however, though technically competent is totally lacking in artistic merit. The "cans" image, in fact and in context, is part of a social documentary series on urban life / urban decay / urban neglect, and this merely represents one of many grabbed shots while out and about. In that respect it doesn't matter if they are "art" of not or if they draw artistic acclaim.
I threw that image up here so that if anyone, including you, sees fit to criticise it they are free "to fire at will"... not that I personally will take a blind bit of notice. I shoot; I get published; I get paid. I only have to satisfy two people myself and my editor. For me that is the equation.
So I confused you by putting up an image without comment? Without an invitation to be critical of the subject matter or technical quality? Out of context? That was the intention.
You are not the first and will not be the last. When I made that image I started with the series theme in mind to go with a contextual feature written piece - "One Careful Owner" - and before I ever loaded the camera; after shooting for an hour I had 34fr; thereafter my own first selects were down to 14fr. One "artsy" type I work with commented that from the first round of 14 selects the subject matter needed to be tighter but the series title was "inpired"... Oh? Right! I understand now, the series title, at least to that person, is more important than the images. Like it or hate it my work stands on it's own but it doesn't rise or fall on the series or image title.
Tell you what I want you to do? Nothing... absolutely nothing. That's the whole point.
Hunter
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Hi Tim ... Thanks for your solid thoughts and suggestions. All worth considering.
~~~~~~~~~~ Regards ...... Bill
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Hi Mike ......Hey ... you and Tim are coming up with great thoughts. I don't know if the "site admin." reads these things .... but sounds like good ideas.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regards ...... Bill
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Hi Dai ...... Hey ..What the hell is going on ... did you miss your distemper shot .. or what? No one is attacking you .. especially me. You slapped up an Image with no nothing of who..where..why.. and when. If it was a trick .. it worked .... I fell for it. ... Come on .. Chill-out. No one is criticizing your methods in marketing your work. I am a former Photojournalist also ... I know the drill. Many of my post here on UF are in the journalism category . they are not arty things ... just showing a moment in time. .. Oh .. did I mention .. I was a magazine publisher also..... I'm aware of the process from pix to mag.
So ... now that you have opened the subject of "the cans" .. and given the publishing process: halftones.. plates . etc. .. are you saying that this Image is clear/sharp enough to end up on the published page .. as it appears here?
All this has nothing to do with UF ... but everything to do with ..what I thought was your very "aggressive" reply.
~~~~~~~~~~ Warm regards ...... Bill Mahler
|
|
|
|
Anthony Gargani
(K=4527) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
hmmmm...
Hello Bill! I have been mulling this over since you posted it. I think it is a very provocative question.
The 'problem' as I see it is that the *art* of photography, just like all of the *arts* has become so subjective (not necessarily a bad thing I guess...) that anyone's opinion can be dismissed without a second thought or even an intelligent rebuttle. "It is what it is"-take it or leave it. Apparently, many people *take* it AND like it. Who am I to question? I think *art* has always been and will always be this way.
One example:
I remember years ago listening to Yoko Ono's Primal Scream Therapy albums. I knew some people who were really turned on by it. Me? It was a huge waste of wax produced by someone with way too much money and way too little talent. But I guess it was 'cutting edge' at the time and some people actually bought it.
For me it was a typical example of the emperor having no clothes. And in this case, not only was the emperor naked, he was UGLY to boot. (Let me clarify this or I may be accused of making a comment on someone's physical looks-The 'music' was poor and had no value, AND not only that, it was so poor as to be 'hard' to look upon.)
Perhaps some of what we see in the realm of the "great shot!", "wonderful capture", etc. is as you alluded, no more than a popularity contest or a community hug mentality. Some of it may be attributed to the quest for *karma*. Some of it, I'm sure is a result of the "everbody is special-YOU ARE SPECIAL TOO!" line of thinking that permeates our world today. This idea that everyone has talent and you (or I) are just too MEAN to appreciate it.
I also think that it is easy to become so deep in our attempt to put forth our 'art' that we become shallow. That is, some try to justify what traditionally would be considered terrible work because it represents some abstract emotional significance TO THEM. Of course the sensitive types (not meant as an insult-just an observation) will surround this work with feel-good comments and hugs and kisses. Others (I confess I would fall into this camp)will stare at it and think-"what is the point of that garbage?". Which, I will defend to my last breath IS as viable an opinion as "wonderful representation of your pain..."
So in the end where does it leave us?
I guess right where we started:
To each his own....
ahhhh....such is 'art'....
I will continue to think about this and if so moved continue the discussion...
Anthony
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Hi Tony ...... Thanks for your very thought provoking comment. I really like your example of "the king has no clothes" Maybe , that's what is happening.
My main thought is: If you want to take "snapshots" .. fine.. you should be left alone to do just that. ... However.. If you want to improve your photography.. with serious intent. .. Then welcome .. serious help in the form of.... Information on style...... tips.... real composition ( the rule of thirds is not on "the ten commandments tablet")...tricks of the trade... lighting....posing..... and the meaning of the word" discord" in the world of Photography.
I truly believe that this fine site ..should be a adventure in learning.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regards ...... Bill Mahler
|
|
|
|
Chris Lauritzen
(K=14949) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
I have been on this site for years and I was at one time a donor and I must agree with Ray on this. Most that are posting here want to hear nothing but good things about their work and do not want to hear the negative. At one time there was a points system here that really ruined this site for me and many others I know. Many people were interested in points only and there for were only commenting with ?Nice shot, Congrats, bravo? and such to get the points. I have only recently started posting images back on here and I will give the site some time to see if things are better now.
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Hi Chris, ..... Well said. I too.. wish it to be an honest site.. with no National boundaries or language "clicks".
~~~~~~~~~ Warm regards .... Bill Mahler
|
|
|
|
Anthony Gargani
(K=4527) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Bill, NOW YOU HAVE DONE IT! LOL...
I'm already late for work and had to pause to let you know that several lightbulbs have gone off (almost blinded me hahah...), and I will be back asap to clarify and add to my previous comments...
Suffice to say this thread is "good stuff"!
Tony
|
|
|
|
Robert Stokes
(K=4509) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Ah, I think you hit the nail on the head with your comment Bill when you used the 's' word ( snapshot, that is ). I just took a quick look at the recent images page, quick by dial-up standards anyway, and as seems to be the norm there are several images that I would consider to be nothing more than snapshots. No apparent thought given to composition, lighting, subject, or anything technique or artistic related. What is there to comment on ? What is there to say when it appears that someone picked up a disposable camera at the grocery store while on vacation, pointed, clicked, and for some reason posted ? Do I comment on these images, or even look at them ? Not likely. I am interested in learning from the thoughtful, inspired images of others, and maybe offering positive suggestions where I think they may be warrented. I'm on dial-up remember, no time to waste on snapshots.
|
|
|
|
Chuck Freeman
(K=13616) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
Myb philosophy after so many years is.. do your best at all times. Great was Ansel Adams and his generation... Great also is Eggleston, Shore and 1000's of others. I love simplicity.. Oh well, I am getting old.. Attachment a photo taken in Greene County Ga in 1999. The best I could do that day it seemed . K0odak Ektachrome 100 And basic camera. 28mm-200mm Sigma (Not a good lens except about F/8.
|
|
|
|
Chuck Freeman
(K=13616) - Comment Date 11/3/2004
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony Gargani
(K=4527) - Comment Date 11/4/2004
|
Ok...back again...
I'll try and put forth a few points and some clarification to my original reply.
Although my first reply did in some ways address Bill's original question I may have overshot the topic somewhat. I think we need to tighten or rather narrow the discussion a bit.
By that, I mean to say that we should differentiate between 'art' or abstract photography (photos that are INTENTIONALLY blurred or otherwise manipulated for an artistic purpose) and those shots that are more traditional but have technical deficiencies.
My comments above were more applicable to the 'art and abstract' genre than those that are just 'bad' or 'not good'. While I stand by what I said, it doesn't really address what Bill is talking about directly.
OK...
I think at this point I should state emphatically that this is the best site of its type that I have come across and I have nothing but highest praise for Al and those that assisted him in setting it up and with the daily maintenance of it. Surely it is a huge undertaking and requires a great deal of knowledge and obviously time. Al and his staff are well deserving of the highest praise for creating a unique and high class website and for allowing our 'community' access to it.
I have not been here that long, but I believe I have been here long enough to make objective observations about this community and perhaps offer some suggestions that may help to provide a better exhange of ideas and discussion relative to learning the art as it were.
Some observations...
1. I think we have a very mixed membership as far as photographic ambitions and abilities.
2. I believe there to be many people who utilize Usefilm as merely a place to post pictures with no intention or desire to have them critiqued or judged in anyway.
3. We have many photographers whose work appears to be 'pro' level or pro quality, who may in fact BE PROS. Some of these pros just like to post to exhibit their work, while some like to participate in assisting others by sharing their experience and their work.
4. We have a large body of advanced amateurs and students of photography who truly desire to have their work critiqued and challenged by more advanced photographers and pros so that they can grow and mature in the art.
5. We have members who simply enjoy taking pictures and like to exchange comments and conversation with their friends here.
6. There is a group of more adventerous 'artistic' type photographers who enjoy being able to push the envelope so to speak with their art and to share and exchange ideas and information with other like minded photographers.
I must emphatically state that there is NO right or wrong 'good' or 'bad'group listed above. In fact, one may fit into several of the groups mentioned. Which ever group or groups we may fit in above, we all enjoy some aspect of photography enough to post pictures here. Finding the best way to serve these diverse groups as a community is the challenge. And that is what I have been giving some thought to this evening.
It occurred to me while considering the diversity of our community how it resembled a school community or environment. Not having been to college myself, I can only use my experience in high school to guess that a college would offer a less structured and (hopefully) more mature environment, but with a similar structure. That lead me to put it like this:
The Pros are the faculty and also those that are presented as 'examples of excellence' to the students.
The 'students' and advanced amateurs, are well-students.
The 'snapshooters and friends' are like those hanging out in the cafeteria and the dorms just kinda well-hanging out.
There are those just that post pics with little or no interaction with the rest of the community. These are akin to people who walk across campus or occasionally attend a function or two at the school.
And the 'artists', well they love the excitement of pushing the envelope and trying to take the art of photography someplace it has never been before. I guess these are similar to grad students who are advanced enough in technique to do what they want and only need a place to do it.
Ok...now what?
Let me first admit that I do not have all the answers (and some may argue that there isn't even a question...). But I was thinking of a way to address Bill's concern in the most constructive way. What came to mind is the establishment of the "Usefilm School of Photography".
As someone who is interested in advancing my abilities and technical knowledge of the craft of photography my primary reason for being here is to learn. I have a seperate website that I post my 'snapshots' on (and if we are to be honest with ourselves-we ALL take snapshots-even pros). I post shots of family gatherings and athletic contests, etc. For me, Usefilm is NOT the place to just put a bunch of pictures up. It is a place to post photographs that I consider to represent 'my best', or to put photographs that I need or desire some help with. I think there are many here who do the same.
By establishing a "Usefilm School of Photography" we would create a space within the community to maximize the learning aspect of photography.
How would it work?
Well, I believe it would involve putting together a 'faculty' of advanced or pro (active or retired) photographers who feel that they would enjoy interacting with student photographers with the intention of helping them to advance by critique and example.
I then think an application process could be setup where one would 'apply' for the school by submitting a bio and explaining their photographic aspirations. I would even suggest that a reasonable fee be required of the student as well for two main reasons-1. It adds a level of seriousness to it. 2. It would help to insure that this site gets some funding. As to the amount or the ability to pay, this could be determined based on the students ability and what Al and the staff feel would be fair.
By setting aside a corner of Usefilm dedicated to the advancement of photography technique I belive we would be providing the most benefit to those who wish to learn AND to those whose desire is to teach and share their expertise. This corner would allow the focus to be placed squarely where many of us I'm sure wish it were-sharing and learning.
This 'corner' would not have to interfere with or take away from those who just want to go to the cafeteria and hang out and chat. Nor would it interfere with those who just want a place to put their portfolio or gallery. But it WOULD allow those who come here to study, critique and share a dedicated place to do so without having to wade through or work around the thousands of other photographs and photographers.
Ultimately I'd like to see it setup as 'the Usefilm Lab' or even as suggested under the heading of the 'Usefilm School of Photography' and require a password to gain entrance to an entirely different area of the site including having a separate forum etc.
I realize that what I have just proposed may bother or even offend some people as it creates a 'sub-community' or perhaps even an 'elite' section of the community. This IS not my intention at all. What I am suggesting is that the intense focus on learning is worthy of such separation due to the mind blowing size and scope of Usefilm as it currently is.
We have pros here who at times seem to be competing with amateurs for 'awards' and comments.
We have people who post pictures and snapshots on a daily basis and tell each other "great shot!" and "wonderful perspective".
We have people whose galleries are fantastic and are wonderful to view but don't need or deserve critique or criticism.
and then we have-
Aspiring photographers who truly desire to have their work seriously critiqued and to expand their knowledge that have to compete with all of the above.
What I am suggesting is that we create a place where the student is able to get the critque and discussion they need. Where awards and acknowledement can be given based on ability, time-in-craft, improvement of technique, and interpretation of assignments and projects-not on popularity. Where one is judged by one's peers and those who have the credentials that students will respect.
I realize the answer to this probably seems to be:
"If that is what you want, then go sign up for school!" But, the reality is many of us have full time jobs, family, and other constraints that make attending a regular photography school an impossibility. A cyber-school is the one answer that would meet this need.
hmmmm....
Well...my fingers are tired and I need a break!
I'll probably add, correct, or somehow add to this at some point, but until then...
Regards,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/4/2004
|
Hi Robert,..... Thanks for your reply .... which reinforces my thoughts that I have always believed. I appreciate your contribution to this forum.. and look forward to hearing from you again.
~~~~~~~~~~ Warm regards ...... Bill
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/4/2004
|
That's my CREED. Chuck......"do your best at all times" ... Thank you.
~~~~~~~~~~~ Warm regards ...... Bill
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/4/2004
|
WOW.... Tony....What a well concieved and thought out....proposal. It is a very clear and balanced "blue print".. that could really help many and yet not offend any. You have given this "mucho" thinking.
Al and his staff could still retain control.. no one is trying to overthrow the existing establishment.. not by any means. But , it could expand the possibilities of any photographer ...wanting to learn.. ten fold.
Your reference to a high school colony is a masterpiece. I can visualize all the groups that you described. I .. myself... fall into several of them .. lololo.
Let's see what everyone thinks........... Congrats and a big BRAVO Tony on this one.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regards ...... Bill Mahler
|
|
|
|
Richard Dakin
(K=12915) - Comment Date 11/4/2004
|
Although I am not entirely sure I understand the problem, I think Anthony's proposal for a "Usefilm School of Photography" is an excellent one. My reason for joining usefilm.com was to learn. As a relative newcomer to serious photography I understand that I have a lot to learn, but recently I have become frustrated by people (not at usefilm) who seem to think criticism is only about telling people what is WRONG with their work. These "experts" often have little more than some obscure photographic rule as the reason for their criticism and offer no solutions for improvement.
I have not seen that attitude here. All critiques I have had have given positive feedback to go with the points for improvement. Do other people see this as a problem??? Do others complain????? If this is the case then Tony's idea would be great. You would have both a "safe" posting area, and one where you would expect and be prepared for a critique aimed at specific problem areas and solutions.
As for all the talk about Karma points .... does this actually matter to anyone???? Maybe we should abandon this concept, and the "friends" concept with it. I don't really see either as a problem, but maybe they are linked to the number of comments of the "WOW" category.
Finally to Bill. I'm not sure you and I could ever agree on what "beautiful" music is before discussing the notes and harmonies, but that is what is great about all art. My Picasso may be your .."What on earth was he thinking to produce such rubbish!!!!"... and the ensuing discussions can be an art in themselves.
................. sincerely, Rick.
|
|
|
|
Dai Hunter
(K=2028) - Comment Date 11/4/2004
|
Interleaved reply:
BILL MAHLER (Donor) (K:5,738) - Nov 3, 2004
Hi Dai ...... Hey ..What the hell is going on ... did you miss your distemper shot .. or what? No one is attacking you .. especially me.
+++ Not to worry, didn't take it that way. "Quantum Peltus Thickus" LOL
B.M.: You slapped up an Image with no nothing of who..where..why.. and when. If it was a trick .. it worked .... I fell for it. ...
+++ Yup! But the point was your curious criticism of comments on other work by other commentators without context - the images which you are addressing are also posted for the most part here on UF out of context. "...My question is..If I see blurry... out of focus Images... don't you?..." - of course but, then again, maybe that?s what they were supposed to be.
B.M.: Come on .. Chill-out.
+++ I am so chilled that they hire me as an A/C in deserts. LOL
B.M.: No one is criticizing your methods in marketing your work. I am a former Photojournalist also ... I know the drill. Many of my post here on UF are in the journalism category . they are not arty things ... just showing a moment in time. .. Oh .. did I mention .. I was a magazine publisher also..... I'm aware of the process from pix to mag.
+++ You have been around for, what, 48+ years - and I have been doing more or less the same for 45+... we are definitely not that far apart on many aspects of the business I think.
I am often intrigued by the distinction between "arts" photography students and "non-arts" photography students today. As I still attend college courses for my own entertainment I have run into both. The philosophy in the "arts" courses (instructors and students both) seems to be "go forth and make images" but don't worry about the technical side. In fact, I can honestly say that I know several of those [arts photography] students who after two years couldn't tell you the difference between a f-stop and a full stop (a period at the end of the sentence.) On the other hand for courses such as the City and Guilds Level 2 and 3 (in the UK) technical competence with camera, film, process and presentation is much more fundamental and the belief is that artistic competence in the classical sense of photography will emerge. Like you I find it difficult to judge "art" - a lot of it is, in a technical sense, crap (or maybe I should place that in caps - CRAP!) Not to say that it isn't art but it just isn't technically competent photography either.
Comments like "...Wow.... great capture.... excellent sharpness and lighting..." to which you seem to object when they attach to some work that you find not to be the least bit competent... well that's like, let me see, "artsy" jargon for I don't understand what the hell it is but I guess I will say something nice about it.... on the other hand I, personally, might be more likely to call it self-indulgent; self-glorifying; pretentious; CRAP! and several well known names in contemporary photography come to mind here. The problem is that others try to imitate that style and produce more CRAP! And it wins prizes. God know why.
B.M.: So ... now that you have opened the subject of "the cans" .. and given the publishing process: halftones.. plates . etc. .. are you saying that this Image is clear/sharp enough to end up on the published page .. as it appears here?
+++ As it appers here? Nope, you know the drill - take a 25Mb 300ppi .tiff scan and knock it down to a 25Kb 72ppi .jpg and you produce... well... CRAP! The original "cans" image there will repro quite nicely on mid-quality slick with a 150LPI screen from the original file. No problem.
In a way that also says a lot about ANY digital imaging when viewed on the computer screen with minimised file sizes vs. the original image on quality paper.
Thoughts from one Dinosaur to another... LOL
Hunter
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/4/2004
|
Hey Dai...... I like you alot... You're right up front.. with a big dash of humor. Why in hell didn't you say all this in the begining? I was smiling and nodding all through it. You make lot's of sense
Being a fellow dinosaur .. you can see where my feelings ..thoughts and " what the hell is going on here" mentality comes from. Now .. we have "selected blurr" .... "selected focus". I know I'm stepping out onto a limb with that remark..... but I just don't get it. Maybe I should just fade away and be done with it.
Thanks for your reply Dai... enjoyed it immensely. Keep in touch.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Bill
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/4/2004
|
HiRichard......Thanks for your comment ..You also... as many others ... make sense. Your points are well taken. I will say this: It appears that the skill and meaning of what's really "well done" is at different levels in many countrys .. due in part to social environments.
Nice comment Richard ... Thank you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Bill
|
|
|
|
Richard Thornton
(K=26442) - Comment Date 11/4/2004
|
Please bear with me . . .
I have put usefilm on temporary hold while I sort out what my photographic objectives are or if I even have any left. Through 40+ years of photography as an army photographer, a part-time pro and always as an enthusiastic amateur the basic problem has been been the same ? what to do with the images produced. Are they just a personal form of expression, not to be shared? Are they art to be offered up to those who could afford to purchase a print? Or, shall they be posted on usefilm to see what people worldwide might think of them?
The professional photographer has no cares in this regard (although she must deal with clients) because her photography is purpose-driven. There is a use for the image waiting.
The amateur is harder pressed to justify his passion. There is no assignment except the one he gives himself. No one is waiting for the results. He can say he is a "fine artist" but success in that field may be harder to come by than straight commercial photography. The world of spaces to hang photography and agents and clientel who might or might not purchase a print is not for the faint hearted!
The sites, of which usefilm is a prime example, that offer bandwidth to display photos and present them for critiques from all over the globe, are exciting concepts. They are a little like the new camera clubs, but there are notable exceptions. Someone with experience grounded in the old chemical photography, with many years of experience, probably cannot benefit from most of the comments. Usually, whatever might be offered up from the commenter falls into the category of already seen it, done it, heard it. You don't immediately know the commenter's qualifications. He could be a rank beginner with his first digital camera or an old salt with decades of experience.
If you allow that the commenters are not all great critics, but that as a group they represent what the general public's reaction to your images could be, then that is something useful to know.
The unfortunate part of all this is that you get comments only in proportion to the comments you give. So, generally speaking, the fact that one image has 75 comments and yours has only five has nothing to do with the quality of your image, or whether your objectives in making the image were satisfied. Either your images are routinely dealt with by your list of "friends" or the thumbnail is sufficiently arresting to coax a few looks (sunsets/sunrises with lots of deep red).
As far as what constitutes the "good" picture, you must as always look to yourself. What did you want to convey in the image and can you say you succeeded? Art, graphics, lines on paper, paint smears on plywood and the near cousins, objects in the real world "discovered" by the photographer, are all SUBJECTIVE. There are no eternal objective certainties. No rules, except those formulated by people to help them try to understand why they like a picture. But as soon as those rules are set down and codified, they become stilted and common. The "rule of thirds" has probably ruined more art than it has ever helped.
That said, I feel about photography the same way I feel about other visual media. I would rather see the work of a painter who proves he can paint realistically and has a mastery of his craft FIRST . . . then when he paints an abstract I feel he's been grounded in the fundimentals and has a perfect right to go off in a new direction. Similarly, I will respect the blurry image if I know the photographer meant it to be that way and could have, if he wished, produced something sharp and conventional.
As usual, it's easy to judge the work of others.
Now, if I just knew what to do with my own photography!
|
|
|
|
Dai Hunter
(K=2028) - Comment Date 11/4/2004
|
Thanks Bill... and as for Richard T's follow-up where he suggests that someone that can at least demonstrate competence in the craft first can then go on to explore more personal visions of photography, or "art," reminds me of something that happened to me a few days ago...
On another forum there was a thread on "dreamy" non-glam portraiture. I posted two exemplars - one was a nasty, grainy, semi-sepia, digitally manipulated image salvaged from an underexposed roll of film that would normally have gone in the trash - for whatever reason (shear laziness probably) I still had it in my files; but along side it was a second image that was much better technically. The combination of the two side by side prompted a well known publishing personality to obtain my e-mail address (unbidden) and send me a message to the effect that he loved the images and I should get a portfolio together and post it... A suggestion, as explained before, that I will decline but the note, the unsolicited positive comment from him and the time it took to do that, was highly appreciated.
I somehow don't think it would have happened at all if I had posted only one of the images in isolation regardless of which one. Interesting.
Hunter
|
|
|
|
Richard Dakin
(K=12915) - Comment Date 11/5/2004
|
To Richard T. - Wow. That was extremely well expressed. You have verbalized many of the impressions of art/photography/usefilm I have had difficulty coming to grips ith in recent months. Thanks for your clarifying words.
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/5/2004
|
Well Dai..Richard ... Guess that about does it. My original question was .. not really..answered .. but I sure enjoyed this thread and all the conversation and exchange of Ideas. I wanted to learn what some of you thought of my question....and you all "let it all hang out". Thank you all .. for the pleasure of your company .. along with your replys. It has been a learning experience..for sure. I will be more understanding of the issues that have bothered me...and quite possibly.. It's time for me to enter the 21st century.
On the plus side..... Hey .. I've gained many new friends. So.. I will consider this thread closed.. unless there are more thoughts out there. Hey.. I will see you all at the "site".
Is that something "red" I see over there ?? .. lololo. :)))
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Warm Regards ..... Bill
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/5/2004
|
PS........ Thank you Richard for your personal observations and thoughts. It did clear up many points.
~~~~~~~~~ Warm regards ...... Bill :))
|
|
|
|
Anthony Gargani
(K=4527) - Comment Date 11/5/2004
|
Well Bill, since you said your original question wasn't answered I figured I let you down and I'd like to give it another try before this thread dies. I have 'cut and pasted' your original post into my response just so I don't miss anything-lol...well here we go-
"Q. The Pursuit Of Fine Photography
I have a simple question.. but let me preface it with this thought. When I see something "red".. do you not also see red?.."
ANSWER: Not always, as I suffer from a red-green color blind deficiency (this is true, and it causes me great aggravation when processing pics. I always need my wife's eyes to insure that I haven't mucked something up). BUT-in a general sense "YES" (if I understand the question correctly).
"When I see Blue" .. do you not see blue also?"
ANSWER: YES I have no real problem with most blues unless they lean toward the purple side, then I sometimes get them confused.
"and when I hear beautiful music .. do you also hear each note and the harmony produced?"
ANSWER: Yes, I believe beautiful music IS ALWAYS BEAUTIFUL AND RECOGNIZABLE AS SUCH! And, as has already been stated, music is very subjective. Perhaps even more subjective than photography. But in a realistic and general way-YES. I can appreciate the finer aspects of melody, harmony, and RHYTHM (I'm a drummer), and I can 'see' the beauty in most types of music-EVEN-if I don't fully appreciate the particular style.
"I think that you do."
AGREE...
"Now .. with that said: .. My question is..If I see blurry... out of focus Images... don't you?"
ANSWER: YES Absolutely, and I see them all the time.
"Why do I view so many Images like I have described with outstanding comments of .. Wow.... great capture.... excellent sharpness and lighting..."
ANSWER\s:
1. Because the 'system of commenting' mostly revolves around networks of 'friends' that has developed over time. Some folks really need and desire to hear "good job", "well done", "nice shot". If you want to hear this type of comment on your work the best way to get it is to GIVE THAT TYPE OF COMMENT TO SOMEONE ELSE as many times as possible. I see this all the time here. If you follow the more popular pictures (those with many, many, comments) you will notice several tightly knit groups of people who all give each other the same type of comment on EVERY PICTURE THEY POST no matter what the quality.
2. Because there is a number system attached to comments and some people are drawn and driven by competition of any type. Naturally, it is easier to type-"GREAT shot!", than to take any time to thoughtfully critique the work.
3. Over the years standards of excellence have been lowered so much that almost ANY EFFORT is rewarded in some way by our culture and society. "Hey my buddy took the time to post that shot of the kiddy pool in his backyard, I should make him/her feel good!-"Great shot!" "Nice compostion of the lawn mower and the out of focus garden hose!", oh and my personal favorite: "WONDERFUL COLOR!!!!!" People get rave comments for raising a camera to their eye and pressing the shutter it seems at times.
I believe that it won't be long before awards are given out for "GREAT BREATHING!" and "WONDERFUL SNORING!" and "FANTASTIC BELCH!" (I think Guiness already has that one covered...)
"When in fact ..the Image is of such poor quality ..It should have been thrown away. And to make it worse.. it also recieves an award."
ANSWER: Yea, these kinda hurt a little bit *sigh*...
"Yes ..... to learn is the issue here... but if a member doesn't seem to grasp the likes of: A rose by Margaret sturgess.. A village street by Chris Spacklen....A scenic by Jeff Cartwright ... Autumn by Anders Skoglund.. and Peter's portrait by Innocent..What the heck are they thinking.? We learn by Copying and doing."
ANSWER: Unfortunately, I really don't think as many people want to learn here as we might think. I believe there is more of an exhibitionist tendency-"Hey look at what I did", than anything else. I'm also quite surprised at the number of 'Self Portraits' being done. Entire galleries of self portraits have been posted here. Interestingly enough, many of these are exactly as you describe-out of focus, poor exposure, poor composition, etc. But alas-they are *art* pictures so it doesn't matter. All that matters is that the "artist" feels good about it, and how can they not when they receive 25 "great shot" comments? They have been convinced that mediocrity has become execellence. Perfect example of 'double-plus-good' (1984)and as I said above "The King has no clothes on...".
Don't forget the cafeteria analogy. Some people thrive on social interaction. They love to 'hang-out' and just spend time with other people. It doesn't matter what brings them together, what matters is that THEY ARE TOGETHER and having *fun* hanging with their friends. The photography is almost secondary and in fact might as well be gardening, or stamp collecting, or whatever. Usefilm is a COOL place to hang out, and by the way, check out my latest shot (or fern, or stamp, or quilt or whatever...). Frankly, and this is probably going to sound a bit harsh but here goes-I don't *need* anymore *friends* (I probably just ruined any chance of a career here...). I have *friends* (well, actually one-my wife). What I *need* from Usefilm are MENTORS and PEERS with a common goal of the advancement of the craft of photography. I don't mind chit-chatting or sharing info on the forums, but as far as hanging out in a mutual admiration society?-Forget it. I have people all around me telling me my pics are "great" even when *I* know they are not.
"Also. and I've mentioned this before>>>>> Nationalism and blood .. seem to mean more then
honesty and truth. If you really want to help your countryman ... tell him/her the truth. Help them learn and advance."
ANSWER: Agreed, no comment.
"Please .. I would like to see some real logical.. honest replys."
Well Bill, that's about as honest and logical as I dare to make it at this time. Hopefully, I have avoided offending anyone, but if so, so be it.
Most Sincerely,
Tony
|
|
|
|
Dai Hunter
(K=2028) - Comment Date 11/5/2004
|
Well as this is a philosophy thread I will end with a philosophy quote:
"I never lie...
I never joke...
The truth is often the best joke."
--- Robert Frost, Poet
Hunter
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/5/2004
|
Hi Tony..... No.. you didn't let me down .. matter of fact your last post really bubbled the truth to the surface. When I asked the "question" .. I didn't want to put words into the mouths of those who replyed. I thought , maybe I am out of contact with the reality of today's photography. So, I sought the feelings and thoughts of the members. Some "tap danced" around the problem .. but did touch on it.
You Tony.... in your last comment really exposed it. Now , I feel .. it wasn't me. These things and practices do exist and will .. I presume.. continue. I .. like a couple of members I know..am struggling with the idea of what to do next with our own photography. Thanks again Tony..... We will see... huh!
~~~~~~~~~ Warm Regards to all ...... Bill
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/5/2004
|
MY FINAL PLACE TO BE................
|
|
|
|
James McGinnis
(K=6045) - Comment Date 11/5/2004
|
Chris made a comment a few posts up the page here that pretty much sums it up for me.
When I first started doing this photography thing just (which wasn't that long ago) I would post everything I thought was good. Some was, most wasn't. In the beginning I would get a bit of feedback that I found very helpful. That feedback also made me more critical of other's work and from that I began to learn what I liked and what "worked" for me.
One other factor vis a vis this site:
Not only do I see more gratuitous praise I also see fewer comments per photo. If I post a photo today at noon, by 3 in the afternoon there are 50 more photos posted by others. As a result, your photo has about an hour to get comments. After that, unless someone is just terribly bored and has nothing better to do than scroll through page after page of thumbnails, you aren't going to get any crticism...good or bad.
I've all but stopped posting for just this reason. I'm now trying to learn to be a better self critic based on the works of those I admire and not based on my "karma" scores on this site.
|
|
|
|
James McGinnis
(K=6045) - Comment Date 11/5/2004
|
OH, and one other point:
I also found that my ability to manipulate photoshop became an increasingly frustrating barrier. Before I knew it, I was spending more time trying to learn a computer program and less time learning to shoot photos. I also found that more and more of the critiques dealt with photoshop issues and not with issues of composition, style, etc.
I just want to take good pictures....I could give a rip about photoshop.
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/5/2004
|
Hi James.... RIGHT ON..... BRAVO ..... The time of day has a great deal to do with who views your work. As an example: A member may post an excellent Image at "eastern standard time" .. say :11.00 pm ... and most of the North American members are gone to bed. By 8.00 am the next morning .. it's buried by the European post. (not a complaint.. but a fact)
~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regards ..... Bill
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/6/2004
|
OOOOps .. Sorry my friends .. this is the Image I ment to post. My special spot in Florida...where I can be at peace with the world.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Best to all .......Bill
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/6/2004
|
Well .It didn't work..... just visualize crop marks above the lower tree .. and just below the suntan lotion. That's a water mark in upper left..and a thumb tac hole in the center. Great post .. huh? I'm going to go stand in the corner now.... lolololo.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regards ...... Bill
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/8/2004
|
Hi Tony ....and others..... Need I say more. Todays Photographer of the day :Bruce Elliott with 8 photos posted to his credit. A sunset. UK.
Second: .... Staff Choice ... B/w Flowers ..by Lukasz Rzeszotarski .. POLAND. .. an ordinary snapshot.
I guess that the "staff" and "admin" don't read the forums.
I GIVE UP.
~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regards ...... Bill
|
|
|
|
Anthony Gargani
(K=4527) - Comment Date 11/11/2004
|
Interesting....
The last two (or more) posts in this thread just...
*disappeared*
Mine...
Ray Heath's...
John L.'s....
Bill's....
Must be a thread eating virus on the loose...
|
|
|
|
Anthony Gargani
(K=4527) - Comment Date 11/11/2004
|
CORRECTION:
I don't think Ray Heath posted to this thread...
strike him from the above....
My apologies...
|
|
|
|
Anthony Gargani
(K=4527) - Comment Date 11/11/2004
|
OK..
Let's just say it's been a very long day....
I'm in the wrong room, this isn't my house, this isn't my beautiful wife...
Move along folks, nothing here to see...
Just the inane ramblings of a nit-wit...
sheesshhhh...
now where did I put that crow?
|
|
|
|
Scott McFadden
(K=5663) - Comment Date 11/13/2004
|
When I see red well its seems red to me though when I see blue it really looks like blue
Now hearing thats a diffrent matter entirely yet for my purposes the same.
See Im partially deaf , thus no I dont hear every note nor appreciate every harmony.
Most still appeal to me and you wouldnt ever know I was partially deaf if we ever met.
Reading up on lense design I discovered something interesting Each lens is diffrent and so will render each of those design flaws diffrent.
Including colour detail , Contrast ,Sharpness and even Distortions.
Now I like a lot of songs but some hit a bad note for me , this doesnt make the song a bad song just becuase I dont like it.
Photography can mean diffrent things to diffrent people , Its meaning to me is communication of many generations and or variations.
|
|
|
|
BILL MAHLER
(K=5882) - Comment Date 11/21/2004
|
Hi Tony...... Just a side note>>>>> Have you noticed that all the awards lately have been selected on their deserving merits .....Maybe our forum got it's point across.. huh.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Best ....... Bill
|
|
|
|
Michael Alexander
(K=5293) - Comment Date 2/8/2005
|
Bill, here?s my simple answer, ?Politics?
Most of the comments I receive are from people trying to promote their recently posted pictures. And some are from friends that will comment just to be nice, and most of my pictures are junk, so they probably show up in the images needing comments section and people comment out of pity. But I rarely receive any real critiques, all just spam ?nice picture? comments for the most part, so I will post meaningless ?nice shot? comments on their pictures as well. Like ray said, ?mindless stroking of delicate and sensitive egos?
Usefilm is, to a large degree, a popularity contest. There are too many people, too many images to actually critique all in depth. The only way to generate traffic to your portfolio is to post ?nice? comments on other peoples pictures and a lot of them.
Sometimes I wonder if this is worth my time, I?d be hard pressed to find any real critiques on this site thru all the bullshit.
~Mike
|
|
|
|
Michael Alexander
(K=5293) - Comment Date 2/8/2005
|
Reading this thread has changed my perspective on photography, thank you
~Mike
|
|
|
|
Pico diGoliardi
(K=540) - Comment Date 2/17/2005
|
We would agree upon what is red or blue, and we each might recognize a well-known piece of music, but what we perceive in terms of esthetics (among other things) is culturally based. It is unlikely that and I see the world the same way, and almost certainly not photographs nor music.
Perception is hinted by experience.
|
|
|
|
Pico diGoliardi
(K=540) - Comment Date 2/17/2005
|
Someone above said that art (in particular the art of photography) has become so subjective ...". Well that is an empty statement which simply shows his opinion and misunderstanding of art. Opinions are not part of art criticism. Sometimes they follow criticism, but they aren't neccessary. Opinions are like commenting upon flavors of food without consideration of the food itself.
Art has been considered over history largely as a craft, for example the perfectly regimented handwork in ancient Egypt, later ancient Greek culture defined forms and regimented art to techniques which evinced the ideal regime. The late Greek and Romans followed similarly with a liberation of sculpture when they discovered gravity (points of balance), but still followed protocols.
So far we are speaking of crafts, n'est pas? Artwork was largely _commissioned_ work in Western cultures and until the near end of the Dark Ages it wasn't created unless it was commissioned. And then with the rennaisance some were very lucky to have well endowed and _tolerant_ patrons who allowed their artists to express some unique views (for example the several cases of DaVinci's themes, some acceptable and others so very similar in all respects but with nuances changed to suit the Church.) Art during the rennaisance was still arbitrated, for example by the guilds from which they purchased their colors. Not just anybody had a good enough patron or enough individual prestige so that the guild would let him have prussian blue, for example. It was too dear to waste on ordinary craftsmen/artists. Crafts still.
All the meanwhile ordinary persons like you and I made images and sculpture, many of which were emotionally compelling and endearing - and it all turned to dust.
ART remained largely a craft until the precursor to the industrial age and later communication _about_ the arts was fostered in the vernacular tradition tightly coupled with writing and widespread communications - then ART began to talk about itself. That is, artists worked very hard to reflect upon the exercise of making images and what it meant in a critical fashion. By critical I mean the process by which one first determines the scope of the work, then considers how it addresses the scope and what comments it makes upon the work within the area. Ah, is this not another craft, this criticism and study of fitness to an idea?
Photography is largely made by persons who haven't any idea of the enterprise called Art. But that is not a bad thing. We fit within the larger cultural vector that every civilization had - ephemeral works of tentative 'beauty'.
|
|
|
|
Ian T
(K=-75) - Comment Date 2/17/2005
|
I have to say that I have stopped posting images as I only received 'very few' comments and largely 'well done, great shot' ones or the odd unhelpful or inaccurate criticism. This is my first visit for a month or so. I too am only interested in learning, experimenting and growing as a photographer. I have also left my camera club as I was uninspired by the 'same old same old' and the 'big fish in a small pond' attitude that tp often prevailed.
I'll agree to post more and to look at and review properly with constuctive feedback if you will agree to do the same. If we all do so, and encourage other to follow, maybe we will see an improvement.
I would also add, that having been away for a while, I am now reminded of the reasons I joined usefilm and the tallent displayed on this site that I aspire to.
|
|
|
|
Pete Dawes
(K=272) - Comment Date 2/18/2005
|
In the late 60s I joined Brighton Camera Club, and submitted a slide of a VERY out of focus segment of the Pier, enough to make the diamond shape struts in the top third of the shot very blurred, and the shot was severely overexposed, so much so that the sea was a very light eggshell blue. It didn't have a title, but the kind of song that went with it in my head would have been a Beach Boys song, perhaps "The Warmth of the Sun" or "All Summer Long". ( I was being young and arty farty, trying to imply the fleetingness of Summer)
The judge went at it like a pit bull, condemning the shot roundly for a total lack of technical skill. The previous slide, a standard flower shot with pin sharp focus, was praised for its technical skill. I took it.
2 weeks ago, at my local camera club, the judge of a print battle with the theme "Water" stated that he deducted points if there was less than 25% water in the shot, as it meant it didn't fulfil the demands of the brief. ( I was reminded of the opening scenes of "Dead Poet's Society")
In my opinion, a contrasty picture of a tortured looking tethered man staring in agony at a single drop of water falling towards his damp forehead might well have been Best in Show. Or a dying man struggling across the desert, with a mirage in front of him, and not a drop of water in sight. Title: "Water?" [but rubbish titles are another thing I hate]
My main point really is that criticism is a different skill, and many people don't have it. Probably it is possessed more by great photographers, as they will be more critical of their own and other people's work, in a way that aids their own development as an artist.
I think there should be several different critique channels here, they could be labelled:
Brutal
Developmental
Mutually Huggy Wuggy
And some of the channels should be by invitation only. Adequate moderators and judges could be chosen by public acclaim, NOT by the staff, and you would have to graduate from one stream to another, based on your shots, or your critiques. (I have to say that, I am much better at criticising other people's work than I am at making my own...)
Then we might get this problem sorted.
|
|
|
|
Pico diGoliardi
(K=540) - Comment Date 2/19/2005
|
Pete Dawes: "Huggy (something)"
First, it is difficult to critique a photograph if one doesn't know the area of photography that was being addressed.
That said, I find a lot of groups tend to mediate serious criticism with flattery, encouraging mediocrity.
I do not know if overall that is what is happening here, but there is a lot of encouragement to do ordinary work.
|
|
|
|
Pete Dawes
(K=272) - Comment Date 2/19/2005
|
That is what worries me about this and other critique forums.
Continual repetition of:
"Isn't she lovely?"
"I love her expression!"
"Great capture"
is similar to saying "You must have a nice camera"
empty, meaningless, and of no help whatsoever.
And if that is the response a photographer is seeking when they post the shot, they shouldn't bother.
Let's take the featured critique: *****Elle #3*****
I like the shot a lot, but there are only a few comments in the thread that actually consider the art or the technique, and only one that really makes any suggestion as to how the picture could be improved.
Yet it is the featured critique!
I think criticism should be a lot more rigorous, and a lot of pictures that seem to be getting only responses like "oo" and "awww" should be moved to my proposed "Mutual Hugging" section.
However, maybe it is more the way I want it on the Donor Only section. If so, it might be worth getting my wallet out....
|
|
|
|
Kurt LaRue
(K=5067) - Comment Date 3/8/2005
|
In case anyone is still watching this thread, please check out my post "What about the" (under Philosophy of Photography) where I've tried to keep Tony's excellent school idea alive. Kurt
|
|
|
|
dal mandle
(K=1484) - Comment Date 3/9/2005
|
I'm sick of these people who comment/abuse... but fail to ever upload anything.
As far as I'm concerned they can all 'piss off where they belong'.
"did you miss your distemper shot .. or what?"... good reply Bill :)))
|
|
|
|
Joe Johnson
(K=8529) - Comment Date 3/23/2005
|
Nationalism and blood
----------------------------------
Huh?
As for the other, you're asking - what is art? Is it just in the eye of the critic, or that of the buyer? Is there an art that many, if not all, independently conceive to be art without necessarily any ulterior motive other than whatever their own views may be?
The great art of the past was rejected by the 'ugly' artists of the last century of so. Putting aside any self-referential in this very question, in that ugly art, some gems came through - just as in the ugly brothel music, some gems gave rise to an American form of music, jazz. I suppose even in the area of R&B 'hip-hop', there are some gems (but I wouldn't know).
So you might say that a consensus for great art can entirely and utterly vanish. Do people consider the Mona Lisa great art, or merely an expensive curiosity and tourist attraction, the sculpture of David, etc?
For some time, people everywhere greatly admired the work of Ansel Adams. There is a money-making foundation, today, which can attest to that. But more have been expressing an opinion that such are merely 'glorified record shots'; just carefully produced records of what is somewhere, at some time and place. It seems a weak complaint, to me. But it is a complaint some offer.
So is there art, real masterpiece? Is there against that, sometimes in line with that, an art market? Are the two now out of sync? Is great art shunned? Are lesser works applauded even to mock the existence of great art?
Or can all opinion suddenly change, regardless of obvious motive? Is there nothing permanent, not transcendent over time and tastes?
My answer might be that tastes are what are impermanent. The great art remains. In some period it is admired. In others it is studiously ignored. But it's the period, the fads, the art market if you will, that is impermanent. And I think that's the answer. Yes, there is great art. And yes, there are masterpieces of photography.
|
|
|
|
Joe Johnson
(K=8529) - Comment Date 3/23/2005
|
Chris, I think any rating system comes close to that. It becomes a competition. And without set rules, people will want to win. There are stories of racers filling their tires with water to pass weight limits in handicapped drag races, only to run the lighter car on the track obviously without the water. Anything to win. I doubt there is any photosite, ever put up on the web, where such a rating system didn't quickly descend into some sort of cheating, which typically would infuriate others sufficiently so that the site owners would revise, and re-revise, and revise again the rules, or abandon the concept entirely.
I suppose it goes to the basic question and purpose for sites - why support, why post? Is it to get an honest critique? Is it to share or teach others? Is it to learn instead, or in addition?
I would think what all these sites offer those posting, beyond those just using such for an online personal archive, is a sort of 'continuing education' of refining their art and photography. One hopes for a constructively critical comment, that makes sense. But I think the real incentive is found within, as one invests in themselves in posting, and then, themselves, compare and contrast their work, honestly, with the best on the boards. And I think that's where the real learning begins, or at least speaking for myself I feel that it does. You 'go to class' for taking the time to involve yourself and upload what you consider to be your best. And you learn by examing the rest, without anyone saying a word.
|
|
|
|
Lou Mmm
(K=342) - Comment Date 4/10/2005
|
Interesting thread!
I haven't been here on Usefilm long, but some days I love it and some days I don't. Those "great shot!" comments by themselves I agree are totally worthless.
Try as we might, I think the only thing we can do is post meaningful comments to people and see if they post meaningful comments back. Form our own 'network' the way that supposedly other people do. But this is a 'meaningful comments' network as opposed to a slap-on-the-back-good-old-boy network.
To that end, I have posted comments on one picture from most people on this thread. I'm no expert, but thought I'd contribute constructive criticism.
That's all we can hope to accomplish.
|
|
|
|
Joggie van Staden
(K=41700) - Comment Date 4/11/2005
|
A lot have been said along this thread. I agree with most sentiments expressed. What I was looking for when I joined the site a month ago was exactly that - constructive criticism. I must say, although most of my entries were well recieved, I think about 10% of the comments recieved could be classified as constructive.
The second thing I noticed is that when I made, what I thought was an objective or constructive comment/criticism/question on some of the more "famous" members images, they dont even bother to answer. It was from them specifically I would like some feedback to learn, even on the quality of my comment!
What I suggest is a bit of action - I invite everybody who participated on this thread to critisize my images, and yes you can be brutal if that is what I need to get out of my chain of thinking/seeing and maybe get more creative and/or technically correct. But please concentrate on the photography and not the PS work.
Great show al of you. Kind regards.
Joggie
|
|
|
|
Darren Arena
(K=2999) - Comment Date 10/16/2008
|
I know that this is an extremely old post, but I found it to be a very intersting insite to human vantage points.
First off, my biggest question since I began in photography is this: How can ANYONE judge or critique another persons art??
Art is in essence how one sees his or her own world, and how that person interprets what he sees in his/her mind.
If they do indeed post their "Art" for critique, then that was the first mistake!! You have to believe in yourself, and your clear sight from your own vantage point, not others vantage points.
If you start to rely on how people view what you see, then it's all over. You have lost your sight.
That being said, I think this was very entertaining and really made me think about what I do!!
Thanks for the thread Bill!!
-Darren Arena- 
|
|
|
|
nimish dalal
(K=5) - Comment Date 1/31/2009
|
hi, Darren. I think the criticism is not about the art itself but about the technicalities put into creating that piece of art.
|
|
|
|
