LL: Learning from the Best Images

R

Renzsu

Well-known
Local time
1:08 AM
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
637
Location
Amsterdam
View My Gallery
Is it just me, am I so bitter that one look at the sample photos provided make me want to dismiss the whole article posted there?

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/learning-best.shtml

I mean, no doubt the writer makes good points, and provides some solid tips on how to improve your images.. but come on, most shots are from rusty metal sheets, generic boring shots of structures, etc..
How is this better than a brick wall shooter explaining how to get bricks to look the best at the golden hour for example..
I'm not saying I can do better, because if I could I should be writing such an article instead..

rust1-v3.jpg
 
He selected images that specifically illustrated each of his points. And his points are good ones. It really doesn't matter what you point your camera at, people or rusty metal. The "rules" are pretty much the same.
 
George Barr is a 'fine art' photographer. This is the thrust of the LL site really, rather than landscape as such, and there is a strong tendency to focus on technical perfection as a part of delivering 'your vision'. If you read through the forums there are many ludicrous examples of this going way too far.

What is missing from the article is that there are other approaches to photography (and art) that are equally valid and where actively concentrating on the points made would be counter to the intent of the artist and work.

You pays your money.

Mike
 
If I understand you, the point of contention is the photographers work used, not the article. Since, the point of the photos is to illustrate his points in the article. I think that it succeeds. I too am not moved by the pictures, and would appreciate pictures that did make a connection with me. But, this is quite subjective. So, I do not know that it is fair to apply this point of contention as a requirement for a successful technical article.

As to other techniques, as brought up by Mike, he does address this issue in the first paragraph. He simply does not go into describing the what, when, where issues. But, that is not the point of the article. I think a firm understanding of the basics of good composition is needed before you can truly understand when to change them. I agree in that it would be nice to see a follow up article that goes into these other details for a more advanced approach.

Kindest Regards,
 
1. I can't think of any really 'great' photographers who write 'technical' blogs or technical text of any kind.
2. Everyone likes their own tastes, but really - what percentage of people actually have good taste?
3. Photographers tend to be narcissistic about their own work. Sometimes they can sell you on the virtues of it. More often, they just can't.
4. Pictures of "rusty stuff" — i don't get it either. Technically, well-executed, but to me, it's akin to 'found object art.' You come upon something. You 'capture' it. You could have used a Canon G10 or a Hasselblad H-something. I don't really see the point. It doesn't have any 'you-ness.' Can you tell the difference between this fellow's rusty stuff picture and someone else's? Does it SAY anything about anything?
5. I thought i had a point here, but it seems this post is rather aimless after all.
 
Could someone please tell me the name of the photographer who made and exhibited enormous platinum prints of pictures of cigarette stubs in a gutter?
 
biggambi said:
If I understand you, the point of contention is the photographers work used, not the article. Since, the point of the photos is to illustrate his points in the article. I think that it succeeds. I too am not moved by the pictures, and would appreciate pictures that did make a connection with me. But, this is quite subjective. So, I do not know that it is fair to apply this point of contention as a requirement for a successful technical article.
Click to expand...

Yup, fair point and yes, this work is certainly not to my own personal taste. I still think the article would've been better with a bit more variation in the work on display.
But more importantly, I was just a bit annoyed this morning and needed some inspiration that I couldn't really find.

CK Dexter Haven said:
1. I can't think of any really 'great' photographers who write 'technical' blogs or technical text of any kind.
2. Everyone likes their own tastes, but really - what percentage of people actually have good taste?
3. Photographers tend to be narcissistic about their own work. Sometimes they can sell you on the virtues of it. More often, they just can't.
4. Pictures of "rusty stuff" — i don't get it either. Technically, well-executed, but to me, it's akin to 'found object art.' You come upon something. You 'capture' it. You could have used a Canon G10 or a Hasselblad H-something. I don't really see the point. It doesn't have any 'you-ness.' Can you tell the difference between this fellow's rusty stuff picture and someone else's? Does it SAY anything about anything?
5. I thought i had a point here, but it seems this post is rather aimless after all.
Click to expand...

Regarding point 4, true.. that's kind of my first feeling as well, but on the other hand, isn't part of photography as a whole based on those finds? The whole field of street photography would also fall under this category (even though it's a more fleeting moment kind of thing).

Anyways, glad to see I didn't totally get burned down for writing this topic in the first place.
 
It's not just you .... a genre that doesn't "talk" to me either.

But then, lot's of people do it, and others seam to like it ....
 
To me, they're not generic or boring: I found the majority to be very attractive images. As others have said, it's just a question of what appeals to you, and what doesn't.

Cheers,

R.
 
Thank you, tomtofa.

This business makes me think that we are not making the necessary distinction between photographs pure and simple, objects which stand on their own and can be enjoyed and also learnt from, and photographs as illustrations.
 








I'm one of those that shoot rusty metal, and found objects. I think they're brilliant. And the images make me happy. For me it's important to observe and document these objects. I'm not sure about anything else as far as art. What is my motivation? Don't know, don't care. I will say this, that one time I enlarged a frozen piece of string in ice shot with a medium format to 6x4 feet. Some people's reactions were so intense that they wanted to physically fight me. I was at this show where the photo was being displayed and there was this guy with his eyes bulging out of his head and veins about to pop. Growling at me, "why would blow up a pice of string in frozen ice six by four ****ing feet big?" 😀 The picture sold 😛. And the angry man went away. You don't think he is a member of RangeFinderForum do you.
 
Last edited:
4x6 of a string, imagine how big you'd make the image if you came across a spectra-12 mooring line (now thats a strong 'piece of string').

rusty plates, string, - shoot what you like, - good for you !
 
I am on the 'rusty things' team..... I got that from my mother. She has always had a fascination with the way walls/materials naturally decay....paint peeling, metal rusting etc... tree bark, that sort of thing. She has been an oil painter her whole life, and photographer. These days she only uses an old Canon zoom digicam. Her photos are just well framed, and the subjects are well chosen. Nothing fancy. I am still only 28 (she is 55), but with all the nice lenses/bodies I buy, nothing I take can touch her work.....
.....like everyone has already said, different people like to look at different things. I am lucky, I guess, in that I enjoy all sorts of images. People/portraits, street candid shots, sports photog, landscapes, textures, anything.
My goal when I select a nice photo to show a friend, is for them to care enough to stare at it for more than about 2-3 seconds....if they skim past it, it probably is average/poor, if they check it out for a few seconds, I am happy.
I definitely spent more than a few seconds checking out NIKKORAISs photos....beautiful as always!
 
Nikkor AIS said:
I'm one of those that shoot rusty metal, and found objects. I think they're brilliant. And the images make me happy. For me it's important to observe and document these objects. I'm not sure about anything else as far as art. What is my motivation? Don't know, don't care. I will say this, that one time I enlarged a frozen piece of string in ice shot with a medium format to 6x4 feet. Some people's reactions were so intense that they wanted to physically fight me. I was at this show where the photo was being displayed and there was this guy with his eyes bulging out of his head and veins about to pop. Growling at me, "why would blow up a pice of string in frozen ice six by four ****ing feet big?" 😀 The picture sold 😛. And the angry man went away. You don't think he is a member of RangeFinderForum do you.
Click to expand...

Love your pictures and that's a great story. 🙂

People are free to have different tastes but they should definitely chill out and relax more!
 
It's all pretty darn subjective. I hate to look at nature photography because I personally just find it boring, but that doesn't diminish the quality of a good bird photo. I'm one of the artsy-fartsy types that can find "art" in a lot of things... whether others agree or not, I have no control over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom