Does anybody besides me think Ralph Gibson's "Leica Picture of the Year"...

[Bill Blackwell]

His first book, The Somnambulist, is what put him on the critical map, and I would say deservedly. ...

It seems to me, then, he is now resting on his laurels ... There is allot of that going around. It's unbelievable what passes for a "good" photograph once you've earned a name for yourself. Very often a picture's critique has more to do with the photographer than the picture itself.

Most of us would have ignored, or even deleted, such a photograph if we had taken it - and so would most critics.

 

[Canyongazer]

Those who criticise..the higher up..than them..
Are like fleas on a dog..
Always nippin at sumthin..
To boost their sagging egos..
Ralphy may have had a bad day..
Who hasnt..
Might be gettin old..
Bored maybe..
Whatever..
He did his due and on some level..
The fleas might be better off..cookin their own meals..
And not eating the meals of others..and complainin..
It doesnt taste good..

"Great fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em,
And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so ad infinitum."


Jonathan Swift (?)

 

[retinax]

I don't mind it. Imagining the typical poster in this thread in a museum cracks me up.

 

[oldwino]

Irregardless of your opinion as to the quality of the photo, or its prize-worthiness, it is a very recognizable "Ralph Gibson Photo". Give him credit - he has a visual signature. Most of us do not.

 

[Ororaro]

You know that moment when you see a master at work, when it all seems so easy?
And the results, almost laughable... like your grandma could do better?

And then you try... and can never come close?

Well, that’s when the Master owns you in his little backpocket.

 

[Rob-F]

I just clicked on the link, and got a McAfee message that the site is infected. I think I saw the word "illegal." No idea if the message was legit. Did anyone else see that?

Edit: A couple of hours later I tried again and there was no problem. And yes I am surprised that Leica chose this.

 

[Archiver]

It seems illogical to think that artistic work can only be critiqued by someone of equal artistic standing or skill. From a technical standpoint, a person doesn't have to be a master tradesman to be able to discern a good paint job from a bad one, or a middling paintjob from an excellent one. Art is such a subjective area that critique is a function of multiple factors including viewer perception and bias, comparison with the artist's existing works, un so weiter. (Yes, that's German, it just seemed appropriate for Leica land.) I'll bet dollars to donuts that the artistic sensibilities of many RFF members are more refined and informed than those of the general public. Characterizing honest critique as the nipping of gnats only serves to stifle and stigmatize discussion.

 

[Yokosuka Mike]

A couple of YouTube videos related to the conversation.

Ralph Gibson - The Leica Aesthetic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z_oO4vWATc

Ralph Gibson - Leica Hall of Fame Award 2021 winner
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAVkJkWJSXk

Mike

 

[Yokosuka Mike]

... Very often a picture's critique has more to do with the photographer than the picture itself...

So true Bill, so true. A cult of popularity versus good photography. Don't we see that here at RFF? I think so.

All the best,
Mike

 

[Sonnar Brian]

It could be right out of "Color Magic" and "Color Again" by Walther Benser. No wonder that the Leica judges like it.
You either like it, or you don't. It made me pull out those two books. So, it had an effect.

 

[robert blu]

A couple of YouTube videos related to the conversation.

Ralph Gibson - The Leica Aesthetic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z_oO4vWATc

Ralph Gibson - Leica Hall of Fame Award 2021 winner
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAVkJkWJSXk

Mike

Thanks Mike to link these two videos which by the way I had already seen 😉

But probably interesting for other people here who would like to go deeper into the subject and not to stop only at the "I like or I do not like it" sentence.
I believe when we evaluate the work of somebody is always good to know where he or she comes from to have a more balanced view.

After that of course everybody is free to like or not the work in quiestion.

 

[jsrockit]

So true Bill, so true. A cult of popularity versus good photography. Don't we see that here at RFF? I think so.

All the best,
Mike

Ok, so let’s define good photography next? 😉

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Ok, so let’s define good photography next? 😉

A rabbit hole with no rabbit at the bottom.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Good photography is a picture that you like. Just show a picture to anyone, ask them if they like it or not, and then ask them is it good photography. If enough people want to pay for it, you can make a living as a photographer. Ralph Gibson has made his living as a photographer. Enough people like his work enough to pay for it.

 

[raid]

As Brian has said, it depends on your taste in the photos being sold/displayed. Tastes differ. I recall when Audi came out with a special blue color (that I did not like at all), it was a hit in Germany. A friend of mine bought such a car. I could not understand why he picked that color.

 

[ptpdprinter]

Good photography is a picture that you like. Just show a picture to anyone, ask them if they like it or not, and then ask them is it good photography. If enough people want to pay for it, you can make a living as a photographer. Ralph Gibson has made his living as a photographer. Enough people like his work enough to pay for it.

The Leica Picture of the Year 2021 is being sold in a limited edition of 75 prints priced at $2000. Even if you don't like the image you might want to buy one anyway and keep it in the closet. Someone may like it a lot a few years down the road.

The other thing is if Ralph Gibson is selling his prints for only $2000, there is no hope for any of us of making a living in the fine art photography field.

 

[raid]

Thanks Mike to link these two videos which by the way I had already seen 😉

But probably interesting for other people here who would like to go deeper into the subject and not to stop only at the "I like or I do not like it" sentence.
I believe when we evaluate the work of somebody is always good to know where he or she comes from to have a more balanced view.

After that of course everybody is free to like or not the work in quiestion.

I agree with you, Rob, but people do have different tastes.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The Leica Picture of the Year 2021 is being sold in a limited edition of 75 prints priced at $2000. Even if you don't like the image you might want to buy one anyway and keep it in the closet. Someone may like it a lot a few years down the road.

I've bought some limited edition prints by Robert Taylor, Artists Proof, Artists Proof #1 (Luck, Viginia Bader would have kept it), Publishers Proofs. The Smithsonian Udvar Hazy has similar taste, but mine has more signatures. Bought the Publishers Proof of one because my Dad flew on that mission. One signed by Jimmy Doolittle with a BeeGee racer hand drawn on the print. After 25 years- would cost several (edit, more than 10) times what I paid for them- price checks, more than the Ralph Gibson print. Bought because I like them, need to let my daughter know they are valuable. I will not be selling them.

 

[robert blu]

Ok, so letâs define good photography next? 😉

Interesting subject, perhaps worthwhile a dedicatec thread!

 

[robert blu]

I agree with you, Rob, but people do have different tastes.

Yes and no Raid! I think one things are personal tastes and preferences, another things is the evaluation of somebody's work.

Let's assume I like abstract art and design: I can say I like this kind of pictures but I do not like landscapes or formal portraits. Which absoluteluy does not mean thay cannot be good pictures. Simply do not suit my taste but still are good.
Of course if I want to buy a photo or a painting to hang in my living room I agree a good one is the one I like 🙂