boring

[sunsworth]

I mean, can things be so boring that they become interesting - minimalism?

You are confusing interesting with memorable. They are two totally different things. Memorable can be something that you wouldn't want to repeat under any circumstances. It remains with you because of that.

 

[pmun]

I find the remark condescending, whether made about urbanpaths or anything else. In the context of this thread, the underlying implication is that viewers find things boring because they have no imagination and expect to be spoon-fed.

What I mean here is that a lot of people find it difficult to appreciate a photograph unless it has a particularly clear or striking feature. The same can be said of music; many people find that music without a distinctive melody is boring. That's not to criticise anyone, melodious music and obvious photographs can be very pleasing and satisfying. But then again, it's nice to hold the spoon yourself sometimes😉

 

[pmun]

You are confusing interesting with memorable. They are two totally different things. Memorable can be something that you wouldn't want to repeat under any circumstances. It remains with you because of that.

good point

 

[sunsworth]

I feel photography has to be able to stand up on its own two feet i.e. without a narrative or essay

Amen to that. It's like comedy, if you have to explain a joke the chances are it's not funny in the first place.

 

[pmun]

But in my version of the thought experiment, 95% think the b&w pictures are exciting and interesting! How do you answer that?

Do you see what I'm getting at? If the conclusion is part of the experiment, then anyone can reverse the experiment by giving the opposite conclusion.

Yes I do, but I repeat, the conclusion is not part of the experiment, again: we are discussing 'boring' not B&W photography. The whole aspect of B&W photography is something that you just have to accept if you are to take part in the experiment; then it's up to you to form a conclusion by answering the question. I don't think I can help you any further with this.

 

[BillP]

I choose not to take part in the experiment.

Regards,

Bill

 

[pmun]

in my version of the thought experiment, 95% think the b&w pictures are exciting and interesting! How do you answer that?

Those people were ready for and embraced change or anything new, and they weren't afraid to because they were in the majority, indeed it became fashionable to appreciate B&W photography.
(only a thought experiment everyone - this didn't really happen)

 

[notturtle]

Heres part 2 of what I tried to send earlier as one piece but my Afghan internet would not allow:

Looking at the images: They are too repetitive IMO and I agree with previous comments that if you are to pursue this concept the images need to be grab the viewer better or hold their attention in any way you can. They need to make people look at them otherwise you are never going to get engagement on the concept. I feel that they do not isolate anything from normal life that i do not see in normal life and that the banality of it contributes nothing to the point of making them. If you want to lead people to see things in a different light or to explore certain concepts, it is likely that you will need more powerful tools to do so i.e. images that may hit upon the same concept time and time again but in different ways.

You do not need other people to agree with you. For all I know you may become a huge name and win global awards! But I do think you ought to realise that the discussion being prompted here is not 'a good thing' as far as your work is concerned. This is not a discourse that compliments or validates your project, but it may help you think about your work in the same way as you have asked us to think about your work.

To pressure on the issue of engagement, as already pointed out, will never end well. It can come across as arrogant (I have not taken it this way in this case) and make people think this is an emperor's clothes scenario. I know this is not your intention, but just as people walk out of maths exams/interviews thinking they have done brilliantly (and have failed miserably) it is possible to have a concept that excites you only to find it does not excite anyone else, and for perfectly valid reasons that do not highlight inadequacies on the part of the viewer.

This is not the place to show such work, neither is Leica forum, if you want engagement from the sort of people that would be your customer base. I regard the modern art world as largely comprised of people as mad as hatters, pretentious individuals with certain aspirations, charlatans, the intellectually and personally insecure and a small number of genuinely very talented artists and the public that enjoy their work. I find more intellectual stimulation in a bar fight or a well read magazine (in a language I cannot understand) in a Dentist's waiting room. I find little conceptual art challenging, new, different, or enduring, but they are my prejudices. The fact that I find some interesting does reinforce my feeling that the work which I don't simply does not reach my threshold of interest. The fact that other like it does not mean they should not, but i do suspect the emperor's clothes phenomenon has an awful lot to do with it in more than a few cases.

I remember being really bored in art class at school and energetically painting a green dinosaur (aged 16) in the last five minutes of the day, which inadvertently ended up in with the real work we had done. the teacher found it when handing out the work and absolutely loved it - it was apparently the only decent piece of work in the pile and nothing to do with the lesson. I should add that she was a successful artist across Europe and taught purely for pleasure. It was still garbage, however.

Good luck and stick by your guns if you have been truly open to what has been said here, but still believe in what you are doing.

 

[John Rountree]

Pmun, have you ever read The Painted Word, by Tom Wolfe?

 

[pmun]

Pmun, have you ever read The Painted Word, by Tom Wolfe?

No, I haven't, why do you ask?

 

[Steve M.]

The question and the discussion are boring.

 

[pmun]

I feel photography has to be able to stand up on its own two feet i.e. without a narrative or essay. Sure, they can add to the work and help ground it, but if the images lose everything in the absence of words, I am not sure that they can truly be alll they aspire to be. Photography is a visual medium, unless what you have presented here should be described as conceptual art that just happens to use photography as a partial contribution to the concept delivery.

Notturtle, first of all thank you for taking the time to think and reflect about this. I’ll cover just a few of your points, if I may. Yes, I know exactly what you mean here. I’ve been painting for almost 25 years now, and words having nothing to do with my paintings. They stand on their own; they are paint on canvas – that’s all. One of the reasons for returning to ‘serious’ photography is to apply my passion for ideas to images (philosophy was my undergraduate degree). So while I understand the ‘it should stand on its own’ argument, especially as it’s one I’ve defended in the past, I am now open to a different approach.

What makes photography a unique medium is its relationship to its subject matter. With abstract painting, the painting is the paint. With photographs we have a collection of pixels, ink, paper, screen etc…then we have something else: the realistic illusion of three-dimensional space. So we have three dimensions of ‘reality’ flattened down onto two to make a new reality in a completely different space and time. There is so much happening here that I cannot ignore it. It is a relationship that like other relationships is in flux. But here one part remains the same, while the other changes its relevance. A photograph of Michael Jackson is now very different to what it was a couple of days ago (at least our perception of it is), but the space photographed remains exactly the same, those young innocent eyes looking at the camera – the eyes of a genius (a photograph of death?)

The reason I don’t go for the ‘great capture’ style of photography you often see posted on these forums is that, put simply, I want a photograph to reveal more about what it really is (not more of the subject). If the subject dominates, that’s all we tend to see and that removes us from the photograph itself and denies us a sense of the relationship. My black and white thought experiment is one I thought up during this whole discussion/debate because there are similarities: Colour is absent for the sake of the photograph (not the subject). It helps us focus on the formal qualities of tone and texture. In urbanpaths to some extent the subject is absent (at least we become blind to it because it’s so, well, boring). Then we can get on with the formal characteristics of photography itself, and because we are there with the photograph, we are with the relationship as well. Then that opens up a dialogue about the relationship. That’s it in very basic terms.

 

[pmun]

This is not the place to show such work, neither is Leica forum, if you want engagement from the sort of people that would be your customer base. Good luck and stick by your guns if you have been truly open to what has been said here, but still believe in what you are doing.

Thanks Notturtle for your support. You’re right this is not the right place for this. I naively thought, being philosophy, that people might be more inclined to use logic and argument here and engage; but as you can see that is not the case. Nevertheless, you only need one person to look and think and care, and there have been a few of those here, especially you.

As for the emperor’s new clothes and how good my project is, I don’t really care that much at this stage (at least two years to go) – and I think that frustrates some people here. I didn’t post for ‘good capture’ comments but to exchange ideas. I’m glad I’ve done it and have been amazed at the response and interest. People seem to be compelled to criticise and discuss the project even though I didn’t invite that (on this thread at least). Then they’re convinced that somehow I’m defending the photographs because I’m talking about ideas related to photography in general! The project has a long way to go and I need to hone the conceptual framework, I’m very excited by it and honoured that so many people here have taken the time to look and comment – no matter how dismissive or derogatory their remarks.

Besides if I really am ‘a pathetic, petulant, chicken, troll with a bruised ego who is playing to the crowd and taking really boring, really excruciatingly boring photos, that look like the first attempts at street photography by a shy and frightened beginner, who is really just on one big advertising campaign with assumptions coming out of my arse’ then everyone should just be grateful they’re not me and go and make a nice cup of tea.😉

 

[ruben]

The question and the discussion are boring.

Your veredict has been recorded.

 

[John Rountree]

No, I haven't, why do you ask?

I think you might find The Painted Word interesting. Basically it looks at how "conceptual art" is dependent on the explanation of the work to make it valid, rather than the work standing on its own.

 

[pmun]

I think you might find The Painted Word interesting. Basically it looks at how "conceptual art" is dependent on the explanation of the work to make it valid, rather than the work standing on its own.

Thanks, I had a look on Amazon - looks interesting. The reason I like a strong concept is that it lingers well after the work has gone (the viewer left the gallery). A good concept can have an aesthetic too; it's not only the material object that can have this - as such an idea can be elegant.

 

[palec]

This is funny, I was just thinking - if you're so interested in boredom, why don't you open encyclopedia and find the definition there? And what I have found? The word boredom is not that old – mid 19th century – probably people in the past had not been so bored to think about it.

 

[Roger Hicks]

This is funny, I was just thinking - if you're so interested in boredom, why don't you open encyclopedia and find the definition there? And what I have found? The word boredom is not that old – mid 19th century – probably people in the past had not been so bored to think about it.

Bore (in its present sense, 'to weary by tedious conversation or simply by the failure to be interesting) dates from at least 1768, and 'borish' (tedious, wearisome) to at least 1766. (Source: OED).

Tashi delek,

R.

 

[palec]

Bore (in its present sense, 'to weary by tedious conversation or simply by the failure to be interesting) dates from at least 1768, and 'borish' (tedious, wearisome) to at least 1766. (Source: OED).

Tashi delek,

R.

Oh, my mistake, it should have been mid 18th century. I was too fast to come with conclusion.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Oh, my mistake, it should have been mid 18th century. I was too fast to come with conclusion.

Not a problem. Besides, if my Slovak were as good as your English, I'd be quite happy.

Tashi delek,

R.