boring

There's an omitted middle here. Sure, a lot of geniuses and great artists have been called fools, but their genius has been vindicated by posterity. Equally, a lot of fools have been called fools, too, and posterity has also vindicated that diagnosis.

(Not calling you a fool; just adding to the debate).

Tashi delek,

R.
 
pmun said:
Here's the question: Can photographs (or any other object for that matter) be inherently boring or is it in the way people look at things?
Click to expand...

I'm with you on this one Pmun.
For a single photo to be boring is an impossibility. The same, or similar photos, repeated too much can become monotonous if the concept is not understood by the viewer.

Someone earlier was indignated by the thought of having to be spoon fed the message, I can't agree. Although I'm well educated certain subjects and concepts are beyond me and would necessitate me being spoon fed, to my (possible) benefit.

Like you, I have worked long and hard on several projects/concepts that few else would understand or appreciate. Does it matter? Not to me. Personal exploration is just that, personal.

I wonder what the membership here would think of the photo project done by the character "Auggie" in the film "Smoke". He took a photo of his store front from across the street at 8am each day.
 
mabelsound said:
pmun, you might like the work of my conceptual artist friend Hamish Fulton.

He goes on walks. The walks are the artworks, really; the gallery show is sort of an artifact of the walk, a kind of map of it. This may be the kind of thing you're going for. But if you actually want feedback, I can tell you that you need more than the photographs themselves to be the artifacts of your experiences. You need writings maybe, or video, or physical items you found nearby, or something--things to fill out the viewer's experience of it, to lend your experience mystery. Ultimately, as it stands, I think the project asks too much of its viewer. Every photograph demands something of its viewer, of course, but not many people will put in the imaginative work necessary to complete their experience of your pictures. It would end up being more the viewer's work than yours.
Click to expand...

What work such as this always brings to my mind, and what I worked on myself way back when I made any sort of "art" to speak of, is the dichotomy between the immediate,, personal reality of experience--a holistic and indescribable thing--and the inadequacy (or at least limits of) of our attempts to narrate, communicate, describe, convey it, etc. to others by whatever means. We necessarily have to break down/isolate experience out of an intrinsic fabric, turn it into something transmittable (language, physical object, combinations therof) and pass it on, and the way we do this is shaped by our motives and abilities.

All we have are artefacts, physical and mental, once the moment passes...and it's continuously passing. Your friend's "walks" remind me more of what he can't share than what he can. The absences are more poignant than the presences. (That's not a criticism, mind you...it's the actual point of the work in my eyes, and as best I can see it on low-bandwidth African internet.)

And some artefacts are simply boring. Sorry, pmun, like I said in the other thread, IMHO it's a one-note pony that's not going anywhere right now. Work with it and see if you can make us understand what you're going for using a different tactic. Or just call us ignorant philistines and walk away.
 
Last edited:
Roger Hicks said:
There's an omitted middle here. Sure, a lot of geniuses and great artists have been called fools, but their genius has been vindicated by posterity. Equally, a lot of fools have been called fools, too, and posterity has also vindicated that diagnosis.
Click to expand...
But how important is posterity? How I'm remembered is irrelevant when it comes to the decisions I make regarding my project.
 
pmun said:
What's a 'sticky'?
Click to expand...
If something is deemed particularly informative or interesting enough, a moderator can make a thread a sticky. It "sticks" to the top of the sub-forum search results so that each time you view the thread, those pertinent topics persist and you don't have to search for it.
 
pmun said:
Steve, when you become acutely aware of things you wouldn't normally get to see (eg: a glimpse of a person in motion sustained over time) or when you notice details you otherwise wouldn't see (eg: the ability to count the textile creases behind someone's knee during a stride) or when you start to notice the formal characteristics of the photograph before the characteristics of the subject matter (a splash of red that breaks up the greyness).

Basically any of these are some of the unique characteristics of photography (it could be argued that colours, tones and shapes are everywhere, not just in a photograph - but don't forget the relationship with reality). If you look back at the LUF thread at posts 69,71 and 81 you can read more about this with examples: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/88999-non-classic-shots-m8-4.html

An interest in and openness to these ideas and a keen eye for detail for its own sake is probably enough. Otherwise, as many people have found here and on the LUF thread the whole thing could be tedious.
Click to expand...

i think that's what people find fault with. if you try hard enough, you can derive social commentary or philosophical musings from ANY photo. your project simply doesn't capture attention, nor does it express meaning any better than a snapshot collection of any other subject such as a water fountain series of 100 images shot at 8 fps. yes, each image will depict something unique in a sense, you can definitely manifest some deeper meaning in the flow of water and it's relation to the human condition, but that doesn't make it worth looking at, nor does it take any skill to capture.

since you're so keen on maintaining that this thread is about the application of the term "boring" and not your own work in particular, disregard my mention of your project and just read the rest of my post. a collage of photos of a water fountain are boring. anybody can (and often do) create such projects so it can't even be argued that the monotony of the genre is unique in itself. boring is boring, and the purpose of art and exploration is often to pursue that which expands perspectives. boring lacks this quality and is in relative terms, rather pointless and uninspired.

ps: you should consider revising the tone of your responses because you exhibit many qualities of a troll. you claim people who don't appreciate boring collections to be boring people themselves, and you harbor a pretentious air about you when people suggest that boring projects or photo subjects are a waste of time. that's their opinion, and rightfully so considering the plethora of these sorts of projects found a dime a dozen on the internet. lighten up a little and stop trying to make it sound like people are getting defensive because you have a point and they can't argue with it. they're getting frustrated because you're pushing a dull project as being deeper than it actually is. you're not smarter than everyone else. please stop acting like you are.
 
Brad Maestas said:
If something is deemed particularly informative or interesting enough, a moderator can make a thread a sticky. It "sticks" to the top of the sub-forum search results so that each time you view the thread, those pertinent topics persist and you don't have to search for it.
Click to expand...
Thanks Brad
 
Last edited:
I opened this thread becasue I was bored and I thought I might get something to help alleviate the problem, judging from the title.

I have been bored now for about, oh, three weeks. Fairly constantly. I try to pretend I am not bored for while, but I loose interest in it. I am not convinced.
I read the whole thread. I feel it important to mention this.

PMUN,

No matter how much you talk about spinning the results of your project(stultifying boredom) you cant make boredom into an attractively stimulating result for an artwork. And you certainly cant argue that people have missed the point of your art becasue they havnt realised that its boringness is its redeeming feature.

By its very nature, boredom is inherently filled up entire worlds of complete lack of interest. No matter how broing something is, their is no event horizon where all of that unmitigatedly mindless wasteland of unadulterated lack of stimulation, communication or interest will collapse in on itself and and create an even mildly interesting black hole made up of compacted universes of sheer boredom. Its impossible.
Even the fact that you have contemplated that this might be possible, is not even remotely diverting.

I refuse to think any deeper on this subject becasue to do so would be to lose interest in it entirely.
 
pmun said:
Here's the question: Can photographs (or any other object for that matter) be inherently boring or is it in the way people look at things?
Click to expand...

It is the way people look at things. Most people concentrate more on the subject of the photograph rather than the photograph itself; meaning, they care more about what you're showing than how you're showing it.

Others don't care what it is you're showing, it is how you're showing it.

Rare is the person who will look at a photo with more than one perspective, and even rarer the one who will create a photo the same way.
 
Carlsen Highway said:
No matter how broing something is, their is no event horizon where all of that unmitigatedly mindless wasteland of unadulterated lack of stimulation, communication or interest will collapse in on itself and and create an even mildly interesting black hole made up of compacted universes of sheer boredom.
Click to expand...

However if Stephen Hawking's theories apply to boredom, then a boredom singularity will in fact radiate particles of interest. As the black hole of boredom shrinks (due to this Hawking Boredom Radiation), the particles of interest flux will increase until, at the final moments of the boredom hole, it will vanish in a giant blinding explosion of interesting particles.

(Unless you're traveling in a time-reversed path, in which an extremely boring event actually appears, relativistically speaking, to be extremely interesting.)
 
Antiquark, you have sparked my interest.

I propose that boredom and fascination are relative to each other, and can be increased or reduced by each others proximity.
I postulate thusly: If a really, really boring person who is sitting on a train with a really interested person, the interesting person becomes infinitely more interesting to a passing observer, and the boring person becomes relatively more mindlessly painful to be around.
I call this the Boring Theory of Relativity.

This can be achieved also with photographs. If you put one of these legs walking on the street pictures next to one of my shots, it becomes plain that I am a photographic genius. I am in fact, at that moment, more succesful artistically than HCB, or Man Ray, or Ansel Adams. Yet remove my phtograph to a distance and it is plain that its natural state is only one of mild interest.

You have to have a really, really boring picture in you possession to weld that kind of absolute power.
PMUN, use these pictures for good, not evil.
 
Carlsen Highway said:
If you put one of these legs walking on the street pictures next to one of my shots, it becomes plain that I am a photographic genius. I am in fact, at that moment, more succesful artistically than HCB, or Man Ray, or Ansel Adams.
Click to expand...

If nothing else, I've just had an entirely unexpected chuckle from the disinterment of this old thread :)

Carlsen Highway said:
You have to have a really, really boring picture in you possession to weld that kind of absolute power.
PMUN, use these pictures for good, not evil.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom