OT: Flickr users

[daveozzz]

Thought some here might find this amusing.

Anyone that uses Flickr might have seen the Deleteme group where people submit a picture to the group and users vote delete or save depending on whether people think the picture technically worthy of what the call The Safe - only for "incredible" pictures. First to 10 votes each way wins.

You might recognise this recent submission by a certain well known leica user which the, um, expert critics deleted 10-4 (mostly for being too blurry):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrerabelo/70458366/

 

[Goodyear]

Heh.

I like that.

I found deleteme to be pure pants anyway - I didn't hang around.

 

[Goodyear]

That said, just becasue it's HCB doesn't make it good. That would not rank among my favourites of his.

But the ignorance is still hilarious. 😀

 

[cp_ste.croix]

heh...I must admit though, posting an HCB shot in order to 'expose' people is a little mean spirited, if funny.

 

[Goodyear]

But mainly funny.

 

[cp_ste.croix]

oh, hilarious...don't get me wrong. My gf is in creative writing and I keep begging her to submit a something from Elliot or Pound for criticism. I think that every serious artist has an understanding of the artists who have come before and helped define the field...it seems to me it's one of the delineations between 'art' and 'craft'.

 

[Stephan]

Mwaaaaahahahahahhah, the IGNORANCE !

Very funny, but very scary too... reminds me of a lynchmob. ("We've found a witch !...")

 

[daveozzz]

Yeah it's not the first time someone's used the word lynchmob in connection with that group - gets quite heated at times in there.

 

[ywenz]

Why are they ignorant? This photo by HCB is kinda weak anyways.. Are you sure you're not trumping it up only because it was shot by HCB?

 

[aizan]

lol. that's so lame!

 

[JonB]

Honestly, I'm glad people troll like that; I just wish the trolls were more articulate. Probably the most revealing thing I've found on the internet is this thread on photo.net, which calls Lee Friedlander's quality to task. One of the pictures given as an example of his low quality is Leslie Katz; I find this image absolutely stunning. Having been thus inspired to find more of Friedlander's work, I've been thumbing through a recently published book on him and have probably learned more about photography from that than from any other source. Now, the photo.net post wasn't a troll, but things that push people to explore their conception of art (and, perhaps, through art their experience of reality) are good things. The discussion in that thread had more to do with the nature of art, and isn't terribly well conceived, but at least sparked a few worthwhile comments; I'm contemplating creating a Flickr account just so somebody can step in and say something that rises above grade-school dogmatic polarization.

Or maybe I've just missed the point of this "Deleteme" group.

 

[aizan]

anybody else feel dity after reading the comments on that page? ugh, gross!

 

[celluloidprop]

Can we see a few of the shots elected/selected by the deleteme folk?

 

[celluloidprop]

And do you happen to remember the name/authors of the Friedlander book, JonB? Was it an autobiography or a monograph?

 

[einolu]

that group is a joke, you should see the pictures that they actually like! perfect pictures of kittens and flowers...

 

[celluloidprop]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/atui/69227939/in/pool-stockr/

Toddler with flies on his face = instant art!

 

[JonB]

And do you happen to remember the name/authors of the Friedlander book, JonB? Was it an autobiography or a monograph?

Lee Friedlander/Peter Galassi, with an essay by Richard Benson. Haven't read anything--if the library lets me keep it long enough, maybe I can comment on the words, too, but the pictures are wonderful.

Published by the New York Museum of Modern Art, 2005. ISBN: 0870703439. [ISBN links to Amazon.com; I wasn't able to find a referral program with RFF, but photo.net will benefit from any purchases through that link; let me know if this isn't an acceptable practice here.]

 

[Stephan]

Why are they ignorant? This photo by HCB is kinda weak anyways.. Are you sure you're not trumping it up only because it was shot by HCB?

I find the composition almost perfect, the depth and the stair-rails guide the eye to the moving bike, the picture has a great feeling of motion to it in spite of the fact that the only moving element is relatively small (but well positioned).

 

[cp_ste.croix]

"sharpness is a bourgoise concept" HCB

 

[JonB]

[rant]
Sharpness is a simple concept; sharpness is an easy concept. Art isn't easy to judge, but there have always been those who try to reduce it to rules. I've seen someone, in essentially the same breath, criticize a photograph for not following basic rules (like sharpness and the rule of 3rds), and also bash on minimalist art, like Ellsworth Kelly. The whole idea of minimalism, as I understand it, is to explore the rules without the distraction of substance; I don't know of a photographic equivalent, but those who complain about focus or odd composition--if that really is their problem with the image--should love minimalist art. On the other hand, actually judging art on its merits is not simple or easy, and should not be treated as such ... as is done in the deleteme group, from time to time.
[/rant]