Primitive photography.

[Ko.Fe.]

I went to Chicago Institute of Art on previous week. Monet was for money, but they have impressionist hall for regular admission. Some paintings I only seen in the books before.
This hall, part of museum was most crowded. You have to look at the picture and interpreter it. You have to resonate by your inner side with it.

The rest of museum was next to empty. Fat naked bodies, portraits next to like for passport. Who needs it?

I'm with the crowd at impressionist hall. Photography part in Chicago Institute of Art just sucks, BTW.


Here, at rangefinder forum many what I see is no interpretation, passport like photos.

Why? Why if you are going to some goofing event you photograph like it is for police photos. Some goofy dressed people in the frame and nothing.
This is so boring...

Where are pictures from Helen Hill, Maiku, Airfrogusmc. With extraction of the moment and something else. This is, IMO, rangefinder photography.

We are noising it by endless tests of endless lenses and cameras with same pictures of family members who just can't say no, but it is written on their face.

Is it really interesting how some weirdos get dressed or is it more interesting how weirdos interact with each others? What is more interesting - mannequins or people who are interconnected?

What is the purpose of having Leica? To try to extract something Joel Meyerowitz is talking about by holding Leica to his right eye and looking around by both eyes? Or taking some legume closeups via electronic VF with non RF coupled lens, something any DSLR will do better?

😎

 

[B-9]

Ko.Fe the title sounds like a good name for a photo studio.

I can agree Leica has become more cult than creative these days.

 

[robert blu]

I understand what you say, this why I like to photograph with the Polaroid!

But I'm also trying to use the Leica in an impressionist way...still learning !

 

[pauld111]

I wish I knew how to progress from the gutter of 2nd class passport photographer. It's not so easy to have a preconceived vision beaten into a photograph.

 

[sevres_babylone]

Sorry about your disappointment with the photography at the Art Institute. My impression was undoubtedly influenced by the fact that on my first visit there they had an amazing exhibition called “On the Art Of Fixing a Shadow.” I later bought the catalogue at Edwards Books in Toronto, when such bookstores still existed.

I love the Impressionism exhibited in the gallery. I recently recommended it to a friend who was going to Chicago, and she raved about that, and the Monet exhibition as well.

 

[webOSUser]

Good post

Good post

Ko.FE,

Interesting post. I struggle with trying to create art rather than 2nd class postcards. I like landscapes.🙂



Have to think on this one.

Steve W

 

[Axel]

...

Here, at rangefinder forum many what I see is no interpretation, passport like photos.

Why? ...
😎

One reason I see is that this forum still about gear.

There are many good pictures with depth and scenes with room for interpretation in the gallery every week.

But when a (good) picture has a title of equipment parts it was obviously taken with it sucks.


My 5ct

 

[charjohncarter]

Alternative processes, and others what I use to call my screwups are still very interesting. I've done a few but mostly they are unintended:

January Fog by John Carter, on Flickr

Tmax 100 expired HC-110h by John Carter, on Flickr

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I've been to the Art Institute of Chicago many times over the years. They have a really good photography collection, but it was not presented well. I have not been there in about ten years, but in the past the photo galleries were small and didn't allow showing much of the collection.

 

[Takkun]

One reason I see is that this forum still about gear.

I'm okay with that. I come here to talk shop, I share my images and view them elsewhere.

But I do get what Ko's getting at. Sometimes I see contemporary photography in galleries and museums and...I just don't get it. I'm not expecting sunsets and flowers, but a lot of that Terry Richardson style photography.

Or in parallel, the same old emulation of past masters. I'm gearing up for a big exhibition and I looked up the only other photographer in the show—I don't remember the artist statement, but it was interesting and compelling; the photos were all sort of Richard Avedon style nudes on a gray background.

Re: street photography. It's harder than it looks. I take a ton of photos only to get one good keeper, like mentioned in the OP, of something happening, people interacting, etc., something worth looking at, and not someone just standing around.

And yet when I browse related tags on tumblr/instagram, it's just that. A lot of people standing around, sans context. Maybe it's grainy or blurry or something that distracts from how painfully boring it is.
In the art world, at least, some people subscribe to the notion that 'anything is art,' and I suppose that legitimizes that sort of photography. But I also encounter many who don't believe photography is art, and those sorts of 'street' shots are such proof.

Believe me, I have a lot of bad shots that I've kept, or worse, printed, mostly just as a record of what a particular place looked like at a particular time. But those aren't what I share for the world as my art. I don't really care about meaning, or even technique (there's a lot of purism in the film world, either the 'film should be gritty and grainy' or the 'wet printing is the only real photography' camps), as long as I've got something worthwhile to look at. Something happening, an interesting viewpoint, a detail overlooked.


On an unrelated note: since starting my Instagram odyssey, it's been a blurry whirlwind of overcooked HDR, half-naked women, and dogs/cars/dogs in cars.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I understand what you say, this why I like to photograph with the Polaroid!

Holga, toy, Brownie or any fixed focus, pinhole - those are primitive cameras, so is Polariod, but strangely enough they often produce something interesting if photographer even barely trying 🙂
Next to it is true Lomography, which is done with film.
Lomography was step from primitive art as Polariod is. True Lomography is about the moment, intuitive feel. But it is still using film. And it could be sharp and in focus.

Somehow film or any analog media for visualization produce more on the art side.
No digital camera will beat Olympus XA with color film on it. M10 colors and rendering just nothing special at all.
But/and...
Here is only few photogs with digital Leicas (RF) who are capable to produce something interesting despite what digital Leica files are not analog quality.
Just really very few I'm aware of. I have mentioned one in OP.
Those few are trying to find more than just colors, light and low hanging le gumes.

 

[David Hughes]

OTOH, it, photography, is not just about art. Some of us see it as a sort of note book or diary. No more, no less.


Regards, David

 

[Michael Markey]

OTOH, it, photography, is not just about art. Some of us see it as a sort of note book or diary. No more, no less.


Regards, David

Agreed …. I never see it as art .

 

[charjohncarter]

Some of the fun for me with RFF is seeing our member's work. I have seen Robert Blu's comments but I never went on his Blog. It is interesting. Here is a not so perfect video he made of one of his exhibitions. It is 8 minutes and some in Italian but delightful:

https://thequietphotographer.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/i-know-it-is-not-perfect/

 

[pyeh]

Gee Ko.Fe, don't hold back will you? I like what you're saying but I still enjoy all the photos put up here on RFF. I think the standard, by and large, is exceedingly high. I read almost all the w/nw threads, even when the premise is a particular camera or lens, which if it is, is usually completely irrelevant to the photos shown.
I don't agree with those who say RFF is mainly gear oriented. Sure I love the "Show me your xxx camera" threads, but for each one of those there's two "pictures with aaa" that backs it up and it's those threads that are the most enjoyable.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I like many photos on RFF. I like Fort W thread, it isn’t far from where I’m, it makes me want to drive where. One year with Rollei 35 is super.
Baltic couple on bikes is book worthy thread.

All I’m trying to say, do not get stuck on testing gear. Photography is not about keep on buying the gear. We could help bartender also by taking pictures which are not easy to take. Perhaps...

 

[charjohncarter]

All I’m trying to say, do not get stuck on testing gear.

No kidding, use anything. Here is my Bessa R with a mounted Instamatic lens:


TriX HC-110h Rodinal by John Carter, on Flickr

 

[nickthetasmaniac]

Here, at rangefinder forum many what I see is no interpretation, passport like photos.

Why? Why if you are going to some goofing event you photograph like it is for police photos. Some goofy dressed people in the frame and nothing.
This is so boring...

Where are pictures from Helen Hill, Maiku, Airfrogusmc. With extraction of the moment and something else. This is, IMO, rangefinder photography.

We are noising it by endless tests of endless lenses and cameras with same pictures of pelicans and family members who just can't say no, but it is written on their face.

Is it really interesting how some weirdos get dressed or is it more interesting how weirdos interact with each others? What is more interesting - mannequins or people who are interconnected?

With respect Ko.Fe., you clearly have a preference for a certain type of photography - stories about people interacting from what I gather - but not everyone needs to share that preference. Likewise, not everyone has the ability to produce the type of photography you're talking about.

RFF is not a portfolio site for professional street photographers, but nonetheless I think the standard of images shared here tends to be higher than any of the other photography forums I'm familiar with.

What is the purpose of having Leica? To try to extract something Joel Meyerowitz is talking about by holding Leica to his right eye and looking around by both eyes? Or taking some legume closeups via electronic VF with non RF coupled lens, something any DSLR will do better?

I find it odd that after grumbling about RFF being overly focused on gear discussion, you bring it back to gear. At the end of the day a Leica is just a bit of gear, it has no purpose beyond however its owner chooses to use it...

 

[35photo]

Yeah, I live in Chicago and it's true the Art Institute really hasn't had good photography shows of late... They have in the past though... The Eggleston retrospective was amazing, went twice it was so good... but that was years ago. They have a great collection, that I can tell you... I've visited the print room, you have make an appointment and see anything in their collection you want... I once saw Meyerowitz's Cap Cod prints, breathtaking stuff... 20X24 glorious prints... Robert Frank's Americans, great stuff...etc. Seriously they have one of best photography collections in the world you wouldn't think so by the stuff they show in the museum. San Fransisco Museum of Modern Art and MOMA way better for photography show...

 

[tunalegs]

A lot of art is up to you, the viewer.