Rather depressing

shadowfox

shadowfox

Darkroom printing lives
Local time
9:10 PM
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
8,770
... when you read a well-known fine-art photography magazine and then you realize that of about 100 photos you see, only 3 of them wows you.

The others ranges from "I don't get it" to "I've seen it done to death" to "just plain boring".

And I'm talking about the thick, wonderfully printed, annual contest winner edition of the magazine. Aren't these supposed to have wonderful photos in them?

I don't know whether I'm depressed because the standard of those contest judges are either too eccentric or to high (as in high-brow) for me...

or am I depressed because I can do some queries on flickr and found more images that I am impressed with.

Your thoughts?
 
Then again you can find more horrifying photos on flickr as well.

I'm a big photography fan of course, but I feel a bit inadequate sometimes because I can't bump off names of photographers I'm a big fan of, or photographers who are a big influence on me. EVERYONE'S a photographer these days so I guess it's more difficult to single someone out or for someone to really rise above the gigantic pool of content.
 
Boring stuff gets published all the time. I saw photography book on photos of paint stripes recently. Just stripes of paint on different things. I also saw a photo book of photos of outhouses.
 
I agree 100%with your comments. The Leica magazines / exhibitions in the 60's thru the 90's had fantastic photos, now they almost make me sick.
 
A lot of times something gets published for no better reason than the photographer's dad went to prep school and ivy league university with the publisher's dad, everybody lives off their trust funds, nobody's had a creative idea in three generations since Great Grandpa started a company at the right time and place and had the good sense to turn operations over to qualified paid management.


http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
 
If your talking about BW magazine then I agree, the recent issue is kinda lame (or maybe I just don't get it).

Todd
 
It's been a long time since I bought a so called "fine art" magazine. In the days of internet I think that it doesn't make sense anymore. It's better to buy some film instead...

Thomas (wallace)
 
I think we're in a new age of intellectual BS photography. Things that were mistakes twenty years ago are now art. I'm talking things my clients would have fired me for if I had done them. I guess they were mistakes for me and art if you have an MFA. I was looking at a photo magazine, can't remember the name, a few months ago and didn't know whether to laugh or cry about the images they published. One stood out in my mind and I'll have to admit I had never seen anything like them. The photographer and I use that term in joking photographed images of dog S**it in the grass and made 50x50 inch color prints. I seem to remember he had a grant to do this.

Another that comes to mind is David Hillard. The first image I ever saw of his was a three print series and was quite large. It was a coke cup in a field of vines with part of the frame put of focus.

I really think this is another passing fad in art. I've seen them come and go almost on a monthly basis. I keep holding onto the idea that there will always be a place for well done traditional photography while the fads come and go.
 
I'm probably in the issue you speak of... Perhaps the non-color mag portfolio issue? A few of my images were accepted. Still I would agree that there are a lot of questionable pictures. Although I think this issue is better than some past... I often wonder how these contests work. From thousands how do they choose?
 
I haven't seen the magazine you're talking about, however, I note that these days we see photographs of excellent technical quality of very boring subjects. Many without focal point or anything. Kind of reminds me of the old camera club contests.
 
Actually it's quite good news that you don't like it. This forces people with fixed ideas to re-evaluate the value of their opinions. I try to do this whenever possible. Especially when faced with the opinions of competition judges, professors of fine art, and the like. who presume to tell me what to think.Sometimes they're right -- though not often. But Fred's right about the standard of work attracted by compositions.

Earlier today I was talking to a friend with 24 peer-reviewed prizes. Real stuff -- press photography -- and I was intrigued to learn that out of 24 awards (1st, 2nd and 3rd), he reckoned that 16 were taken with Leicas.

But what does he know? He's just another prizewinning photojournalist...

Tashi delek,

R.
 
Last edited:
Look at National Geographic for some good pictures

Look at National Geographic for some good pictures

A friend told me to look at National Geographic magazines to see good photography, and I have to agree I almost always like those shots.

Out of interest are they mostly shot on film - slide film at that?

Tom
 
What you simply must do is get a copy of Susan Sontag's "On Photography" or whatever the title is and read a passage and then look at the photos from your magazine. It pays to have a bottle of .90 proof vodka beside you as well.
 
I haven't seen the magazine in question, but let me ask you this:

Are you sure that everything you like is good?

Are you sure there's nothing you don't like that might actually be good?

Like Roger says, if we're interested at all in cultivating our taste, we can't just run with our knee jerk reactions and stick with them. Other people can have valid points of view and appreciate deserving things that we don't. Not in every case, but even if you give something a chance and decide you still don't like it, you can walk away with a greater sense of why you don't like it, which is still more enriching than immediate dismissal.
 
I agree -- that was a really nice magazine.

I still have one of the final issues. The cover story had Lucille Ball on it -- a feature about Philippe Halsman. He was the photographer who did some work with Salvador Dali but also often had his subjects jump. Mr. Halsman had a keen sense of humor -- which is sometimes lacking in our politically correct, self-absorbed society.

That issue also compared several pocket 35mm cameras: Minox, Rollei 35S, Olympus XA and Ricoh FF-1.

jmcd said:
Camera magazine from the '70s, published in Switzerland—I loved that magazine.
Click to expand...
 
>> think we're in a new age of intellectual BS photography. Things that were mistakes twenty years ago are now art.

that's what everyone was saying 20 years ago too. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom