Rockwell: What Makes A Photograph Great

I do like to read brother Rockwell. Thanks for the link.

I do have one question to ask though. Is what Rockwellsays in the section "Close One Eye" true? I've never had binocular vision so I've often wondered what it's like.

--michael
 
I enjoy reading Rockwell mostly and dont wish to excoriate him as some others do. But having seen some of his photographic efforts, I sincerely do nto think he is an authority on what makes a great photo. In general I would simply say that what makes a great photo is that it provokes an emotion - preferably a positive one.
 
peterm1 said:
But having seen some of his photographic efforts, I sincerely do nto think he is an authority on what makes a great photo.
Click to expand...

Having seen the film work of the great movie critics, I must say they're no authorities on movies. Having tasted the food prepared by the great restaurant reviewers, I must say they are no experts on what makes a great meal.

In other words, just because a person can't do it, doesn't mean he or she can't explain it, rate it, critique it, understand it, or teach it.

Not that I think he's right. I just laugh when I read comments that seek to dismiss the claims of another on the basis that they can't do it themselves, therefore they have no basis to evaluate it. I guess historians have no idea what makes a great general, since they've never been great generals.
 
Journeyman said:
"Formal courses of photographic study rarely, if ever, cover the basics of image structure. All they teach is technical mumbo-jumbo, which is a waste because cameras do all of the technical stuff for us today anyway."
Click to expand...

I normally don't partake in any "Rockwell Bashing" because I quite frankly have more important things to spend my time on, but this comment is so absurdly wrong.

I would lean the other way and say the technical side is not taught as much as it should be. With an A.S. In Digital Media, B.A. Fine Art, B.A. Graphic Design, I have to say the number one emphasis in every entry level course for all three degrees was: you guessed it: image structure. And few of Ken's images are complex enough to even warrant the discussion of image structure. If you want to discuss image structure look at HCB, Elliott Erwitt, Lee Friedlander, Sandy Skoglund, Matt Eich, Chris Weeks, Etc, Etc, Etc.
 
Last edited:
mwooten said:
I do like to read brother Rockwell. Thanks for the link.

I do have one question to ask though. Is what Rockwellsays in the section "Close One Eye" true? I've never had binocular vision so I've often wondered what it's like.

--michael
Click to expand...

I always shoot with one eye. but I suspect he's correct in that we apparently lose depth perception when we don't or can't use both eyes.

The red wall photo appeals to me. Looks like something I'd like to take. Taste is always subjective, but we should not assume that "I like it" means "it's good", or vice versa. Certainly, the photo is much more evocative of the American southwest than a quirky b&w shot on an Eastern urban street. I see many photos of that nature that receive almost universal praise, but they leave me cold.

I remain surprised that Rockwell provokes such a hostile, almost Pavlovian, response in some quarters. It's only photography, people.
 
Last edited:
I read him daily because he is fun and enthusiastic. A bit like checking out the Garfield comics in the newspapers.

But this article is the most egocentric , pedantic and undocumented one he has written in a long time that once again shows is one dimensional perception of the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom