johne
Well-known
If your original pic is representative, it would appear that you face an uphill struggle! 🙂 Johne
Vision and Stuff
- Thread starter bmattock
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 30
- Views 2K
W
wlewisiii
Guest
bmattock said:
It's an interesting set of questions that you're posing here. It's been on my mind as well as I've also been pondering how to reply to the 2005 Pulitzer thread.
Starting with your list,
1) Ultimately for myself. I have occasionally taken photographs on request however even then I take them with my vision and sense of aesthetics.
2 to 4) Everyone? No, but lets be honest, I'd not post 200+ shots here if I didn't think someone would appreciate them. But many times I'm amused to see the ones that get comments vs. the ones that don't. Or even the fact that a shot with a woman or girl in it gets many more views than others. As joe mentioned, quite often the shots I think are best get little or no comment.
5) As with most things in this world, it's not an "either/or" but a "both/and" situation. A middle way, if you will. How I "see" the world about me will impact how I present that vision. OTOH, if I try to find an antagonistic way to present it simply for that reason, what am I accomplishing? OTGH, (again, riffing off of joe's post) more than once, historically, new artistic movements have caused extreme aggrivation before becoming accepted. The ones that do cause this aggrivation but then do eventually become part of the mainstream are what can be best refered to as avant guard. That which is never accepted as part of the mainstream is best refered to as ... something else... 😛 Obviously the problem is that when it's first happening it's often rather difficult to know which is which.
As an example, a snapshot is not something that is inherently good or bad - how, what, where, when, why, etc all play an important role in determining if it is worth anything. Is there a difference between the snapshots on a found roll of film as lovingly developed and posted by Gene M and those taken by me on a day at church and 1 hour dunked at Walgreens? Perhaps, perhaps not...
So I work on how I do things. I learn what I am able to do effectivly, to my eyes, with my camera and the handfull of lenses I have. I try, very hard, to have a camera in my hands everytime I go out of the house. Sometimes I get results I feel are worth sharing and I post them here.
More than that, I really can't say I'm sure about. But it is nice to ponder on a spring afternoon while my son naps.
William
FrankS
Registered User
"i dislike sweeping statements made on my behalf.
if you like a question, like this one, and it impacts you, great! but it may or may not be the best question ever for you or me.
speaking for yourself only is a good thing. speaking for me is not."
joe
Hi Joe, is this statement in regard to anything in particular?
I'm worried it was prompted by my assertion that the orginal post by Bill was the best, most important question asked here so far. I would never presume to speak for anyone but myself and offer my opinions only as my own. If you perceived anything else, then I apologize for not making that clearer.
if you like a question, like this one, and it impacts you, great! but it may or may not be the best question ever for you or me.
speaking for yourself only is a good thing. speaking for me is not."
joe
Hi Joe, is this statement in regard to anything in particular?
I'm worried it was prompted by my assertion that the orginal post by Bill was the best, most important question asked here so far. I would never presume to speak for anyone but myself and offer my opinions only as my own. If you perceived anything else, then I apologize for not making that clearer.
FrankS
Registered User
"i dislike sweeping statements made on my behalf.
if you like a question, like this one, and it impacts you, great! but it may or may not be the best question ever for you or me.
speaking for yourself only is a good thing. speaking for me is not."
joe
Hi Joe, is this statement in regard to anything in particular?
I'm worried it was prompted by my assertion that the orginal post by Bill was the best, most important question asked here so far. I would never presume to speak for anyone but myself and offer my opinions only as my own. If you perceived anything else, then I apologize for not making that clearer.
if you like a question, like this one, and it impacts you, great! but it may or may not be the best question ever for you or me.
speaking for yourself only is a good thing. speaking for me is not."
joe
Hi Joe, is this statement in regard to anything in particular?
I'm worried it was prompted by my assertion that the orginal post by Bill was the best, most important question asked here so far. I would never presume to speak for anyone but myself and offer my opinions only as my own. If you perceived anything else, then I apologize for not making that clearer.
FrankS
Registered User
I've added "in my humble opinion" to my signature to prevent misunderstandings like this in the future.
oftheherd
Veteran
Joe, now you have at least two of us paranoid! FrankS and myself. 😛
FrankS, I think you are off the hook. I think it was my questioning of your statement on snapshots where I posted several questions using an all encompassing "we." You are correct that I can't speak for others, Joe, and I really didn't intend to do so. As "we" so often do, I was using the "we" to include everybody in the discussion. But, without their permission, my bad. :bang:
So, everyone, go back to my second post and wherever I said "we," please insert "I."
I would still like to hear anyone's response to what "I" questioned.
FrankS, I think you are off the hook. I think it was my questioning of your statement on snapshots where I posted several questions using an all encompassing "we." You are correct that I can't speak for others, Joe, and I really didn't intend to do so. As "we" so often do, I was using the "we" to include everybody in the discussion. But, without their permission, my bad. :bang:
So, everyone, go back to my second post and wherever I said "we," please insert "I."
I would still like to hear anyone's response to what "I" questioned.
kiev4a
Well-known
I think to a great degree my "vision" is that of a historian.
If I look back at stuff shot by my dad 80 years ago his photos of mountain scenery with no people in them are meaningless to me. The only way they would be of interest is if I could located that same spot today and photograph it so show how much it has changed. Dad's best shots (as far as I am concerned) are his photos of family members and scenes in the community where he lived.
When I look back at photos I have taken over the past 40 years, the ones that are still interesting are the ones of people and buildings or scenery that has changed since the photo was taken. An "artistic" photo of a glowing light bulb that I thought was a prize winner in 1968 doesn't hold the slightest interest for me today.
My approach probably comes from my newspaper background. A number of years ago I sent a young man who had just received his degree in photojournalism out to shoot an annual parade in our community. He came back with a photo of a leaf in the gutter with legs of some of the parade participants who were passing by in the background. He was very excited about his interpretation. I told the young man he had better hope the parade wasn't over because I wanted him to go back and get some photos of floats, or the people on the floats, or the expressions on the faces of people watching the parade -- not a $%$###&*&^% leaf in a *(&&%$#$ gutter.!!!!! (I cleaned up what I actually said) Twenty years down the road people looking at that edition of the newspaper aren't going to give a rat's rearend about a leaf in the gutter.
So amost everything I shoot is from the viewpoint that I want the photos to give future generations some information about the past -- freezing a particular moment in time. -- as artistically as possible. Of course history was always my favorite subject in school.
If I look back at stuff shot by my dad 80 years ago his photos of mountain scenery with no people in them are meaningless to me. The only way they would be of interest is if I could located that same spot today and photograph it so show how much it has changed. Dad's best shots (as far as I am concerned) are his photos of family members and scenes in the community where he lived.
When I look back at photos I have taken over the past 40 years, the ones that are still interesting are the ones of people and buildings or scenery that has changed since the photo was taken. An "artistic" photo of a glowing light bulb that I thought was a prize winner in 1968 doesn't hold the slightest interest for me today.
My approach probably comes from my newspaper background. A number of years ago I sent a young man who had just received his degree in photojournalism out to shoot an annual parade in our community. He came back with a photo of a leaf in the gutter with legs of some of the parade participants who were passing by in the background. He was very excited about his interpretation. I told the young man he had better hope the parade wasn't over because I wanted him to go back and get some photos of floats, or the people on the floats, or the expressions on the faces of people watching the parade -- not a $%$###&*&^% leaf in a *(&&%$#$ gutter.!!!!! (I cleaned up what I actually said) Twenty years down the road people looking at that edition of the newspaper aren't going to give a rat's rearend about a leaf in the gutter.
So amost everything I shoot is from the viewpoint that I want the photos to give future generations some information about the past -- freezing a particular moment in time. -- as artistically as possible. Of course history was always my favorite subject in school.
back alley
IMAGES
oftheherd said:
not you, sorry. i guess i could/should have been more specific.
frank and i had an off forum conversation to work things out between us. seems 'we' may be more alike than not. kinda scary sometimes how things work out.
joe
FrankS
Registered User
It's all good. 🙂
doubs43
Well-known
bmattock said:
I create for my own pleasure and satisfaction.
It's *somewhat* important that others like my work but it's not an overriding consideration. If *I* like a photograph I've taken, I'm not going to stop liking it because others don't. It feels good if they do but I don't lose sleep if they don't see what I see. Example: I took a picture of an American flag flying high on the tip of a construction crane boom. A beautiful cloud formation with a bright spot created by the sun shining from behind the cloud framed the flag in a dramatic way. I took the shot with a Praktica camera and 200mm Russian Jupiter-21A lens so I posted it to the Russian Camera Gallery. In over two weeks not one comment has been made about it. *I* still think it's a fine picture and the "Macon Telegraph" newspaper Editor thought enough of it to publish it in a Sunday edition. Perhaps the flag is just too "political" for the Russian Camera forum. Who knows?
If people "like" my pictures then I think it follows that they "appreciate" my work in some fashion.
I'm not sure *I* "understand" my own work in every instance so asking someone else to has never crossed my mind. If they "get" it - or think they do - then that's OK by me.
I'm engaged in an on-going project of my own choosing at the moment and I suppose it would bore most people to death. There's a HUGE peach mounted on a tall steel pole sitting alongside Interstate Highway 75 near my home. Made of vinyl-covered aluminum, it was damaged last year in a storm and was taken down for repairs. I've followed the repairs as best I could and have taken pictures with at least 5 different cameras over the course of time. It's ready to be placed back atop the pole and I'd like to capture it being installed but I doubt that I do as it's likely to happen while I'm working. I still have a pretty good record of the whole event and I appreciate the chance to capture it on film for my own satisfaction.
While no one today may appreciate the pictures of the peach, that may not be true 50 years from now. My father spent 60 years recording ordinary life where he lived. Before his death, he had the satisfaction of having roughly 120 pictures placed in the archives of the Smithsonian Institute. The way of life he photographed will never happen again. It didn't hurt that he was an excellent photographer.
Walker
Last edited:
hoppinghippos
Camera Addict
My personal views on this:
1) As long as some thought had been put into the creative aspect of taking the photography (regardless of what kind of photo), one has qualified as an artist (which is not a term with grades attached to it to me)
2) on gaining recognition/acceptance/praise, etc: No matter how nice you may think your shot is, the real challenge is in being able to convince or touch someone else who's viewing your shot. I feel art is about self-expression, yet there is also an element of communication. Failing to communicate, no matter how impressive the self-expression has been still means the work of art has failed. This goes beyond technical superiority, etc, but basic simple communication. Sometimes one sees photos which are technically near perfect, but that's all. Sometimes one sees photos which whether technically perfect or not (some are far from perfect!) are able to simply wham! Bam! hit you in the mind and in the heart. Whether it raises vile feelings or happy feelings or whatever, it has an effect on you immediately.
3) In relation to (2), I think its a mixture of experience, learning, practicing and a hell lot of luck. We'll get lousy shots ans so-so shots along with the occasional wham! bam! kind of shot. I think its impt to recognise this and not have the mindset that hey I think my shot is great but why isn't anyone else thinking the same way. On this, I"ll agree with one of the previous post that I"ll rather be super critical of my own works then anyone else!
1) As long as some thought had been put into the creative aspect of taking the photography (regardless of what kind of photo), one has qualified as an artist (which is not a term with grades attached to it to me)
2) on gaining recognition/acceptance/praise, etc: No matter how nice you may think your shot is, the real challenge is in being able to convince or touch someone else who's viewing your shot. I feel art is about self-expression, yet there is also an element of communication. Failing to communicate, no matter how impressive the self-expression has been still means the work of art has failed. This goes beyond technical superiority, etc, but basic simple communication. Sometimes one sees photos which are technically near perfect, but that's all. Sometimes one sees photos which whether technically perfect or not (some are far from perfect!) are able to simply wham! Bam! hit you in the mind and in the heart. Whether it raises vile feelings or happy feelings or whatever, it has an effect on you immediately.
3) In relation to (2), I think its a mixture of experience, learning, practicing and a hell lot of luck. We'll get lousy shots ans so-so shots along with the occasional wham! bam! kind of shot. I think its impt to recognise this and not have the mindset that hey I think my shot is great but why isn't anyone else thinking the same way. On this, I"ll agree with one of the previous post that I"ll rather be super critical of my own works then anyone else!
Similar threads
