What do YOU think of this photography?

I don't know, I thought photography is one of the most female-friendly hobbies around. The examples the OP cities is really not about photographers, but about the structures of newsrooms and publishing.
 
Several photos from page 14-21 of the PDF are quite interesting to me. I like them. A few towards the top are nice too.
I think if something is interesting enough to be hung on a wall and engage the viewer for more than just a glance, it can of course be called 'art'.... I completely disagree that a photo must somehow be 'manipulated' to be called art.
Perhaps one single photo may seem like just a snapshot, but it is the way a collection of photos come together, which then show the viewer the style or vision of the artist/photographer.
The 'snapshot' style is very big in Japan. This is where I live and perhaps that makes me more biased toward this type of photography. I find it very interesting. It is about capturing or creating a mood/atmosphere, making the viewer feel a certain way, or just trying to get a reaction out of a viewer.

I think the views of members on this forum (which is largely 'gear' focused) compared to those on other more 'art' based forums, may differ greatly, also.
 
Last edited:
"Those shots have no relevance at all."

"These shots are fading away."

I think you might be a bit out of touch. These works are extremely relevant and contemporary photography is only on the up.
 
The first link takes me to a site with several different photographers mentioned...any particular one you were referring to? Why am I the only one who asked this question. 😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom