Women say they dress for Women: Do you take photos for yourself?

[PaulDalex]

Alistair,
I add that I agree with all the rest of your post

 

[Addy101]

I wish to add that I object the statement that there no art if a work is not intended to be shown to others.
Indeed Leonardo did not want to show the Gioconda to others throughout his life. He kept the painting constatly covered by a linen in his studio.
There is no mistery. It is just a fact. The greatest of all art masterpieces was not intended to be seen only by anybody. At least as long as the author was alive.

There is a logical flaw in your reasoning. If nobody saw it, how would one know it is a great work of art?
In the case of Leonardo Da Vinci we saw the Mona Lisa (a.k.a. Gioconda) after his death and could see it is a great work of art. Your pictures you don't show, that doesn't mean they're a work of art, let alone a great work of art. Art becomes art when it becomes public, until then it is just a hobby.

I don't believe in art for arts sake. It is an outdated romantic view imho. Van Gogh wanted to be recognised as a great painter, Rembrandt had a big painting company, Vermeer sold paintings to pay off debts. Real art is public, even if the public doesn't know 😱

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . I don't believe in art for arts sake. It is an outdated romantic view imho.

Not only outdated, but also comparatively recent: it hardly surfaced until the 18th century, with Constable and romantics such as Goethe. Even then, it didn't really get under way until the 19th century: the wrist to the brow and cries of "But I am an ARTIST!"

Cheers,

R.

 

[BW400CN]

I shoot only for my pleasure - some of these pictures I share with other people - but they all are done for my satisfaction.

 

[stefan-s]

I undress woman, then take fotos for myself!

 

[raid]

Everybody here is so jealous of you now.:bang::bang:😀:bang:

 

[DNG]

I take photos for my own enjoyment..and satisfaction,
If my wife or others like them, then that is a bonus for me.

 

[Dwig]

You should fix the poll so that it matches the title.

Definitely. The mismatch lead me to vote incorrectly. I voted based on the thread's title, misreading the poll's phrasing.

For the record, I shoot for myself, not others. If others like my images, good, but they must satisfy me first or they're never seen.

 

[raid]

The same idea is phrased twice differently, but if you read the poll question, it is clear.

 

[Stdon]

When I shoot for fun and for myself it's all about me. When I get paid it's all about them. I get paid to please them no matter if I'm not particularly enthralled with the results.

 

[PaulDalex]

Addy,

you completely alter my thought. My work may well be garbage

Let me try to explain better

I was not certainly trying to make a irreverent and blaspheme comparison.

All true artist must be aware IMO of history of art, to the study of which BTW I devote a good deal of my time.

My point is that an artist may or may not care at all to show to others his work.

Coming to Monna Lisa (yes two n in Italian: this is the correct name, also the name used by Vasari in his famous book)

Not only Leonardo did not wanted to show it. But he risked a lot in his testament.

In fact the painting was inherited by Salai, the assistant of Leonardo. And given the kind of guy Salai was, it could very well have gone lost.

We are extremely lucky that Salai in turn sold the painting to Francis I the king of France that hosted Leonardo at Amboise in the last six years of his life

So my point stands.

And I absolutely never intended that the fact that I don't show my work qualifies it as art.

I repeat: it may well be garbage

Hope this will do for you

Cheers

Paolo

 

[PaulDalex]

Edit: did not want

 

[rbsinto]

Unless I am being paid to photograph or doing someone a favor , I always shoot for myself.

 

[shadowfox]

Both, I like to take pictures.
The ones I really like, I print them and I hope some people would enjoy it also.

I don't think we can be motivated to continue photographing without positive feedback from others (no matter how small the audience is).

 

[koven]

I do this for a living so yeah Im always trying to figure out the essence of what people like while still staying true to my own aesthetic values.

 

[rwintle]

I shoot for myself but am vain enough to hope that other people might like some of it. 😉

 

[PaulDalex]

A little bit of consolation for us amateurs:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/briots-view/vision_part_7_in_praise_of_amateurs.shtml

 

[Addy101]

And I absolutely never intended that the fact that I don't show my work qualifies it as art.

I repeat: it may well be garbage

Or it may well be the very best pictures ever taken, we'll never know 😱
So, I stay with my position: art is only art in public, not in private!