I just Googled “Rhine II”. My instant gut reaction is “You’ve got to be kidding!” But... Warhol was right. “Art IS what you can get away with.”
I just Googled “Rhine II”. My instant gut reaction is “You’ve got to be kidding!” But... Warhol was right. “Art IS what you can get away with.”
--- Steve from Missouri ---
I was joking. The first one is pretty darn good and others.
Originally Posted by scheinfluger_77
You missed the modifier: "self-conscious". But I don't even like the generic term "art" applied to photographs because it carries pretentious connotations. Am I trying to start a meaningless semantic debate. Obviously. Tortured terms deserve to be tortured more.
In the beginning, photography was Not Art.
There is art, and there is photography. I hope the two never intersect.
Not Boring, save a life or 2 imaging.
Beyond art. "Terahertz Window Offers Untapped Potential"
I see what you are hiding. https://www.photonics.com/Article.as...ign=IPV&PID=20
In this era of mandatory instant everything, an awful lot of artsy photography had adopted the "gotcha" strategy of advertising imagery. It's designed to immediately catch your attention with something novel and loud, quite possibly exploiting the latest whatever visual app, but contains no deeper later. It's momentarily exciting due to its flashy packaging; but once you take the time to open it up, it gets boring just as fast.
Drew, I am never bored.
I might bore other people, but I'm too old to care.
Times up.
Well, I imagine that soon after I pass away, some bums will be rummaging through the dumpster where all my drymounted prints end up, find some smeared with ketchup from a drippy bottle, and comment on how much better these taste than the crusts in the dumpster behind the pizza parlor. Recognition at last !
I’m a bit late to this party, but I haven’t seen blood flow yet, so, despite moderator tendencies (we don’t want TRVTH, we want quiet!), I’ll bring it back. Mostly because it’s been on my mind for several years now.
Having spent years mastering certain techniques (and attaining mere competence in others), I have come to the conclusion that if there is anything inventive in my photos, it’s sheer accident. It’s one reason I don’t post much—I feel like I’ve run out of steam.
I look at the photos I made years ago, and barring the occasional accident, there’s just nothing there for me. My photos that excited me so much at the time look like all the other wannabe photos out there.
It’s hard to sustain diligence in (difficult) technique when my portrayal of subjects is so uninteresting. I still love the technique, and love having developed it, but it’s no longer enough.
And so most of my prints are stacked in a closet. Facing a wall.
In music, it’s different. The invention is more in the composer’s hands, and my job is mostly not to screw it up, and partly to let it play on my emotions in a public way. I have been working on two movements from the Bach ‘Cello Suites for a couple of years, and I’m still not ready to be happy with the result. But the work remains compelling because of what Bach did. I don’t want to perform it—there’s still too much of my screwing up and not enough Bach.
Musicians can listen in rapt attention to a great artist playing practice-room scales, but their enjoyment may be based on technical appreciation as much as emotional response. To most, it would be boring, I suppose. Most musicians want to rise above that.
For most people, photographs live or die on the subject. Those boring snapshots will excite historians someday, or family members right now. There’s a reason that sunset photos are called “yet another sunset” on many forums, but they still excite those who are not jaded by having seen thousands of them. Like me.
When I see a compelling subject, and I do frequently, I’m pretty sure at this point that it will not remain compelling in a photograph I would make, and I seem to lose what’s compelling about it in the exercise of technique. I keep screwing it up. There’s still too much me and not enough subject. But much technique is devoted to adding the photographer to the subject as much as it is to avoid screwing up, though often in trite ways, as with canned software enhancements.
I have so little understanding of what makes an emotional connection without depending on the subject that I wonder why I ever got into photography, despite the enjoyment of the technical exercise and the cool toys.
I’m turning 60 this year. It’s not having a good effect.
Rick “maybe a little too much TRVTH” Denney
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks