Still life = sentimentalist BS?

[Ole Tjugen]

... but if saw a portfolio of images from the tops of the waterfalls looking down , it would still be Yosemite but it could be so original. ...

I've tried that (though not in Yosemite). It was boring. The picture, that is - taking it was certainly NOT boring!

[paulr]

...most of it is repetitious sentimentalist BS

true, but you could say the same about the landscapes, portraits, street pictures, and even nudes made by a certain common strain of photographer.

[Toyon]

This photograph by Hazel Thompson appears on the New York Times front page today. A pretty mundane scene on a Subway, but it crackles with energy, meaning and intent, that's what creativity is to me. The subtitle is "Muslims’ Veils Test Britain’s Tolerance."

[Michael Graves]

While disqualifying as still life, I never met a naked woman I didn't like.

Let me tell you about the time a co-worker snuck onto my computer when was away from my desk and put a photograph of an 800-pound woman, stark naked, as the desktop image of my computer at work. Naturally, the computer went to sleep before I discovered it. And naturally my female boss was at my side when I hit the space bar to bring the system to live.

I HAVE met a naked woman I didn't like.....virtually speaking, that is.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Most product photography might be described as still life, and even if it's commercial illustration, and lots of it isn't that interesting, it's not all sentimentalist as fruit in a bowl.

The most interesting still life painting of, say, the Dutch Golden Age, is more interesting when one considers that these quiet paintings of mundane objects in placid settings were made while the Dutch were fighting the Spanish, and that there were relatively few Dutch paintings of military subjects or battles at sea during this period, and even then, the ships are often far in the distance and they could just as well be out for a cruise. There is a very good essay on this topic by the Polish poet and essayist, Zbigniew Herbert, translated in English as "The Non-Heroic Subject" in the collection, Still Life with a Bridle.

They also usually convey a sense of motion that you might not notice unless you look carefully or try to replicate them photographically. Objects are in impossible positions, about to fall off tables, and liquids are in mid-drip. Mapplethorpe's florals often capture this sense of motion and the flowers often have a sense of personality like his portrait subjects.

[Mike Davis]

Mapplethorpe's florals often capture this sense of motion and the flowers often have a sense of personality like his portrait subjects.

Agreed. In fact, I would go farther and say that Maplethorpe's still lifes and portraits are MORE interesting than his more "controversial" work. Some of the work with Patti Smith is just short of amazing IMO. But then again, I like shells, peppers, and kelp (Oh, My!).

Mordencage or a digital shot of model dressed as the statue of liberty, reclining on a sofa with a dollar stuck in her garter are certainly no more interesting than a good still life. That said, I have always liked Weston's "Civilian Defense."


Mike Davis

[scrichton]

Ok butting in here ... I raised a thread like this a while ago. Boy that was a mistake, plus sure enough "Traditionalists Vs Modernists" battle royale continues. Although personal preference over what is boring and what is not is even more of a minefield.

I propose we should really rename the forum to Large Format Photography, Socialology & Psychological Profiling Forum

I must admit personally I can't stand still life stuff of books etc... flowers yes as there is at least a level of chaotic growth (studied too much 3d programming in uni) and modern imagery reflects the society where events reported no matter how much we try will be strangely remote unless involved. This is probably a product of the internet and technological advances.

[cyrus]

This photograph by Hazel Thompson appears on the New York Times front page today. A pretty mundane scene on a Subway, but it crackles with energy, meaning and intent, that's what creativity is to me. The subtitle is "Muslims’ Veils Test Britain’s Tolerance."

Funny....they don't dress like that in IRAN and they do in London? LOL!
But anyway not quite still life is it?

The interesting thing is that the affinity for "decrepit things" that is characteristic of other forms of photography subjects (as mentioned on this forum occasionally) also shows itself in still life photography.

[Jim Galli]

Ok butting in here ... I raised a thread like this a while ago. Boy that was a mistake, plus sure enough "Traditionalists Vs Modernists" battle royale continues. Although personal preference over what is boring and what is not is even more of a minefield.

I propose we should really rename the forum to Large Format Photography, Socialology & Psychological Profiling Forum

I must admit personally I can't stand still life stuff of books etc... flowers yes as there is at least a level of chaotic growth (studied too much 3d programming in uni) and modern imagery reflects the society where events reported no matter how much we try will be strangely remote unless involved. This is probably a product of the internet and technological advances.

What causes ire is that someone will come on like they're so much more advanced than anyone else and negatively bash this type or that type. What's the point of that? To elevate the original poster to a non BS non boring non this or that position levitating above anyone who does like boring sentimental subjects. I don't see any other motive.

[John Kasaian]

Profound observation, Jim!