Last week I checked out a book on Renaissance sculpture from the library. If the photographers who did the illustrations for that book want to call themselves Fine Art photographers, they would be right.
Last week I checked out a book on Renaissance sculpture from the library. If the photographers who did the illustrations for that book want to call themselves Fine Art photographers, they would be right.
Come on, folks, these attacks are really getting tiresome. Ellis, I hope you're not calling me a "hypester" because that is offensive. Again, "Fine art" is a useful MODIFIER for the word "photography" and it does have a specific meaning in the right context. You can redefine it all you want, but you would be using it incorrectly.
"Fine" does not mean "good"; it makes a distinction between itself and "applied" arts. "Art" does not mean "good" either.
Hundreds of curators and historians and photographers (including commercial photographers who also show their personal work in a fine art context) use this term without meaning that they think "fine art photography" is better than any other kind. As I said before, this term shows up on surveys all the time and it carries no implication of quality.
A painter, sculptor, or printmaker does not generally have to use such a modifier, beacuse they are assumed to be working in the fine art realm most of the time, but photography encompasses so many different ways of working that we have to find some way to differentiate. All our categories are problematic, because many of us work across categories or don't fit into any of them at all, but they do have their traditional meanings.
Since I have worked almost exclusively in the "fine art" and "academic" context as a painter, printmaker, photographer, and teacher for over 30 years, I do know how the term is used. I would never presume to argue with someone in another field about how they should use their terminology!
It is interesting that at my school and many others, a student can major in Fine Arts. However, photography majors are in the Media Arts department (along with film and animation), except for Non-Silver Processes, which are in the Printmaking department. At some art schools you can major in painting or other Fine Arts but cannot major in photography at all. I say this to point out that there is still a lot of ambivalence about accepting photography as one of the fine arts. It seems that a lot of people on this forum share that ambivalence, which is quite surprising.
Elis is not attacking you, he's giving you his honest opinion as I am, if you take these comments as honest opinions instead of an attact on you then you wouldn't be so fatigued.
What use is this forum if everything agreed on everything? If you had valid points that would cause me to change my mind about what you're saying, I would be the first to say so, but you haven't, I believe calling yourself a fine art photographer is hype. Sorry but that's the way I feel, I hope you don't take offense, but even if you do, I going to express my honest opinion.
Anything can be rationalized into confirming to a point of view, it doesn't mean that that point of view is correct. You've pointed out things that you seem to feel back up the rightness of your position, the truth is you've got the right to call yourself whatever, I just don't agree with you. You put down Photographer on your grant app and that explains just as much to anybody as 'Fine Art Photographer'.
How is Photojournalist, portrait, landscape, still life, and so forth vague, and fine art specific? It isn't. You say fine Art and then explain that that's where you want your images to go, and how you want people to consider them, AND IT DOESN'T SAY ONE WIT ABOUT YOUR IMAGES OR WHAT'S IN THEM.
You can put the cart before the horse if it gets you jobs and recognition and exposure but IMHO it hype!
This is one of the most interesting threads I have seen, and gives one a glimpse into the minds of many on this board. Some comments have been provocative and some pretty funny... like the comment that 'advanced amateurs and professionals' should be lumped together. Other comments are pretty well on target, and probably posted by true professionals. Some time honored truths I have learned as a long time professional are as follows. 1. Amateurs 'take' photographs....professionals 'make' photographs. Nomatter if the subject matter is the desert southwest or a studio shot of a new model automobile. 2. Professionals produce consistant quality imagery on demand, day or night, under incredible deadline pressures. Client art directors don't give a damn about your lack of equipment, or if you are having a bad day. 3. A professional is only as good as his/her last shoot. 4. Professionals don't give a damn about what make or format equipment you use, unless it is unsuitable for what the client wants. 5. Professionals know that what really counts is the quality of the finished product you place in your clients hands...not if you missed 'zone V' or whatever. 6. Professionals know that if you screw up a job that you can 'kiss the client' goodbye...and your income and reputation. 7. Professionals know that when the mail comes and you open the clients letter and find a large five-figure check...($1500 a day plus expenses) you don't find the need to argue about who is a professional or not.
Been there, done that! Now, I can continue to make the photos I always wanted too, but never had the time, because I was busing my ass shooting for Fortune 500 companies. Now it's time for me...and my personal work. Good professionals will always take issue with anyone who whould call 'advanced amateurs' and professionals...one in the same. NOT A CHANCE! Dave Muench (my old classmate) can shoot as good a studio product photography set, as he can a sunrise over the Grand Canyon. That is what a professional is all about. Wise up!
Sandy.
I am certainly not attacking you. But notice that there is a difference between someone else saying "So-and-So" is a "great photographer" and that "So-and-So" calling themselves the same thing. that is my point.
I think you are a fine photographer.
Maybe its really just about talent and love of the medium...which any of the above catagories may have to a greater to lesser degree. The pro works as a highly skilled monetarily motivated employee of the client....the serious amateur works as a highly skilled self motivated employee(if you will) of themselves....I think there is much to learn between the amateurs and the full time pros points of view.Somehow....I think that its important to pay the bills of course and ...really rare(in this world) and fulfilling to do that in a professional way in your chosen field.... but the photos you will be most proud of at the end of your life will probably not be the ones taken for someone elses ad campaign(camera pain?)no matter how good.
You've never met me, you don't know me, and if you've never seen my work then you can't make the idiotic statement of declaring me not to be a true professional because you find it funny what I've said here. I've got a thick enough skin to withstand laughter and even contempt for what I say in this forum, but you make the bullshit jump from your opinion of what I said to a trashing of my whole career Portrait Photographer.
Do you have any concrete facts, specifics, or personal knowledge, of me or my skill level to back up your remarks, I wish you'd state them in a reasoned scrutiny of my work before you open your mouth about what I'm not. I've also had a glimpse of your mind and maybe there isn't enough of it to do that.
There are some very gifted Advanced Amateurs out there who have every bit of the problem solving ability and skill level of the best professionals. Professionals differ in that they have to go and and prove themselves on every shoot, they have to produce, but nobody put a gun to your head to choose to do that.
If you want to diminish my career as a Photographer do it with facts, specifics, and with sound reasoning.
By the way where do you think Professionals come from? They come from a pool of a Advanced Amateurs. You were an Advanced Amateur until you decided to want to be paid for you work. Were you dum them and gifted now because you are now a Pro shooter?
Where do you get off looking down your nose at Advance Amateurs versus Professionals when one comes from the other? The only real difference between one and the other is the ability to produce under pressure, but that's BS to think that puts you in another class.
I defy you to be able to look at the best work of Advanced Amateurs and Professionals mixed in together and point out every image done for its own sake as opposed to the ones done for a fee. You cannot do it, and if there's no difference in the images there's no difference in the skill level of the individuals taking them.
You even refer to your personal work, are those images different because you're no longer under pressure to produce, or as good or better than the images you were paid to do.
You were a gifted enough Advanced Amateur that you could turn pro and make money at it. Suppose you had never decided to turn pro, does that diminish the gift you have? Of course not, you just took another road in life. Operating under pressures as a pro and being paid for your work doesn't valitdate you work as being better that someone who's good at photography and does becauses he or she loves it.
If you cannot admit that, then the truths not in you.
Mr. Brewer: With respect Sir....I don't know how you read my post as some kind of personal attack upon you. It was not. I was challenging your ideas, not you the person. Can we be clear on that? I will just assume that you a really nice guy and a fine photographer, but that does not mean I must agree with your ideas.
Are my images different? Perhaps in sjubject content, but the same quality I hope. I'll bet most professionals will tell you that now they can take their time making a shot and smiling all through the process, rather than sweating bullets and developing ulcers to support a large studio and a family. Most "Advanced Amateurs" try it and bail out because they cant stand the pressure of consistant performance and meeting deadlines....if they do it full time.
With regard to "Advanced Amateur".....what exactily is that? What does "Advanced" mean, and compared to who or what?
You imply that I was some kind of an advanced amateur and life just lead me down some random path into being a professional. Nope! Two years of college as a graphic arts design major, military service as an aerial photographer, and then four college years, a BFA and a year of grad school in photography...and one of the best colleges in the world. Cost me a fortune, but worth every penny. I chose my path and persued it....intensely. My career path was no accident. I chose it, and very glad I did. No regrets, but lets get out of this ivory tower stuff and back into the world of reality, deadlines, art-directors and very heavy competition, among the sharks of the world of professional photography. If no one can tell the difference, then it is easy to see that the person has never been a part of that world. Easy to talk about,...harder to do it...and even harder to do it well and survive. Praise God, I've been lucky and blessed, but I also paid a lot more in my "dues" that most on this board would ever guess. No regrets, glad I did it...it was exciting but it was not an easy journey. Best regards.
I want to thank all for your thoughts. I have to say it seems as though it got a little more on the old debate, Pro Vs Amuteur. I was just wondering what makes up the majority of the shooters. Is there more Pros or Am's shooting with large format cameras? I for one count pros as those who make a living at photography, there just is not that many. I want to thank everyone for your thoughts. James
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks