View Full Version : Photographer = intellectual?
I have noticed that among the popular "mental baggage" (stereotypes?) of photographers - particularly LF photographers - is that they're highly intellectual. I wonder why that is? Perhaps its because portraits of well-known photographers (mostly early-mid 20th century?) are kinda somber, black-white affairs which makes them look like famous authors or other intellectual celebs of the period?
Alan Davenport
1-Dec-2006, 13:20
Does that mean photographers are also Democrats?
tim atherton
1-Dec-2006, 13:29
I have noticed that among the popular "mental baggage" (stereotypes?) of photographers - particularly LF photographers - is that they're highly intellectual. I wonder why that is? Perhaps its because portraits of well-known photographers (mostly early-mid 20th century?) are kinda somber, black-white affairs which makes them look like famous authors or other intellectual celebs of the period?
??
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/OldPhotos/Bourke-White.jpg
http://www.nndb.com/people/741/000024669/weegee-port.jpg
http://www.elangelcaido.org/fotografos/atget/atget.jpg
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~sawyer/SudekGallery1-30.jpg]
Scott Davis
1-Dec-2006, 13:34
Is there a problem with the association between photography and intellect? I would think to be a serious photographer (and while I know it can be a bit of a false assumption, for the purposes of this argument I'll say that the average LF photographer is more serious than the average 35mm/digital shooter), one has to have an above-average functioning cerebrum, or else they wouldn't be able to manage all the subtleties required to do what we do... composition, lighting, exposure, camera movements, n+ or n- development, cropping, burning and dodging, film and paper choices, developer choices, etc etc etc... to put yourself through all that, and to come out of it with an image that satisfies (at least oneself), you've got to have put some pretty serious thought into what you're doing, and have some reasons for doing it other than "it seemed like a good thing to do at the time".
Ole Tjugen
1-Dec-2006, 13:57
... you've got to have put some pretty serious thought into what you're doing, and have some reasons for doing it other than "it seemed like a good thing to do at the time".
Oddly enough my best pictures are those I took because "it seemed a good idea at the time", with whatever movements it took to make it "look right", exposure recorded as "sufficient", developed in whatever was at hand until I thought it was enough, and printed in much the same way.
Sometimes too much cerebral activity gets in the way of creativity.
Intelligent (http://cookps.act.edu.au/mi.htm) ? Definitely.
Intellectual (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intellectual) ? Not necessarily.
As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.
Beyond the intellect, perhaps.
Ron Marshall
1-Dec-2006, 14:27
My wife commented that I am much more intellectual since starting LF. I told her it's just an act, I'm trying to fit in.
Brian Ellis
1-Dec-2006, 14:37
I have noticed that among the popular "mental baggage" (stereotypes?) of photographers - particularly LF photographers - is that they're highly intellectual.
Really? Have you looked at The Lounge in the last couple months?
Walter Calahan
1-Dec-2006, 15:03
What was the question?
bruce terry
1-Dec-2006, 15:07
Manny: " Hey look, that guy over there's surveying for one of them new condo developments."
Mo: "Naw, he's one of them old-fashioned giant-camera weirdos."
Jack: "Shoot, all that trouble for a pitcher my five-year-old could take in about one second? Guy must be pretty stupid."
(Derisive laughter from Manny, Mo and Jack)
Greg Lockrey
1-Dec-2006, 15:10
If you aren't really a photographer, at least with a LF you'll look like one. Especially when you have that hood over your head while you take the picture. ;)
I have noticed that among the popular "mental baggage" (stereotypes?) of photographers - particularly LF photographers - is that they're highly intellectual. I wonder why that is? Perhaps its because portraits of well-known photographers (mostly early-mid 20th century?) are kinda somber, black-white affairs which makes them look like famous authors or other intellectual celebs of the period?
Somehow, the most widespread stereotype about photographers in this city is the one of paparazzi.
:D
Michael Alpert
1-Dec-2006, 16:02
Cartier-Bresson wrote somewhere that the only thing that photographers have in common is that they all use cameras. (I am paraphrasing his statement.) I agree. There's such diversity in approach and outcome that generalizations about photographers seem foolhardy.
Still, you can say without self-contradiction that large-format photographers have not taken the easy road to image-making. That choice can be interpreted as either intellectual or the opposite.
I don't think photography is often an intellectual process. Even using a big camera, or a complicated one. Learning skills and procedures is more a matter of rote than deep thought.
Talking about photography is the more intellectual pursuit. For better or worse.
I find photographers (the majority in THIS community excluded, of course) annoying.
They typically are afflicted with lens envy, are hell bent on proving their depth of knowledge with respect to everything photography-related by boring the living dog dookie out of whomever deigns (or is cornered, fallen and can't get up and or away, etc...) to listen. And apparently, they have formed a clandestine society, the sole purpose of which is to convince me that a Nikon D70 is the absolute best tool available for achieving an extraordinary level of quality in photographic imagery. They are a frightfully edgy lot, imposing themselves in private conversations, perpetually extolling the ultimate "truth" with respect to whatever subject the unfortunate original conversationalists happened to have been discussing.
Take particular care, o intrepid buckaroo, not to offer a contrary view point when assailed by a photographer, especially when in his natural environment, the photography trade show. SHOW THEM NOT YOUR FILM! They are all masters of the Diabolical Arts, and are prone to invoke the names of their demigods in an effort to bring about thy demise; "Pixx-El!" "Digi Tal Bak!" "Dee Pee Revue!" These are the war cries of the demonstrably enraged photographer, and indicate an attack of boorish suppression of any thought not sanctioned by their disciples is exceedingly likely to be at hand!!!!
Yet...we must fight...we can defeat them. Hand me my long-lens! Extend the bellows!
Sulu...load the 5x7 film holders!!!! Damn the megapixels!!!! FULL SPEED AHEAD!!!!!!
OK...it's Friday...and it has been a long, arduous work week. I'll go to my room now.
Note that I'm talking about a popular perception of LF photographers - not how LF photographers really are. If I dare call myself an LF photographer, I know for a fact that I for one am as dumb as a yak!
Ron Marshall
1-Dec-2006, 19:58
Yet...we must fight...we can defeat them. Hand me my long-lens! Extend the bellows!
Sulu...load the 5x7 film holders!!!! Damn the megapixels!!!! FULL SPEED AHEAD!!!!!!
OK...it's Friday...and it has been a long, arduous work week. I'll go to my room now.
Beware the photon torpedoes!
Capocheny
1-Dec-2006, 21:39
I have noticed that among the popular "mental baggage" (stereotypes?) of photographers - particularly LF photographers - is that they're highly intellectual.
Hmmm... wonder why some of my friends tells me I'm absolutely NUTS for lugging all that weight around on my back?
Then, there's the comment about lugging a huge tripod over my shoulder!
Masochistic? - Definitely! :)
Cheers
I find photographers (the majority in THIS community excluded, of course) annoying.
when my old fiction writing professor found out i was a photographer, he rolled his eyes and said, 'god, the only thing worse than a room full of bridge players is room full of photographers.'
never been in a room full of bridge players, but i think i know what he means.
william linne
1-Dec-2006, 23:17
I don't know about everybody else, but I'm a dumbass.
... the popular "mental baggage" (stereotypes?) of photographers - particularly LF photographers - is that they're highly intellectual. ...
Personally? I'm flattered! :D
when my old fiction writing professor found out i was a photographer, he rolled his eyes and said, 'god, the only thing worse than a room full of bridge players is room full of photographers.'
never been in a room full of bridge players, but i think i know what he means.
Never been in either myself, but I imagine it must be very similar to being in a room full of golf players too. :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.