Art is Emotion

[Tin Can]

Today I made a rant triggered by my emotions

At first I was ashamed, then slowly I realized, that is the power of good art

Art is not about tones, shapes, compositions unless it means something to a viewer

The image, a stark truth about a place I know so well, it hit me like a slap

Thank you, Richard Wasserman!

I-94 Overpass— Glenview, IL

[Jody_S]

It's ironic that a photography forum such as this bans discussion of politics. All of my images that I consider successful are political statements.

[Exploring Large Format]

It's ironic that a photography forum such as this bans discussion of politics. All of my images that I consider successful are political statements.

I imagine it's been proposed before, but a thread that featured political photographs, as defined by the one who posts, that invite discussion might be interesting.

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

[Tin Can]

Actually it was tried 2 decades ago here

Did NOT work and I am glad I missed it

Discussion is where we fail... often

Make your images speak and STFU, to use the vernacular

and newer member I am not telling YOU what YOU should do

The Mods do a fine and thankless job

I imagine it's been proposed before, but a thread that featured political photographs, as defined by the one who posts, that invite discussion might be interesting.

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

[neil poulsen]

It's ironic that a photography forum such as this bans discussion of politics. All of my images that I consider successful are political statements.

I think that it's kind of ridiculous, because there's so much related to photography that can be politically related, and yet also be enlightening and insightful. A classic case of the tail wagging the dog, it began when the Lounge sub-forum was created. One can imagine the kind of political discussions that RAGED out of control. So "logically," political discussion was banned in ALL of the sub-forums. (This decision may have also been a bit of an over-reaction by moderators who actually had to deal with the mayhem that was occurring in the Lounge.)

As a former moderator, I argued that political discussion need be banned only in the Lounge. In other sub-forums, errant political discussion was controllable by requiring that all discussion be photographically related, and as current guidelines require, that discussion "maintain forum decorum."

Alas, this logic did not prevail.

Actually, I originally argued that the Lounge be jettisoned, in favor allowing thoughtful and respectful political discussion, which had been permitted previously to the Lounge. But, I could see where the Lounge offered value, so I tempered my input somewhat.

[Tin Can]

Jody, I don't believe your images are banned, it is the insane discussion we fear.

I for one want to see the political Images, not the chatter of opinion

Please speak visually

Today Brian posted this interesting image

Augusta, GA - 5/21/2021
Leica M6, Nikkor 2.8cm f/3.5, Foma 400, Pyrocat

It's ironic that a photography forum such as this bans discussion of politics. All of my images that I consider successful are political statements.

[Tin Can]

Ditto, but most don't notice the message

It's all in our heads anyway

Without a viewer art does not exist

What is the sound of a falling tree, is a popular discussion these days

but is it all in our heads, our entire body is connected to...

[Richard Wasserman]

No need to feel bad about your response! I am extremely pleased that you had such an emotional reaction to my photo—in my experience far too few people look at images on that level. It is a bit tiring, and as you said, irrelevant to mainly talk about the technical aspects of a photograph. I'd much rather hear about what gets stirred up than tonality.

Thank you

[pdmoylan]

One tries to connect the dots when personal nostalgia/experience intervenes when presented with a straight forward image of a road overpass.

Not slighting Richard here, but there is nothing intrinsic to the overpass image that conveys a human connection, let alone the plight of homeless associated with the site.

Now if one were to show in an image or series with the human element, perhaps providing the despair, a sense of hope (or hopelessness), in the context of the physical structure, I as an outside observer might react with emotion. Why do I have to bring any history to an image to find context?

As to politics, IMHO, any depiction of human difficulties has political content. Having said that, if one wants to take a "position" on politics as an artist, I can see limiting that as potentially inflammatory/biased in what is an "open" forum here.

For the creator, emotion may not be an impetus. It fact, it may be an expressive "need" to show light, color, form etc in a way which is intellectually based, or simply visually based.

Art does not have to be viewed to exist, as it is a medium for those attempting to make sense of a complex world with their own signature. It's nice if one can communicate with it, but we are inundated with so many "images" without context in many cases, those that stand out for the most part depict the human dilemma.

When I consider Salgado's images of the Sahel and Rawanda, or Dorothea Lange's of immigrant families, I don't have to be in a rage at the way people have been treated and local communities have neglected the needy, to have an emotional reaction. That comes not from any history, but from the intrinsic nature of the image.

I don't think we should be promulgating politically slanted pictorials to young photographers, as the extreme political and social biases from many factions in societies may cause them undue physical and emotional harm - unless they are willing to take on those risks.

When populations increase beyond an ability to meet the needs of the many, the center falls apart, and "objectivity" loses it value. The photographer's job becomes that much more difficult to depict objectively.

Art is Emotion is simply BS except for those who are emotive to begin with. For most art is a visual medium that causes one to stop, look and find context from that output.

As I may have stated before (apologies for redundancy), the closest that photography comes to art is depiction of the challenges humans (and animals) face.

As much as I seek to capture the beauty of color and light with a camera (mostly in the landscapes), the severe limitations imposed by the medium as compared to painting, collage or multimedia (as examples), tell me that I am an illustrator, perhaps with a good eye/technique, while those with true vision will express command over every millimeter of their output.

Certainly there are innumerable photographers who produce wonderful images. I am not slighting their output (some of whom I envy, and many admire), but as much as I may enjoy a photo, I will take William Chase's landscapes of Long Island (example) over any photos of the same location.

[Tin Can]

Seems to me an overwrought defense of...

I already wrote, the image in discussion is a well known location to me

Not quite down by the river...

One tries to connect the dots when personal nostalgia/experience intervenes when presented with a straight forward image of a road overpass.

Not slighting Richard here, but there is nothing intrinsic to the overpass image that conveys a human connection, let alone the plight of homeless associated with the site.

Now if one were to show in an image or series with the human element, perhaps providing the despair, a sense of hope (or hopelessness), in the context of the physical structure, I as an outside observer might react with emotion. Why do I have to bring any history to an image to find context?

As to politics, IMHO, any depiction of human difficulties has political content. Having said that, if one wants to take a "position" on politics as an artist, I can see limiting that as potentially inflammatory/biased in what is an "open" forum here.

For the creator, emotion may not be an impetus. It fact, it may be an expressive "need" to show light, color, form etc in a way which is intellectually based, or simply visually based.

Art does not have to be viewed to exist, as it is a medium for those attempting to make sense of a complex world with their own signature. It's nice if one can communicate with it, but we are inundated with so many "images" without context in many cases, those that stand out for the most part depict the human dilemma.

When I consider Salgado's images of the Sahel and Rawanda, or Dorothea Lange's of immigrant families, I don't have to be in a rage at the way people have been treated and local communities have neglected the needy, to have an emotional reaction. That comes not from any history, but from the intrinsic nature of the image.

I don't think we should be promulgating politically slanted pictorials to young photographers, as the extreme political and social biases from many factions in societies may cause them undue physical and emotional harm - unless they are willing to take on those risks.

When populations increase beyond an ability to meet the needs of the many, the center falls apart, and "objectivity" loses it value. The photographer's job becomes that much more difficult to depict objectively.

Art is Emotion is simply BS except for those who are emotive to begin with. For most art is a visual medium that causes one to stop, look and find context from that output.

As I may have stated before (apologies for redundancy), the closest that photography comes to art is depiction of the challenges humans (and animals) face.

As much as I seek to capture the beauty of color and light with a camera (mostly in the landscapes), the severe limitations imposed by the medium as compared to painting, collage or multimedia (as examples), tell me that I am an illustrator, perhaps with a good eye/technique, while those with true vision will express command over every millimeter of their output.

Certainly there are innumerable photographers who produce wonderful images. I am not slighting their output (some of whom I envy, and many admire), but as much as I may enjoy a photo, I will take William Chase's landscapes of Long Island (example) over any photos of the same location.