I would think conceptual photography is not a straight snap picture made by 35mm camera, submitted digitally for the one of the major events in North America photo contest.
I would think conceptual photography is not a straight snap picture made by 35mm camera, submitted digitally for the one of the major events in North America photo contest.
Something that needs to be said is that some people think they cannot handle rejections, and that might be one of the reasons why they don't participate in contests.
I was one of those.
I remember exactly how I felt when I submitted and was rejected at my first contest: it was personal, they didn't understand anything about photography and I felt as if a train run over me for 3 days.
It was personal, deadly, and they wouldn't see me anymore and the world of photography would have suffered painfully from it.
Since then I have participated in many.
I have also been accepted in a few and won prices in some.
And, it feels good, it is ego gratifying for sure, but at the end what counts is how YOU judge your own work.
I have found out that you have to make your homework.
See who the judges are, and submit accordingly.
Once in a while there are free contests where most of the times you are required to donate one of your pieces for a charity.
Many times the judges of these contests are curators of Museums and I submit my work no matter what kind of work I see it's preferred.
At the end, rejections are good things, they make you a stronger artist if you take the rejection the right way.
Of course we take pictures for our own pleasure, but what use has Art if it is not shared?
LMAO!Originally Posted by davidb
Everything about Foto1: the website, the contest, communication and organization was first rate. 200+ people (unverified and Bob Alden was among them) can't all be wrong, right? I mean millions voted for Bush, remember?
Regards, Art.
1961: Robert Rauschenberg sent a telegram to the Galerie Iris Clert which said: "This is a portrait of Iris Clert if I say so." as his contribution to an exhibition of portraits.
1960: The artist Stanley Brouwn declares that all the shoe shops in Amsterdam constitute an exhibition of his work.
1953 : Robert Rauschenberg exhibits Erased De Kooning Drawing, a drawing by Willem De Kooning which Rauschenberg erased.
Mark, great post.
So, someone who did not win the FOTO3 contest could simply hang an empty frame and title it "Winner, FOTO3 Contest, Not Submitted."
There's got to be an NEA grant in this somewhere....
I hereby declare that all of the above posts on this thread constitute an exhibition of my work.
Brian Vuillemenot
Yes, but did you win, place or show in Stever's mystery date photo competition? Without some bona fides or pedigree what's your declaration worth?
Mark,
That is a bit of a "strawman" argument - setting up your opponents argument for an easy fall, via a weak and somewhat skewed presentation. (I know you are only trying to help though. I appreciate your posts.)
Look at the whole body of Duchamp's work, especially his final piece, Etant donnés (Given: 1. The Waterfall, 2. The Illuminating Gas), for a fuller view of the conceptual in art.
It is quite a powerful piece and really must be experienced in its installation at the Philadelphia Museum of Art to be fully appreciated. It certainly maintains quite a bit of "aesthetic" value, while being in a sense a summary of his whole career (the title refers to some of his earlier works from 40 years previous, plus his Green Notebook.)
It is quite easy to belittle and dismiss that which we don't appreciate, or that by which we feel threatened. It could easily be applied to most work on this site, or any other internet site on photography that I have seen if one chose. Unfortunately, it often applies to other people and their beliefs by which we feel threatened.
What we have to respect is the fact that good, honest, intelligent people have devoted their passion and energy to their life's work. Whether we appreciate the content or not, I don't think it is helpful to "dis" another group based on our own preferences and prejudices.
As a test, substitute the word "Black" or "Jewish" in the characterization of art world participants and see if they read as balanced statements.
I will just add this small item as a comment on how many others have truly appreciated Duchamp's work, even though the reference is only to "The Fountain", which I have argued against:
In December 2004, Duchamp's Fountain was voted the most influential artwork of the 20th century by 500 of the most powerful people in the British art world. This is testimony to the influence of Duchamp's work, and the mark he has left on the art world.
I spent approximately 3 years in the 1990's studying Duchamp's work and writing, including repaeted trips to the Philadelphia museum and reading every book that I could find at the time. I came to appreciate his work as much as any writer or artist that I have ever encountered. But I still enjoy Paul Strand, John Steinbeck, etc. etc., as well as James Joyce.
I am happy for my son that there are so many wonderful books, ideas, and systems of art for him to explore and enjoy (Harry Potter happens to be the current fave, following on the heels of everything that Roald Dahl has written. He is in 4th grade ...)
This is an intriguing insight. Art seems to be such a notional creative exercise. Great ideas are hard-to-pin-down ephemeral things whose tenuous grounding in reality is subject to whim and caprice. It is a brilliant conceptual jump to make the awards in this contest share the same vague not-quite-sure-if-its real quality that the best art seems to possess. I guess it begs the question, though, whether the work that was submitted for the contest was the art, or whether the contest was the art. It is sort of recursive in a way. Or meta-art. Brilliant deconstruction, David. Now that I understand what is going on, it makes a lot more sense to me.
Though many English language museum catalogues and even critical works refer to Duchamp's urinal signed "R. Mutt" as "The Fountain," it's worth remembering that in Duchamp's native language it is known as "La Fontaine," which makes a statement about allegory, symbolism, and artistic tradition that "The Fountain" does not (Jean de la Fontaine is the canonical 17th century French author of beast fables--the French Aesop).
Didn't even know I had any "opponents" on this one! I just felt the term "Conceptual Art" was being used in an overly broad way, and I decided to be offensively pedantic in describing what it was as a specific, defined style.
I'd love to see Duchamp's Etant donnés, if I ever make it to Philadelphia. I've heard it's a wonderful work independant to itself, and it sounds like a fitting summary to a fascinating career. Duchamp was quite a personality, engaging is so many of the day's art-world -ism's (Cubism, Fauvism, Dadaism, Surrealism...) beore pioneering cubism, then seemingly abandoning art for chess for twenty-some years while secretly working on Etant donnés... and I'm honestly not sure what -ism Etant donnés has been assigned to.
I think one thing the current Fine-with-a-capital-F Art world, including Fine Art photography, lacks is any current cohesive -ism. In the art history, art evolves from -ism to -ism, with groups of artists working in similar styles toward similar goals. Since we hit the nebulous terms "Modernism" and especially "Post-Modernism", there hasn't been much of a defineable style or philosophy towards art. It seems like "anything goes". Not a complaint, just an observation.
"I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks