Debating Modern Photography

[cowanw]

I thought this would be of interest.
Debating Modern Photography: The Triumph of Group f/64
http://www.portlandmuseum.org/Content/4161.shtml
Starts Sept 30. Maybe some Maine members might let us know how it goes.
Regards
Bill

[Jim Galli]

Is anybody really still debating? Wish it was a few states closer. Sounds like a really nice show.

[Jay DeFehr]

I wish I could attend. I think the f64 group helped to redirect photography as an art form, in a positive way, but I also think the pendulum swung too far, and the f64 group was too dogmatic. Maybe the pictorialists were also too dogmatic, but their dogma was effectively defeated by the f64 group, so little of it remains, except as echoed in the digital/PS vs straight film photography debate, to which I feel more connected.

[Mark Woods]

Great post. Thanks Bill.

[Tintype Bob]

"Is anybody really still debating? "
That may sound like a dumb question, but my wife is the Curator at an art museum, her speciality is Photography and she still has people tell her "Photography is not real art" and these are educated and so called art lovers. One of them is even the Director of the Museum.

So I think the debate is still going on.

[MIke Sherck]

And they claim that dinosaurs are all extinct!

Mike

[John NYC]

"Is anybody really still debating? "
That may sound like a dumb question, but my wife is the Curator at an art museum, her speciality is Photography and she still has people tell her "Photography is not real art" and these are educated and so called art lovers. One of them is even the Director of the Museum.

So I think the debate is still going on.

The MOMA began collecting photography 80 years ago now...

http://www.moma.org/explore/collection/photography

If you see the modern photography exhibits there, the f/64 club works seem absolutely ancient. That and HCB are what they bring out when they have a retro-classics show.

[Mark Woods]

Hello John, do you think that familiarity breeds contempt? And that the "old" photographs of, say, The Man In the Top Hat Jumping Over the Puddle, are too familiar? I look at a lot of the slacker "art" that is current and am at a loss. Photography is a very difficult art form if one isn't using bits and bytes in Photo Shop. Does Raphael look ancient? Probably, but does that diminish his artistry? I don't think so. Why the slam on classic photographers? Is history now measured in Tweets and weeks? If that's true, it's really said.

[Mark Woods]

*sad

[John NYC]

Hello John, do you think that familiarity breeds contempt? And that the "old" photographs of, say, The Man In the Top Hat Jumping Over the Puddle, are too familiar? I look at a lot of the slacker "art" that is current and am at a loss. Photography is a very difficult art form if one isn't using bits and bytes in Photo Shop. Does Raphael look ancient? Probably, but does that diminish his artistry? I don't think so. Why the slam on classic photographers? Is history now measured in Tweets and weeks? If that's true, it's really said.

I'm not slamming classic photographers. I love them! Surprised that my post could be interpreted that way.

I am implying that someone (the said "Director") arguing that the classic photographers were not artists and that their work is not art is an argument that is pretty behind the times.