What's your motivation?

[Ken Tanaka]

I wonder now if it's really what I meant to say...

Long story, uh?

No, just angry.

So your denial of photography as an art form is anchored in your bad employment experience as a youth? To each his/her own.

 

[Asher Kelman]

No, just angry.

So your denial of photography as an art form is anchored in your bad employment experience as a youth? To each his/her own.

Ken,

At least she has insight to explain her own tordu view of the matter. From her words again, she just wants to assign the "art" label to the craft of the darkroom tech. After all that's who discovered, within a poor negative, just what was needed to make a fine picture. (Of course, if the form and lighting were not right in the first place, that would be a huge challenge).

Yes, she does sound bitter, but really having an odd point of view is at least grounded in hard work learning a craft which is reflected in her landscapes. She seems to eschew portraits herself! On occasion, wounded folk happen to make great poets and artists! I have no doubt that the experience making fine prints helped her develop her own style.

Asher

 

[Sandrine Bascouert]

Exactly, and I found my way on the lab, and better fulfillment than shooting...The point of the story is what makes a photo a piece of art is not always what ordinary people think it is. And the right people are not often granted for that. Everybody can take photographs (it's my point) and it's often the shadow-man that makes it stand from the crowd. (It's even better when there's a great photographer and a great lab tech working together.)

 

[Rachel Foster]

Everyone can take photographs...but not good ones, and certainly not outstanding, breathtaking ones. Oh, if only I could take the latter!

 

[Ken Tanaka]

Exactly, and I found my way on the lab, and better fulfillment than shooting...The point of the story is what makes a photo a piece of art is not always what ordinary people think it is. And the right people are not often granted for that. Everybody can take photographs (it's my point) and it's often the shadow-man that makes it stand from the crowd. (It's even better when there's a great photographer and a great lab tech working together.)

If we become more precise with your opinion, nearly everyone will agree. Let's leave "art" out of this, as it's an entirely separate concept for which an entirely different language and approach is required, beyond the reach of a photo enthusiast discussion site.

So let's just say this: "Behind many "good" photographs are often unseen hands that can occasionally transform ordinary photographs into extra-ordinary photographs."

With that I will certainly agree.

The fact that nearly everyone can record a photograph makes it the most democratic of all media. But it simultaneously makes it the most difficult medium in which to distinguish oneself. This past April the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMoMA) hosted a symposium to tackle the obviously unanswerable, but provocative, question: "Is Photography Over?". The museum empaneled a relatively wide variety of renowned figures to discuss the subject -- curators, educators, photographers/artists, and a few professional navel-gazers. Some may find their remarks interesting reading.

I leave you with this image and thought.

June 11, 2010
Chicago Blackhawks (pro hockey) fans celebrate the team's first championship since 1961.​

 

[Asher Kelman]

If we become more precise with your opinion, nearly everyone will agree. Let's leave "art" out of this, as it's an entirely separate concept for which an entirely different language and approach is required, beyond the reach of a photo enthusiast discussion site.

The let's leave "Art" out of it" idea is great, as we don't get lost in the syllogistic haze impairing our view of a "good pictures" we might agree on.

Still, I don't think art in photography is necessarily beyond our reach in understanding in this forum but it's sufficient here to put it aside.

So let's just say this: "Behind many "good" photographs are often unseen hands that can occasionally transform ordinary photographs into extra-ordinary photographs."

With that I will certainly agree.

But it simultaneously makes it the most difficult medium in which to distinguish oneself.

So true, even if the pictures are superbly composed and rendered. I'd call this "The sunset conundrum!", LOL!

This past April the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMoMA) hosted a symposium to tackle the obviously unanswerable, but provocative, question: "Is Photography Over?". The museum empaneled a relatively wide variety of renowned figures to discuss the subject -- curators, educators, photographers/artists, and a few professional navel-gazers. Some may find their remarks interesting reading.

I have this printed out and with a good cup of tea, I'll enjoy reading it.

Ken Tanaka: June 11, 2010

Chicago Blackhawks (pro hockey) fans celebrate
the team's first championship since 1961.​

King solomon said just about the same thing, and it's all about the vanities we have!

Asher

 

[Sandrine Bascouert]

I think that I'll get that one on a tee-shirt (with your consent of course).
I like it
I'm so shy that I couldn't take a picture like that, I'd be afraid that the people don't want to be shot and get an argument with me (I'm a bit paranoiac).

 

[Sandrine Bascouert]

If you sell the tee shirt I'd buy one.