The Great Snappers and the Great Contrivers

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/17/2013 04:57:31 PM · #76

Originally posted by tanguera:

I actually contrive to the point where I allow the unplanned to take over.

That's what all contrivers do.

bvy

Sigma DP1x

12/17/2013 05:05:39 PM · #77

Originally posted by Cory:

We clear on this now Brian?

Sure. Thanks for clarifying. No need to be condescending.

Originally posted by Cory:

I didn't say that anything with those traits cannot be called art. I simply said that those traits do not make something art...

Are you sure? The first two of those traits, if any at all, are precisely what elevate jazz to an art form. The music is created in the moment. Nobody ever stuck a score in front of Miles or Coltrane. What came out of these guys' horns was totally in and of and about the moment. And that's what made them great.

(Sorry for the digression into music, but it's another passion of mine.)

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

12/17/2013 05:18:08 PM · #78

...

Message edited by author 2013-12-17 17:35:29.

rooum

12/17/2013 05:23:50 PM · #79

Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by tanguera:
I actually contrive to the point where I allow the unplanned to take over.

That's what all contrivers do.

Yes. I tend to compare it with writing in many ways. Whilst i don't write a huge amount i do like the process of writing short stories and such. There is often a point, after tapping away words for a while, that something just clicks and there is a moment of wonder at where a certain idea or sentence comes from. Doesn't happen often and it's the same with photography. Only a small fraction of photographs of mine fall into this catergory but they are the ones that i am proud of and, perhaps, i can consider art. Just throwing a load of words or eyeballing about and seeing what sticks but the ones that stick tend to be out of my hands.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/17/2013 05:35:12 PM · #80

EDIT: I think I hit the wrong thread... :)

LoVi

Nikon D5100

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

12/18/2013 05:20:18 AM · #81

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Dictionaries are reactive, not proactive. They represent a history of language, not the reality of it. Dictionaries are irrelevant to art. Art is the future, not the past.

Quite astonished by this, actually, Robert. Where is the evolution of art, and "The Arts" if not from history, influence, example, and education?

Originally posted by Cory:
And this folks, is why we need to use language as prescribed in that reactionary document known as a 'Dictionary'.. :D

Okay.......whose dictionary you wanna use? Which edition? Which one's "right"? Do euphemisms and popular vernacular count?

Point is......I want to see what different people see as art......I want to experience their vision, try to understand how their souls are touched/inspired in their worldview.

I don't have *ANY* issue with the definition, or the complete lack thereof, as it pertains to art.....what I *DO* have a problem with is the concept that different is wrong. Different, to me, in forms of expression is never wrong, simply different.

"Vive la difference!"

Sigh.....you are soooo. raw....... do they eat turtles in Paris?

cutout

Canon EOS-20D

12/18/2013 10:20:43 AM · #82

Originally posted by rooum:

Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by tanguera:
I actually contrive to the point where I allow the unplanned to take over.

That's what all contrivers do.

Yes. I tend to compare it with writing in many ways. Whilst i don't write a huge amount i do like the process of writing short stories and such. There is often a point, after tapping away words for a while, that something just clicks and there is a moment of wonder at where a certain idea or sentence comes from. Doesn't happen often and it's the same with photography. Only a small fraction of photographs of mine fall into this catergory but they are the ones that i am proud of and, perhaps, i can consider art. Just throwing a load of words or eyeballing about and seeing what sticks but the ones that stick tend to be out of my hands.

thats exactly my way of doing
oh the excitement of growing with it
never knowing
only thing i do know for certain
no ribbon
shrug

spiritualspatula

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX100

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

12/18/2013 10:22:52 AM · #83

Originally posted by vawendy:

I think, for the most part, each individual shot is either a snap or a contrived shot, however. You're not controlling the nature shots. You may wait for them, but it's still a capture of a moment in time, over which you don't have much control. The street shots, pretty much the same. The setup shots, the stock shots, the portraits (not candid) are contrived. The candids are a capture of a moment in time.

Perhaps it's control vs anarchy then instead of snap vs contrive. :)

I would argue time is control. Even if you're still depending upon some serendipity for your final realization of the scene it's still contrived. A nature photographer waiting for an elk to cross a stream is no different (to me) from HCB waiting for a bicycle.

I can see what you're getting at with the control vs anarchy but I think at a certain point much of what would likely be grouped into the "anarchy" group is careful CONTROL of the anarchy, as well, so they'd have a heavy overlap. Don's original split sidesteps much of this by looking at the process instead.

And as it pertains to the aforementioned battle of art and our ideas of it- there's no reason any of those individuals who produce polished stock or landscape shots can't appreciate such a discussion as well. Consider that you could lay the same analysis upon different landscape photographers- those who set out with a specific scene in mind, use photographer's ephemeris, and arrive to get a specific light and look during the right atmospheric conditions. Surely that's plenty into the Great Contriver camp. And there are those who also sorta wander aimlessly and say "0h hey that's pretty" and photograph it.

Just because that's not necessarily Don's cup of photography doesn't mean the concept can't be applied elsewhere and considered fully. Failure to do so is really just a narrow interpretation crafted of our own reading of the post.

hihosilver

Nikon D200

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

12/18/2013 10:42:06 AM · #84

Whenever I read these threads, my first thought pops into an excited three words, "What if we..."

Then, promptly nothing happens.

In that death silence, the power of the pen falls quite short of the simple pixel imaged however you wish to shape it.

"Thank you" becomes my most complicated word thought on Art (real or otherwise) addressed to the pixel shapers who have enriched my life.

I'll just think it one more time..."Thank you!!!"

Let the Word Vanity Continuum carry on...;-)

Message edited by author 2013-12-18 11:01:29.

Tiny

Apple iPad mini 4

12/18/2013 11:48:12 AM · #85

Thank you Mae

Fujifilm XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR

12/19/2013 11:06:46 AM · #86

Originally posted by spiritualspatula:

Originally posted by vawendy:
I think, for the most part, each individual shot is either a snap or a contrived shot, however. You're not controlling the nature shots. You may wait for them, but it's still a capture of a moment in time, over which you don't have much control. The street shots, pretty much the same. The setup shots, the stock shots, the portraits (not candid) are contrived. The candids are a capture of a moment in time.

Perhaps it's control vs anarchy then instead of snap vs contrive. :)

I would argue time is control. Even if you're still depending upon some serendipity for your final realization of the scene it's still contrived. A nature photographer waiting for an elk to cross a stream is no different (to me) from HCB waiting for a bicycle.

I can see what you're getting at with the control vs anarchy but I think at a certain point much of what would likely be grouped into the "anarchy" group is careful CONTROL of the anarchy, as well, so they'd have a heavy overlap. Don's original split sidesteps much of this by looking at the process instead.

And as it pertains to the aforementioned battle of art and our ideas of it- there's no reason any of those individuals who produce polished stock or landscape shots can't appreciate such a discussion as well. Consider that you could lay the same analysis upon different landscape photographers- those who set out with a specific scene in mind, use photographer's ephemeris, and arrive to get a specific light and look during the right atmospheric conditions. Surely that's plenty into the Great Contriver camp. And there are those who also sorta wander aimlessly and say "0h hey that's pretty" and photograph it.

Just because that's not necessarily Don's cup of photography doesn't mean the concept can't be applied elsewhere and considered fully. Failure to do so is really just a narrow interpretation crafted of our own reading of the post.

I would counter that a landscape photographer is more a snapper than a contriver because s/he sees something already there that s/he wants to capture. All the care and planning is still with the goal of capturing something he's already seen (but yes I know that stretches the idea of "snapper." my dichotomy is flawed, for sure). The only way for a landscape photographer to be a contriver is if s/he is Cristo.

insteps

Ricoh GR III

12/19/2013 12:41:10 PM · #87

Maybe we should be calling the two camps bystanders and orchestrators. We're all snappers to some degree.

Message edited by author 2013-12-19 12:41:25.

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

12/19/2013 12:48:17 PM · #88

Originally posted by insteps:

Maybe we should be calling the two camps bystanders and orchestrators. We're all snappers to some degree.

insteps

Ricoh GR III

Fujifilm XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR

12/19/2013 12:50:57 PM · #89

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by insteps:
Maybe we should be calling the two camps bystanders and orchestrators. We're all snappers to some degree.

+1

Cory agrees with me? Let me rethink this statement... First time for everything I guess.

hahn23

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens

12/19/2013 01:00:57 PM · #90

Originally posted by posthumous:

"Landscape photography is the supreme test of the photographer - and often the supreme disappointment."
Ansel Adams

Capturing interesting light on a well composed landscape scene takes substantial planning and preparation. YMMV

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/19/2013 01:01:20 PM · #91

How much "control" must be exerted before a "snapshot" becomes a contrived image. Can you change your exposure settings, or must you shoot with whatever settings you have at the time? Can you frame/compose the scene, or do you need to "shoot from the hip" and hope your subject ends up in the frame? I take a lot of pictures of things I "happen to come across" but I still try to have a decent exposure and composition. I think there's a continuum running from random pressing of the shutter button (pocket pix with your phone?) to multi-light/backdrop/props studio setup, and that a lot of pictures fall somewhere in the middle.

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

12/19/2013 01:02:42 PM · #92

Originally posted by insteps:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by insteps:
Maybe we should be calling the two camps bystanders and orchestrators. We're all snappers to some degree.

+1

Cory agrees with me? Let me rethink this statement... First time for everything I guess.

Heh...

In the end, I'm firmly entrenched in both camps, whatever we call them... I'd never dream of limiting myself to one mode or the other... Keep in mind that much of what I argue for here is limited to the context of DPC.

blindjustice

Canon EOS-60D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

12/19/2013 01:10:29 PM · #93

Originally posted by GeneralE:

The split for the two camps in this thread it seems, is that the snapping happens on the photog side of the lens, and the contriving happens on the other end. Although how do we know these street photographers aren't ordering people to "act naturally?"

Message edited by author 2013-12-19 13:10:51.

tanguera

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

12/19/2013 01:15:46 PM · #94

Originally posted by Cory:

I'd never dream of limiting myself to one mode or the other...

+ a bizzillion

Fujifilm XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR

12/19/2013 01:30:36 PM · #95

Originally posted by blindjustice:

Originally posted by GeneralE:
How much "control" must be exerted before a "snapshot" becomes a contrived image. Can you change your exposure settings, or must you shoot with whatever settings you have at the time? Can you frame/compose the scene, or do you need to "shoot from the hip" and hope your subject ends up in the frame? I take a lot of pictures of things I "happen to come across" but I still try to have a decent exposure and composition. I think there's a continuum running from random pressing of the shutter button (pocket pix with your phone?) to multi-light/backdrop/props studio setup, and that a lot of pictures fall somewhere in the middle.

The split for the two camps in this thread it seems, is that the snapping happens on the photog side of the lens, and the contriving happens on the other end. Although how do we know these street photographers aren't ordering people to "act naturally?"

The blind man sees things my way.

insteps

Ricoh GR III

12/19/2013 01:30:53 PM · #96

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by insteps:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by insteps:
Maybe we should be calling the two camps bystanders and orchestrators. We're all snappers to some degree.

+1

Cory agrees with me? Let me rethink this statement... First time for everything I guess.

Heh...

In the end, I'm firmly entrenched in both camps, whatever we call them... I'd never dream of limiting myself to one mode or the other... Keep in mind that much of what I argue for here is limited to the context of DPC.

I understand it's just a discussion of style and technique. Few choose to be exclusively one or the other.

Message edited by author 2013-12-19 14:07:03.