| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/20/2007 10:05:37 PM · #1 |
A photographer?
OR an
image-ist?
What's the differance? You tell me.
(edit to conform to more standard verbage.)
Message edited by author 2007-02-20 22:15:15.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 10:10:27 PM · #2 |
I guess since imagist is not a word , I'm a photographer :-P
Message edited by author 2007-02-20 22:24:20.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 10:20:16 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
I guess since imagist is not a word... |
I think Ezra and friends might disagree...
From an Imagist manifesto:
"1. To use the language of common speech, but to employ the exact
word, not the nearly-exact, nor the merely decorative word.
2. We believe that the individuality of a poet may often be better
expressed in free verse than in conventional forms. In poetry, a new
cadence means a new idea.
3. Absolute freedom in the choice of subject.
4. To present an image. We are not a school of painters, but we
believe that poetry should render particulars exactly and not deal in
vague generalities, however magnificent and sonorous. It is for this
reason that we oppose the cosmic poet, who seems to us to shirk the real
difficulties of his art.
5. To produce a poetry that is hard and clear, never blurred nor
indefinite.
6. Finally, most of us believe that concentration is of the very
essence of poetry."
Not sure if this is the tree A. H. is barking up...but an excellent question for sure. Can a photograph be a poem, and when is it not.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 10:26:38 PM · #4 |
Well, I've never been a poet and certainly not one of the early 20th century, so I'm not sure Imagism would have ever been my agenda.
Even if I can stretch my imagination and produce "images" I still consider myself a photographer in that the majority of what is in my images was once in front of my camera. I photograph things and then enhance them with photoshop.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 11:07:20 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
... I still consider myself a photographer in that the majority of what is in my images was once in front of my camera. I photograph things and then enhance them with photoshop. |
As an imagist, you'd be concerned with 'hammering out' a vision rather than with enhancing a sentiment. You'd photograph things within their rythm and use Photoshop to cut excess and idleness.
Objectivism came out of Imagism, btw.
Message edited by author 2007-02-20 23:07:57. |
|
|
|
02/21/2007 07:50:48 AM · #6 |
|
|
|
02/21/2007 07:57:35 AM · #7 |
... erm ... What is the question again?
I normally don't like pigeon-holes ... but I will try to tell you what I am MORE like if I understand the question better ...
... basically ... I am myself.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2007 06:55:04 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Greetmir:
... erm ... What is the question again?
I normally don't like pigeon-holes ... but I will try to tell you what I am MORE like if I understand the question better ...
... basically ... I am myself. |
Pretty straight forward question, I should not have to explain.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/18/2025 03:55:39 AM EDT.
