| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/29/2012 09:54:16 AM · #1 |
Just saw this article and had to share seeing as two of my idols are mentioned (Adams and Bresson)
Top 10 Photographers to Ignore |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 10:23:53 AM · #2 |
Seems the title is just a mechanism to confront the reader. The advice to "ignore" is not really what the article is after. Its real intent is to dismiss imitation of those photographers by pointing out what most, if not all imitators of those photographers lack.
Message edited by author 2012-03-29 10:27:15. |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 10:26:14 AM · #3 |
| imitate, or emulate.... no! inspired by.....yes! |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 10:31:29 AM · #4 |
The message I got was to either give up, or do my own thing. If I do my own thing, eventually some of it will have that elusive trait called "substance". Maybe. Or I could just be an imitative hack. Yes, that will work nicely.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2012 10:36:22 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
imitate, or emulate.... no! inspired by.....yes! |
+1 |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 11:39:56 AM · #6 |
| I personally found the articles tone a bit arrogant (for the reason Yo-Spiff eludes to) and off-putting... I've still got to read their other article on authors which i've got a feeling will be similar. |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 11:41:21 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by mrchhas:
I personally found the articles tone a bit arrogant (for the reason Yo-Spiff eludes to) and off-putting... I've still got to read their other article on authors which i've got a feeling will be similar. |
Actually, not so much. The author article pinpoints exactly what some issues are. It gives very good advice IMO.
R.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2012 11:49:15 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by mrchhas:
I personally found the articles tone a bit arrogant (for the reason Yo-Spiff eludes to) and off-putting... I've still got to read their other article on authors which i've got a feeling will be similar. |
Actually, not so much. The author article pinpoints exactly what some issues are. It gives very good advice IMO.
R. |
The "advice" may be good, but the tone is definitely snarky. |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 11:51:44 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
The "advice" may be good, but the tone is definitely snarky. |
I take the tone with a grain of salt, myself. Snarky sells, it's just a fact of life in the internet. Valid points are made, is my main take-away from it.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2012 11:57:41 AM · #10 |
The points are valid.
The snarky tone makes me want to trip them when they're carrying their tray in the cafeteria. |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 12:03:15 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
The points are valid.
The snarky tone makes me want to trip them when they're carrying their tray in the cafeteria. |
That's the feeling I failed to express when I said "off-putting" |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 12:04:57 PM · #12 |
| I'm sure the author is right, most of us are just too stupid to understand why these photographers are good, and we should not study them, because if we do we will just fall into slavish mindless imitation. Of course the arrogant self satisfied snobbish tone has us reading the article, whereas if the article had been titled "ten great photographers".....yawn. |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 01:45:53 PM · #13 |
Perhaps, but does so with a very narrow view and one that could do as much "damage" as what the author is accusing the photographers of doing. One inexperienced photographer may read that article and purposely ignore those photographers without so much as an attempt to understand the bigger picture.
The article merely takes a narrow concept of each photographer and exploits it in a sense of generality.
People who write poorly constructed articles like that simply leave me with the thought "well, everyone needs a hobby".
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by mrchhas:
I personally found the articles tone a bit arrogant (for the reason Yo-Spiff eludes to) and off-putting... I've still got to read their other article on authors which i've got a feeling will be similar. |
Actually, not so much. The author article pinpoints exactly what some issues are. It gives very good advice IMO.
R. |
|
|
|
|
03/29/2012 01:59:03 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
Perhaps, but does so with a very narrow view and one that could do as much "damage" as what the author is accusing the photographers of doing. One inexperienced photographer may read that article and purposely ignore those photographers without so much as an attempt to understand the bigger picture.
The article merely takes a narrow concept of each photographer and exploits it in a sense of generality.
People who write poorly constructed articles like that simply leave me with the thought "well, everyone needs a hobby".
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by mrchhas:
I personally found the articles tone a bit arrogant (for the reason Yo-Spiff eludes to) and off-putting... I've still got to read their other article on authors which i've got a feeling will be similar. |
Actually, not so much. The author article pinpoints exactly what some issues are. It gives very good advice IMO.
R. |
|
I was referring to the LITERATURE one... It's a little more cautious. I agree, the photography one is kind of arbitrary and misleading, especially in the titling.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2012 03:04:16 PM · #15 |
I dunno, i found this to be a good article for people who think that just because they have a camera they're a professional photographer.
short answer: you're not.
i've said in a lot of places i'm a hobbyist photographer who figures he's reached the maximum point of growth without outside assisance/influence and this is definately a good thing for a lot of people in my situation to hear. |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 03:07:19 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Spork99:
The "advice" may be good, but the tone is definitely snarky. |
I take the tone with a grain of salt, myself. Snarky sells, it's just a fact of life in the internet. Valid points are made, is my main take-away from it. |
+1 e.g. "You suck at photoshop"
Message edited by author 2012-03-29 18:25:00. |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 03:49:47 PM · #17 |
Ah....sorry about that.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I was referring to the LITERATURE one... It's a little more cautious. I agree, the photography one is kind of arbitrary and misleading, especially in the titling. |
|
|
|
|
03/29/2012 05:07:50 PM · #18 |
| Oh I enjoyed that read! Thanks for posting. A wonderful commentary on art; and critique. And artists. It was educational. But if he (they) don't like my lofi, lomo, grainy, filmy, boring, lucky pictures so what? |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 05:27:25 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The "advice" may be good, burt the tone is definitely snarky. I take the tone with a grain of salt, myself. Snarky sells, it's just a fact of life in the internet. |
+1 e.g. "You suck at photoshop" |
You're misquoting me. SPORK uttered the first sentence. The second and third sentences are mine.
R.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2012 06:26:11 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
You're misquoting me. |
Fixed. Sorry, I replied on my phone - fat fingers, bad eyes, yada yada yada. |
|
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: 07/28/2025 01:48:40 PM EDT.
