| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/30/2010 03:31:57 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by George:
Originally posted by h2:
Why not just look what worked here and here ? |
Because they're wrong. |
Because you think so? You're so ignorant.
It worked for DPC voters, that doesn't mean it is what anybody else would describe as minimalism in photography.
And at the end of the day, what  posthumous just wrote is right anyway |
|
|
|
07/30/2010 03:32:08 PM · #52 |
Yeah I have yet to see the minimalist style defined by "Sharp lines". Your wiki post, I think says it best:
"Minimalism describes movements in various forms of art and design, especially visual art and music, where the work is stripped down to its most fundamental features. As a specific movement in the arts it is identified with developments in post-World War II Western Art, most strongly with American visual arts in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Prominent artists associated with this movement include Donald Judd, John McLaughlin, Agnes Martin, Dan Flavin, Robert Morris, Anne Truitt, and Frank Stella. It is rooted in the reductive aspects of Modernism, and is often interpreted as a reaction against Abstract expressionism and a bridge to Postmodern art practices.
The terms have expanded to encompass a movement in music which features repetition and iteration, as in the compositions of La Monte Young, Terry Riley, Steve Reich, Philip Glass, and John Adams. (See also Postminimalism).
The term "minimalist" is often applied colloquially to designate anything which is spare or stripped to its essentials. It has also been used to describe the plays and novels of Samuel Beckett, the films of Robert Bresson, the stories of Raymond Carver, and even the automobile designs of Colin Chapman. The word was first used in English in the early twentieth century to describe the Mensheviks.[1]"
No where there does it say "Sharp Lines"
Just sayin' |
|
|
|
07/30/2010 04:11:27 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by asamite:
Originally posted by George:
Originally posted by h2:
Why not just look what worked here and here ? |
Because they're wrong. |
Isn't photography (and art in general) more about the work itself and less about fitting a specific definition that a group of people have regarding a subject? This thread has proven that the idea of minimalism is not well defined across the spectrum of various sites available out there. You are taking an arbitrary stand that something is wrong because you say it is. It is for that reason that we get so many 1s and 2s on these challenges for perfectly beautiful shots that meet the definition just in a looser sense than you apply to it. You have made up your mind before you even see the pictures available and that is definately NOT what art is for. It is about free expression, not closed-minded bigots (a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.) If you can't see the art for what it is, then you should refrain from voting and just being a troll who likes to see how many times they can DNMC those around them. |
It seems to me you're against challenge topics in general. And stop calling me a bigot. |
|
|
|
07/30/2010 04:17:28 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by h2:
Originally posted by George:
Originally posted by h2:
Why not just look what worked here and here ? |
Because they're wrong. |
Because you think so? You're so ignorant.
It worked for DPC voters, that doesn't mean it is what anybody else would describe as minimalism in photography.
And at the end of the day, what posthumous just wrote is right anyway |
"Why not just look at the people with whom you disagree, and vote/enter based on what worked for them?" "Because they're wrong." I don't see that as ignorant, I see that as having a point of view. Their definition of minimalism was wrong and still is; I didn't get a chance to vote on those entries, but now that I do, I'll make sure my point of view (which is the same as the majority of art historians') comes across. I won't do the old "oh, nobody shares my point of view, so I'll exaggerate my votes to offset them and prove my point"... but I'll consider images that complex objects in the corner to not meet the challenge, because those are not examples of minimalism.
Actually, what posthumous wrote is right for him. It's the way he treats challenge topics and images, and he votes accordingly. To respond directly to him:
Originally posted by posthumous:
As with any other category of art, a good Minimalist piece contains its own definition of Minimalism. |
Minimalism is what we call a certain movement. We call it that because we observe it. When we try to mimic it, we should try to mimic that movement, not some definition we have in our heads that has little to do with the movement, that we try to portray in the image, and that we hope the voter agrees with when they view it.
Message edited by author 2010-07-30 16:21:53. |
|
|
|
07/30/2010 04:52:10 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by George:
Originally posted by posthumous:
As with any other category of art, a good Minimalist piece contains its own definition of Minimalism. |
Minimalism is what we call a certain movement. We call it that because we observe it. When we try to mimic it, we should try to mimic that movement, not some definition we have in our heads that has little to do with the movement, that we try to portray in the image, and that we hope the voter agrees with when they view it. |
When I vote, I look for something beyond mimicry. I think of it more as "engaging with a tradition" than "mimicking a movement." Then again, I'm thinking more about authentic expression than about high scores. |
|
|
|
07/30/2010 04:59:53 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by George:
Originally posted by posthumous:
As with any other category of art, a good Minimalist piece contains its own definition of Minimalism. |
Minimalism is what we call a certain movement. We call it that because we observe it. When we try to mimic it, we should try to mimic that movement, not some definition we have in our heads that has little to do with the movement, that we try to portray in the image, and that we hope the voter agrees with when they view it. |
When I vote, I look for something beyond mimicry. I think of it more as "engaging with a tradition" than "mimicking a movement." Then again, I'm thinking more about authentic expression than about high scores. |
By mimic, I didn't mean mimic a certain work. I meant follow the movement. And just so you don't understand "follow" wrong, I don't mean be a follower rather than a leader; I mean make your image agree with the movement. Better? |
|
|
|
07/30/2010 05:22:10 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by George:
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by George:
Originally posted by posthumous:
As with any other category of art, a good Minimalist piece contains its own definition of Minimalism. |
Minimalism is what we call a certain movement. We call it that because we observe it. When we try to mimic it, we should try to mimic that movement, not some definition we have in our heads that has little to do with the movement, that we try to portray in the image, and that we hope the voter agrees with when they view it. |
When I vote, I look for something beyond mimicry. I think of it more as "engaging with a tradition" than "mimicking a movement." Then again, I'm thinking more about authentic expression than about high scores. |
By mimic, I didn't mean mimic a certain work. I meant follow the movement. And just so you don't understand "follow" wrong, I don't mean be a follower rather than a leader; I mean make your image agree with the movement. Better? |
It's quite possible we both mean the same thing, though it sounds like I'm more open to innovation and subversion. I'd be interested in comparing notes when the challenge is over. |
|
|
|
07/30/2010 05:23:54 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
It's quite possible we both mean the same thing, though it sounds like I'm more open to innovation and subversion. I'd be interested in comparing notes when the challenge is over. |
I think I'll just look over your comments and you look over mine. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 04:17:47 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by George:
"Why not just look at the people with whom you disagree, and vote/enter based on what worked for them?" "Because they're wrong." I don't see that as ignorant, I see that as having a point of view. Their definition of minimalism was wrong and still is; I didn't get a chance to vote on those entries, but now that I do, I'll make sure my point of view (which is the same as the majority of art historians') comes across. I won't do the old "oh, nobody shares my point of view, so I'll exaggerate my votes to offset them and prove my point"... but I'll consider images that complex objects in the corner to not meet the challenge, because those are not examples of minimalism.
|
From this I read that you think you are the only one who has a clue about what minimalism is; and ALL voters from the past minimalism challenges were wrong. Actually, they all had a point of view as you claim to have - and some of them might even share your's . You seem to misunderstand the purpose of DPC and voting in general. The result reflects the average of what people like and what they define as meeting the challenge topic and not what the "majority of art historians" (however you come to know that - did you ask them all or did you read any publication ever, and if so, how do you know you understood it?) would say. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 07:02:44 AM · #60 |
| @ h2 You said "what worked." On the first page of the Minimalism and Minimalism II results, I see a lot of "negative space" entries that are not minimalist. So on average, what worked then was wrong. The whole point of this thread is to give a proper definition to Minimalism, with which I agree, which I'll follow when I vote, and which, unlike the one that was followed by a lot of high-scoring images in the previous challenges, is correct. I don't think I'm the only one - I'm agreeing with the first post, aren't I? |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 07:33:53 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by George:
Originally posted by h2:
Why not just look what worked here and here ? |
Because they're wrong. |
There is a saying that "Perception is Reality". At DPC, not reviewing what the voters considered to meet the challenge in previous runs of the same challenge is counter-productive.
If the cross-walk light says I can cross but cars are still going through the intersection, I may be in the right to proceed, but it wouldn't be a smart move. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 08:37:07 AM · #62 |
Originally posted by Nobody:
Originally posted by George:
Originally posted by h2:
Why not just look what worked here and here ? |
Because they're wrong. |
There is a saying that "Perception is Reality". At DPC, not reviewing what the voters considered to meet the challenge in previous runs of the same challenge is counter-productive.
If the cross-walk light says I can cross but cars are still going through the intersection, I may be in the right to proceed, but it wouldn't be a smart move. |
Looks what came in last in those 2 challenges
 .
Check this one out. I'm so sorry she's not an active member any more.
Message edited by author 2010-07-31 08:44:00. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 08:55:30 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
Check this one out. I'm so sorry she's not an active member any more.
|
Check this one out too:  |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 09:18:14 AM · #64 |
Originally posted by George:
@ h2 You said "what worked." On the first page of the Minimalism and Minimalism II results, I see a lot of "negative space" entries that are not minimalist. So on average, what worked then was wrong. The whole point of this thread is to give a proper definition to Minimalism, with which I agree, which I'll follow when I vote, and which, unlike the one that was followed by a lot of high-scoring images in the previous challenges, is correct. I don't think I'm the only one - I'm agreeing with the first post, aren't I? |
It is not that it was once defined like "Look, this is minimalism. Nothing else ever may fall into that category. And images with lots of negative space are officially excluded from minimalism for all time."
DPC is not a summit of art historians, any submitter and voter is free to interpret the challenge like they want. If you want to follow some obscure guidelines you once read I don't have a problem with that. I learned something different when I studied design, maybe inbetween the last 16 years the view onto minimalism has changed or there may be a difference between a designers point of view and that of an artist or historian, I don't care. I just think it is wrong to ask the voters to vote a certain kind of imagery lower because they don't fit into what you claim to be an exactly defined art form. The challenge title or description in no way ask for images that belong there, it is open. May the most interesting and best executed images win, no matter if they are "art" or eye candy. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 09:18:17 AM · #65 |
Originally posted by mitalapo:
Originally posted by pixelpig:
Check this one out. I'm so sorry she's not an active member any more.
|
Check this one out too: |
Oh how cool is this--she's back! |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 09:34:25 AM · #66 |
Originally posted by Jac:
On a side note. What's the opposite of minimalism? Maximalism? ;\ |
I enjoyed thinking this over. I think the opposite of minimalism is everything else in photography, because unless what you're shooting has natural minimalistic qualities that you don't notice at the time, there is nothing else you can do. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 09:45:05 AM · #67 |
Originally posted by h2:
If you want to follow some obscure guidelines you once read I don't have a problem with that. |
You asked me why I didn't "look at worked." I told you why - because they're wrong. Then you started a long discussion about how they're not wrong or something. It seems you do have a problem with my "obscure guidelines" or my following them.
Message edited by author 2010-07-31 09:46:46. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 10:11:12 AM · #68 |
Originally posted by h2:
I just think it is wrong to ask the voters to vote a certain kind of imagery lower because they don't fit into what you claim to be an exactly defined art form. The challenge title or description in no way ask for images that belong there, it is open. May the most interesting and best executed images win, no matter if they are "art" or eye candy. |
Eye candy is, by definition, uninteresting.
I'm all for people voting based on their own notion of what Minimalism is. As part of that effort, many are checking this thread for a definition or two. Is it wrong of George to offer an alternative to continuing the ignorance of the past two challenges? |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 10:18:05 AM · #69 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
Originally posted by Jac:
On a side note. What's the opposite of minimalism? Maximalism? ;\ |
I enjoyed thinking this over. I think the opposite of minimalism is everything else in photography, because unless what you're shooting has natural minimalistic qualities that you don't notice at the time, there is nothing else you can do. |
That's a good interpretation and one I agree with but it puts my interpretation of minimalism in question. I equated negative space with minimalism but I think I was wrong, although not entirely. Darn, I think I'm skewing my own definition now. This is why I don't usually participate in these threads, they skew my own thoughts on the subject and then I'm thinking like everyone else here and that's not a good thing for my personal creativeness. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 11:23:22 AM · #70 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by h2:
I just think it is wrong to ask the voters to vote a certain kind of imagery lower because they don't fit into what you claim to be an exactly defined art form. The challenge title or description in no way ask for images that belong there, it is open. May the most interesting and best executed images win, no matter if they are "art" or eye candy. |
Eye candy is, by definition, uninteresting.
I'm all for people voting based on their own notion of what Minimalism is. As part of that effort, many are checking this thread for a definition or two. Is it wrong of George to offer an alternative to continuing the ignorance of the past two challenges? |
Absolutely not wrong. Wrong is claiming absoluteness of one's understanding of the challenge.
BTW, ignoring the challenge topic has a long tradition here on DPC :) ETA: Just look at the "Summer Meal" challenge for example, if it doesn't bore you too much
(Besides that, if eye candy is uninteresting, why do so many people enjoy looking at? b I guess his belongs in another thread, though.)
Message edited by author 2010-07-31 11:25:03. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 11:29:17 AM · #71 |
| So here's my perception from what I've read and seen. Minimalism is achieved when you are able to isolate the subject and take away any other distracting details that might be in the photo. Negative space is a common method, although it is definitely not the only way to achieve this. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 11:36:30 AM · #72 |
Originally posted by Trumpeteer4:
So here's my perception from what I've read and seen. Minimalism is achieved when you are able to isolate the subject and take away any other distracting details that might be in the photo. Negative space is a common method, although it is definitely not the only way to achieve this. |
I would say that's an excellent precis of the last 3 pages of posts |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 11:36:53 AM · #73 |
For the flip side of the thread/discussion here take a look at Maximalist and Maximalism as movements:
Maximalist described on Wikipedia
Maximalism on wikipedia
Here's a quote from the maximalist link above:
The term "maximalist" can also refer to anything which is excessive, overtly complex and 'showy', or providing redundant overkill in features and attachments, grossness in quantity and quality and "maximalism" the tendency to add and accumulate to excess.
In some ways, DPC continues to move in a "maximalist" direction in photography, both in PP choices, as well as in the "maximalist manifesto" written in 1991 by Iranian-born German-based artist Daryush Shokof, which includes the following artistic elements:
1. Figurative.
2. Politically aware, with socially critical points of view.
3. Erotic.
4. Mostly include ironic and humorous perspectives in concept or in form.
5. Not made to simply oppose minimalist works of art.
6. Open to wide views and visionary dimensions that can be fantastic, but not deformed.
So I'm glad to see the DPC gods (Drew-Langdon), as well as the SC, occasionally offering an alternative to maximalism such as the minimalist b/w challenge, as well as the occasional minimalist PP requirements.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2010 03:41:19 PM · #74 |
.
Message edited by author 2010-07-31 15:50:45. |
|
|
|
07/31/2010 03:49:12 PM · #75 |
| So, minimalism is not "negative space" |
|
