|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/14/2007 07:33:03 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
I've seen it on quite a few workshops that I've been on - everyone lines up and shoots the same view from the same place and then shows similar shots come review time. Then there was always one person that everyone else says 'where you in the same place as us ?!?'
My goal these days is to be that person - worked well last time ;) |
ROFL!!!
One Saturday, our camera club got two huge rooms, a dozen of us, and three light/backdrop setups for us to use ALL DAY!!!! I took this while everybody was having lunch:
[thumb]599884[/thumb]
It was funny.....we all took a couple hundred shots during the day, but everyone liked this best of all......you can't get the look on Laurel's face on purpose. We were just doinking around trying to get a handle on the lights, and there the shot was. I got a few decent "regular" portraits out of the shoot, and sure learned a lot, but this one......ah, it's a keeper!
|
|
|
|
12/14/2007 09:06:10 PM · #27 |
A couple of points are worth noting, several actually:
1. The writer of that article was definitely not dismissing "collector" photography as an invalid thing to do. He was speaking to a much narrower range of putative listeners, those who strive towards making photographic art.
2. From its very inception, or at least from the point where photography became available to amateurs, "collecting" has been one of the primary, almost certainly THE primary photographic activity. Certainly, if you include recording family images (the birthday parties, the Christmas stockings, and on and on) as a "collecting" activity, this is true; and even if you don't, by far the bulk of vacation photography involves collecting.
3. A place becomes famous, basically, because it IS special; it has a special meaning (the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier), it has a special quality (Yosemite Valley), it is historical, it infamous, whatever ΓΆ€” a famous place has something that makes it so. And speaking of travel in general, by far the bulk of travelers who visit a famous place largely restrict their itineraries to the "must see" menu. I'm only gonna go to Paris one time, for 4 days, I am by God gonna see the Eiffel Tower, the Louvre, take a bateaux down the Seine, and so forth. In fact, in all likelihood, I am on some sort of a guided itinerary, or even a guided tour, that makes absolutely certain I touch all the high spots.
It is relatively few travelers (although I suspect many of us on DPC would fall into this category) who have the time or even the inclination to deviate from the beaten path and explore the byways of a place. And so it is with "destinations" and landscape photography.
So in my mind there's absolutely nothing at all "wrong" with capturing all the famous sites in your travel. Collecting is good. And if you're influenced enough by Ansel to see Yosemite through his eyes, so to speak, that's not a bad thing at all for a once-in-a-lifetime visitor, because he saw Yosemite very well indeed.
It's when you get to go back time and again that it becomes problematic. If you are a regular visitor to Yosemite and see the whole place as a photographic shrine to Ansel Adams, and dedicate yourself to replicating his style of work, well I think that's just too bad.
And as a corollary, most of us have something we can "make our own" quite close to home; a Cape, like me, a city perhaps, a certain field, a certain stream or river, whatever it is, you can return there and explore all the different ways of seeing it, and every time you experience it it can be with eyes that are opened anew.
R.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/21/2025 04:08:24 PM  |
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: 08/21/2025 04:08:24 PM EDT.
|
