| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/20/2008 08:17:18 PM · #101 |
Lots of interesting things were said already here.
I think, the key-point in photography is when viewer's eye can't move from the image while his/her mind is trying to explore and/or travel.
Our eyes can easily explore images with portraits, landscapes, flowers, or other objects of our common experience, because they are well known or quite familiar. We can estimate the value of a beautifully shot landscape, because it is instantly compared with countless landscapes we have seen from the childhood.
But this don't apply usually in astro-images. These colorful nebulae, galaxies and clusters, are mostly unusual and peculiar. We can't see them "with real color" through a telescope. (In fact we loosely see them through any kind of astro-image). Even if most of us have already seen pictures in magazines or the TV, we rarely consider the sense of scale, neither what each feature of a DSO dramatically depicts. So this mind-travel mentioned above is incomplete.
|
|
|
|
05/20/2008 08:35:58 PM · #102 |
... and another key issues are also to take time looking at pictures and at a picture. The first will broaden your perspective and the second will increace your appreciation.
DPC is by far one of the most talented groups, but also one of the most 'short sighted'.
Peace to all.
|
|
|
|
05/20/2008 09:14:40 PM · #103 |
I like this shot but I would have trouble calling it art...
When I took this photo other people started snapping right behind me. Even though I was chewing on an Alligator Sausage with a full styrofoam bowl of Crawfish Etouffe...shooting one-handed, I guess they all realized this guy was very important and needed to be documented.
Let's assume those with the point-and-shooters or cell phone cameras, they took "snap shots" Now, just because my image is relatively well composed...does that make it art? I converted it to B&W, reasonably well (for arguments sake) by playing around with some sliders in Adobe Lightroom, for all of two minutes. Does that make it art? I suppose I do have, as Richard put it "a vision" that points me to these folks but I'm still not sure that that makes it art.
Searching...
Message edited by author 2008-05-20 21:28:30. |
|
|
|
05/20/2008 09:21:33 PM · #104 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
If the teacher and the student create the teaching, when does the artist and the subject matter create the artistry... |
Umm, I answered this already! Now I'm going to have to hold you back a year. :P Long story shorter, the artistry happens when the artist applies his or her vision into the process. By vision I mean how we view and feel about the subject. We all view things differently. It is in that difference that makes art possible but only when we allow it into the process of creating. If I took a photo of say an oil tanker to sell as a stock image I wouldn't allow my personal feelings of that subject dictate how I photograph it. Instead I would photograph it in a way that would make it sell as much as possible. Now if I shot the oil tanker and allowed my personal feelings determine how I shoot it then I'd be on a path to creating art. You could say art is a self portrait. With each artwork you reveal more about yourself. Speaking of Ken Art, just look at all the ways he can communicate just by using woodies. :P
Originally posted by hihosilver:
or above all else when does our external validation for a highly internal process...actually matter? |
Well that's a whole other matter. I'll just say the only real validation you need is your own. After all haven't you seen what the masses typically "validate"?
|
|
|
|
05/20/2008 09:35:33 PM · #105 |
| I would agree that jlanoue is super cool. Helps out, always answers if you pm, and has the most super coolest fancified space photos ever. I can almost reach out and touch the aliens. |
|
|
|
05/20/2008 09:38:38 PM · #106 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I like this shot but I would have trouble calling it art...
When I took this photo other people started snapping right behind me. Let's assume those with point-and-shoots or cell phone cameras took "snap shots" Now, just because my image is relatively well composed...does that make it art? I converted it to B&W, reasonably well (for arguments sake) by playing around with some sliders in Adobe Lightroom, for all of two minutes. Does that make it art? I suppose I do have, as Richard put it "a vision" that points me to these folks but I'm still not sure that that makes it art.
Searching... |
Why are you drawn to these subjects? It seems to me you're searching for something. Oh and sorry about the demise of your crawfish etouffe and alligator sausage plate.
|
|
|
|
05/20/2008 09:48:11 PM · #107 |
Originally posted by Jason_Cross:
I would agree that jlanoue is super cool. Helps out, always answers if you pm, and has the most super coolest fancified space photos ever. I can almost reach out and touch the aliens. |
Ok, I have to say this is pretty cool and of course a few numbnuts gave it low votes.
Message edited by author 2008-05-20 21:49:32.
|
|
|
|
05/20/2008 09:49:45 PM · #108 |
Looks like Art to me...no wait he looks like this... |
|
|
|
05/20/2008 09:50:54 PM · #109 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by Jason_Cross:
I would agree that jlanoue is super cool. Helps out, always answers if you pm, and has the most super coolest fancified space photos ever. I can almost reach out and touch the aliens. |
Ok, I have to say this is pretty cool and of course a few numbnuts gave it low votes. |
Who would give that a 1. Seriously that is stupid. Just being able to find that deserves a 10 in my book. |
|
|
|
05/20/2008 10:33:07 PM · #110 |
Originally posted by Jason_Cross:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by Jason_Cross:
I would agree that jlanoue is super cool. Helps out, always answers if you pm, and has the most super coolest fancified space photos ever. I can almost reach out and touch the aliens. |
Ok, I have to say this is pretty cool and of course a few numbnuts gave it low votes. |
Who would give that a 1. Seriously that is stupid. Just being able to find that deserves a 10 in my book. |
Any "numbnuts" who has a preconceived notion of the purpose of the challenge, whereby only images that show "stop motion" in the classic, photographic sense meet the challenge in his eyes. I mean, face it: the angular momentum of the comet is significantly less than that of a bird flying past, say, and if I entered an ordinary "bird flying" shot I wouldn't expect a good score at all, just on grounds of "sorta-DNMC".
Not that I subscribe to that attitude with the comet shot, which is beautifully executed and a defiantly in-your-face take on the challenge topic, but I can understand someone thinking it's kind of a shoehorn too...
R.
Message edited by author 2008-05-20 23:02:10. |
|
|
|
05/21/2008 12:26:18 AM · #111 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Umm, I answered this already! Now I'm going to have to hold you back a year. :P |
A whole year?!! Well, by then you just might make it as a manager at McD's...and you would be in fine company...
Oprah's Lawyer - Surprise Surprise!
Originally posted by yanko:
If I took a photo of say an oil tanker to sell as a stock image I wouldn't allow my personal feelings of that subject dictate how I photograph it. Instead I would photograph it in a way that would make it sell as much as possible. |
Well, here's a thought...you automatically assume that the photo will make more money if you separate your feelings from it...but the possibility exists that the emotional value of an oil tanker doing something dramatic like exploding may have more monetary appeal than a bland stock photo...no?
Originally posted by yanko:
Speaking of Ken Art, just look at all the ways he can communicate just by using woodies. :P |
Gosh...I'm in polite company so I really don't think it's appropriate for me to comment on what Ken communicates with his...::polite embarrassed cough::...Woodie! |
|
|
|
05/21/2008 11:47:37 AM · #112 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I like this shot but I would have trouble calling it art...
When I took this photo other people started snapping right behind me. Let's assume those with point-and-shoots or cell phone cameras took "snap shots" Now, just because my image is relatively well composed...does that make it art? I converted it to B&W, reasonably well (for arguments sake) by playing around with some sliders in Adobe Lightroom, for all of two minutes. Does that make it art? I suppose I do have, as Richard put it "a vision" that points me to these folks but I'm still not sure that that makes it art.
Searching... |
Why are you drawn to these subjects? It seems to me you're searching for something. Oh and sorry about the demise of your crawfish etouffe and alligator sausage plate. |
I know this is off topic but I'm always looking for old New York souls...or their ghosts(I believe in ghosts). They're splitting town slowly but I can still see and feel them. The city is being completely white-washed beyond recognition. Buildings and entire blocks are being knocked down at a stunningly fast rate. Times Square now resembles Las Vegas. The music and art community are being pushed out and soul of the city is eroding at a rapid pace. We're not dead yet and I'm holding on for dear life.
The Crawfish dumping was a tragedy.
Message edited by author 2008-05-21 16:24:15. |
|
|
|
05/21/2008 12:06:17 PM · #113 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by yanko:
Oh and sorry about the demise of your crawfish etouffe and alligator sausage plate. |
The Crawfish dumping was a tragedy. |
It's true. I ran into Steve (pawdrix) shortly after the incident happened. He looked stricken. :-)
EDIT: ... and at those prices, I'd have felt the same way.
Message edited by author 2008-05-21 14:13:43. |
|
|
|
05/21/2008 03:19:40 PM · #114 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
Originally posted by yanko:
If I took a photo of say an oil tanker to sell as a stock image I wouldn't allow my personal feelings of that subject dictate how I photograph it. Instead I would photograph it in a way that would make it sell as much as possible. |
Well, here's a thought...you automatically assume that the photo will make more money if you separate your feelings from it...but the possibility exists that the emotional value of an oil tanker doing something dramatic like exploding may have more monetary appeal than a bland stock photo...no? |
No I don't automatically assume that. I said if I was shooting stock I would shoot based on what the market dictates. What sells the most. If it so happens what sells the most is how I feel about the subject matter then guess what? I'll be shooting that.
There seems to be an underlining assumption that bland photos are stock and emotional photos is art. I disagree with that. Stock is more than bland and art is more than emotion. Stock can have emotion and art can be bland. Neither describes what stock or art is. The difference is in the purpose.
Message edited by author 2008-05-21 15:33:36.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2008 03:31:23 PM · #115 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I like this shot but I would have trouble calling it art...
When I took this photo other people started snapping right behind me. Let's assume those with point-and-shoots or cell phone cameras took "snap shots" Now, just because my image is relatively well composed...does that make it art? I converted it to B&W, reasonably well (for arguments sake) by playing around with some sliders in Adobe Lightroom, for all of two minutes. Does that make it art? I suppose I do have, as Richard put it "a vision" that points me to these folks but I'm still not sure that that makes it art.
Searching... |
Why are you drawn to these subjects? It seems to me you're searching for something. Oh and sorry about the demise of your crawfish etouffe and alligator sausage plate. |
I know this is off topic but I'm always looking for old New York souls...or their ghosts(I believe in ghosts). They're splitting town slowly but I can still see and feel them. The city is being completely white-washed beyond recognition. Buildings and entire blocks are being knowked down at a stunningly fast rate. Times Square now resembles Las Vegas. The music and art community are being pushed out and soul of the city is eroding at a rapid pace. We're not dead yet and I'm holding on for dear life.
The Crawfish dumping was a tragedy. |
That seems like a noble cause and one highly rooted in art, IMO. There's an aspect to NYC that you feel is being lost and you feel deeply about it and wish to share those feelings to the world through your pictures. That's what art is, IMO. Now technically you may not be creating something new in the physical sense like a sculptor might or if you want to get religious, like a god might, but you're still creating something inheritly unique. That uniqueness is in you. You own the copyright of your feelings and you're laying them out onto a canvas just like a painter would with his brush. The only difference is in the instruments. You and the painter, the sculptor, etc, share the same purpose and that's to capture what you see in your heart and mind and not with your eyes. That's art.
Message edited by author 2008-05-21 15:33:09.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2008 04:37:36 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by yanko:
That seems like a noble cause and one highly rooted in art, IMO. There's an aspect to NYC that you feel is being lost and you feel deeply about it and wish to share those feelings to the world through your pictures. That's what art is, IMO. Now technically you may not be creating something new in the physical sense like a sculptor might or if you want to get religious, like a god might, but you're still creating something inheritly unique. That uniqueness is in you. You own the copyright of your feelings and you're laying them out onto a canvas just like a painter would with his brush. The only difference is in the instruments. You and the painter, the sculptor, etc, share the same purpose and that's to capture what you see in your heart and mind and not with your eyes. That's art. |
Since today's Wednesday...I'll call it art but I can't promise how I'll feel about it tomorrow.
I just looked at my entire portfolio and noticed there are only 3 maybe 4 images of contemporary/modern subjects. I really am grabbing for the past. |
|
|
|
05/21/2008 04:48:08 PM · #117 |
Very interesting. THanks for the info.
Another category of photo that is not a high scorer is politics and photo journalism.
I mean, who wouldn't love to shoot (photos of) people like this as their job?:
|
|
|
|
05/21/2008 04:50:11 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by yanko:
There seems to be an underlining assumption that bland photos are stock and emotional photos is art. I disagree with that. Stock is more than bland and art is more than emotion. Stock can have emotion and art can be bland. Neither describes what stock or art is. The difference is in the purpose. |
Ahhh how foolish of me to comment on the aspects of photography of those often far wiser and more astute than myself.
::Daintily removes toe from hot water::
I confess that I am not an artist, but rather a daughter of two artists so my perspective is rather from a witness to art far more than as a participant.
However, I would add that if all the artists who were truly qualified to define exactly what constitutes purposeful Art in Photography or Art in general for that matter...spent all of their time defining what art is or is not...how much time would they have left over to actually create any true art themselves?
You speak of purposeful art, yet does not the possibility exist of "happy accidents" where art just happens through the artist as well...I can't help but wonder whether or not a true artist is as much a purposeful one or rather one who is fullfilling his purpose and then allowing other people to find the purpose in it.
As an artist, you know who you are, but not all of us carry the weight of your confidence. Tell me, ...is Art a purposeful destination or rather...a journey of discovery perhaps even hidden in the stars?
Fortunately, DPC allows us all to share both our discoveries and our destinations, so here, Richard, let me share one of my french fries with you...;-þ
~M |
|
|
|
05/21/2008 05:54:17 PM · #119 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
Originally posted by yanko:
There seems to be an underlining assumption that bland photos are stock and emotional photos is art. I disagree with that. Stock is more than bland and art is more than emotion. Stock can have emotion and art can be bland. Neither describes what stock or art is. The difference is in the purpose. |
Ahhh how foolish of me to comment on the aspects of photography of those often far wiser and more astute than myself.
::Daintily removes toe from hot water::
I confess that I am not an artist, but rather a daughter of two artists so my perspective is rather from a witness to art far more than as a participant.
However, I would add that if all the artists who were truly qualified to define exactly what constitutes purposeful Art in Photography or Art in general for that matter...spent all of their time defining what art is or is not...how much time would they have left over to actually create any true art themselves?
You speak of purposeful art, yet does not the possibility exist of "happy accidents" where art just happens through the artist as well...I can't help but wonder whether or not a true artist is as much a purposeful one or rather one who is fullfilling his purpose and then allowing other people to find the purpose in it.
As an artist, you know who you are, but not all of us carry the weight of your confidence. Tell me, ...is Art a purposeful destination or rather...a journey of discovery perhaps even hidden in the stars?
Fortunately, DPC allows us all to share both our discoveries and our destinations, so here, Richard, let me share one of my french fries with you...;-þ
~M |
Keep in mind as to how this thread has progressed. It started out with a claim that jlanoue's work doesn't get any credit at DPC, which btw I disagree with but that's a different story. Anyway, I chimed in saying that maybe it's because astrophotography in general is somewhat limited in it's appeal. For me, if I was grading them based on technical and artistic merit in a challenge, those images would get high marks in the first category and low marks in the latter. I then tried to explain why over and over since people continue to ask why.
By no means do I believe I own the truth in this matter, far from it. I am only explaining to you my rationale, my definition of what art is, which btw is just my working definition, subject to change much like everything else. What's ironic in all of this is once you get passed the part about astrophotography I'm basically painting with a very broad stroke as to what art can be so to steal Erik's line I'm very liberal when it comes to art. :)
In regards to your "happy accidents", I'll acknowledge that art is broader than what I've described so far but to keep this confusion down to a minimum I've tried to focus on just its basic essence to explain my view on art. To expand I'll just say that I don't necessarily believe in happy accidents as you worded it. The subconscious mind can drive art just as much if not more than the conscious, IMO. If you look back I've not once said who or what can create art only the way in which it can come about. When I look at things I consider to be art and what others in general consider as art such as a Monet painting or a Baryshnikov dance performance, I find that all these things have something in common and that commonality is what I've been trying to explain, abeit poorly.
Again, just my little opinion. :)
Message edited by author 2008-05-21 18:38:39.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2008 06:47:43 PM · #120 |
Originally posted by metatate:
Very interesting. THanks for the info.
Another category of photo that is not a high scorer is politics and photo journalism.
I mean, who wouldn't love to shoot (photos of) people like this as their job?:
|
That photo reminds me of election day 2000. My gf and I waited all night long in the pouring rain at the capitol building in Austin waiting for a speech that never came. I wasn't into photography back then but my gf was and she got some good shots of the chaos.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2008 07:00:34 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by yanko:
...
Keep in mind as to how this thread has progressed. It started out with a claim that jlanoue's work doesn't get any credit at DPC, which btw I disagree with but that's a different story. ... |
Thank you for remembering there was an original discussion topic.
Your incorrect as to what it is, but I give you credit for recalling there was one. jlanoue's work is an illustration of the topic, not the topic.
(Hint: Re-read the last two paragraphs of the original posting)
Message edited by author 2008-05-21 19:20:36.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2008 08:02:06 PM · #122 |
Richard, your words ARE simmering in brain and I do have some additional thoughts to share but I will rest in the stillness of my own thoughts.
Steve...carry on in chasing your windmill...and my apologies for hijacking your thread!
-M
Message edited by author 2008-05-21 20:24:41. |
|
|
|
05/21/2008 08:29:34 PM · #123 |
Originally posted by Artifacts:
Originally posted by yanko:
...
Keep in mind as to how this thread has progressed. It started out with a claim that jlanoue's work doesn't get any credit at DPC, which btw I disagree with but that's a different story. ... |
Thank you for remembering there was an original discussion topic.
Your incorrect as to what it is, but I give you credit for recalling there was one. jlanoue's work is an illustration of the topic, not the topic.
(Hint: Re-read the last two paragraphs of the original posting) |
So you didn't start out by claiming jlanoue's work doesn't receive credit? Maybe I misinterpreted the title of the thread and the nine paragraphs in your openning post before the two you mentioned. That's what I was referring to when I said "It started...".
ETA: By all means if you would like to get this back to where you wanted it to go then I have no problems if an SC deletes all the posts I made. My first post I feel was on-topic and then everything there after was in response to someone else questioning what I said originally so I tried to explain. I personally don't like it when I ask a question to someone and they ignore it. Next time I'll just PM my response and not post in the thread or not post at all since I kind of got the sense from your original post that you was just making a statement (i.e. respect astrophotography) and not really interested in a discussion about the issue you raised. Am I wrong on that?
Message edited by author 2008-05-21 20:36:33.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2008 08:48:32 PM · #124 |
I don't think we are off topic. I think we are discussing the finer points of the topic and looking to understand the way DPC views technical artist's such as  jlanoue or Pascal. I believe it takes a deeper dialogue for a topic that is far from black & white. (Pun intended :-P)
Message edited by author 2008-05-21 20:55:17. |
|
|
|
05/21/2008 08:58:56 PM · #125 |
Actually, I did mention the Diamondbacks in a negative light and is completely off topic. I suppose that didn't help. :P
Message edited by author 2008-05-21 21:00:14.
|
|
