Mike Johnston has written an amazingly funny entry on how great photographers might have been met when they would have shared their images in areas like the whipping post. A must read.
Very funny!nd something i think about everytime I post in Whipping Post, or elsewhere for that matter.
I think the obvious difference is that the masters show they've mastered their technique, can reproduce their "look" at will, and have arrived at their "look" by developing their aesthetic.
Whereas most of us are happy to get the exposure right.
Very funny!nd something i think about everytime I post in Whipping Post, or elsewhere for that matter.
I think the obvious difference is that the masters show they've mastered their technique, can reproduce their "look" at will, and have arrived at their "look" by developing their aesthetic.
Whereas most of us are happy to get the exposure right.
Funny you say that, Sid. It's part of what Mike describes in his follow up. If you *knew* you looked at the work of an accomplished photographer, would you assume that whatever you find wrong in a picture was wrong deliberately? From another post on the Online Photographer: a nice example is by this photo on Flickr, which was voted to be deleted by a Flickr group. It's a Cartier-Bresson image. Would people have voted different if they knew that? That he could change things if he wanted to, so that his choices were made to create the exact image you're seeing? Mike concludes that we shouldn't discuss "the image that could have been" (if only you stepped a few inches to the side; if only you did this or that), but "the image as is", which should either be a yes or no. I've fallen into the photographers club trap before, but this is something I'll try to keep in mind, since in essence I wholeheartedly agree.
I'll be the first to admit that a good many "classic" photos leave me cold. I put that down to my immature aesthetic sense.
As for feedback on my own shots, I feel I'm experienced enough to know what to dismiss and what to consider. As one of the posters says, some of the feedback has already been considered and dismissed by the shooter.
I'll be the first to admit that a good many "classic" photos leave me cold. I put that down to my immature aesthetic sense.
As for feedback on my own shots, I feel I'm experienced enough to know what to dismiss and what to consider. As one of the posters says, some of the feedback has already been considered and dismissed by the shooter.
"How many photographers does it take to screw in a light bulb"?
"Fifty. One to screw it in and forty nine to say that they would've done a much better job only if given an opportunity"
I suspect that every photographer (indeed every artist of every discipline) who pushed against the boundaries of the accepted norm met with criticism from the "experts."
It takes time (and talent) to win people over to vision. Art is the combination of vision, creativity, technique, faith, discipline, perserverance, originality... all sorts of qualities are need to make an artist and a piece of art.
I'm pretty sure it's not a single snap with some heavy-handed Photoshopping and a "How's this look?"
Comments
Fred
http://www.facebook.com/Riverbendphotos
Thanks for the link.
Cheers,
...and soo true..
www.edhughesphoto.com
Best laugh all week!
Susan Appel Photography My Blog
God forgive me!-
thanks marlof!-
I think the obvious difference is that the masters show they've mastered their technique, can reproduce their "look" at will, and have arrived at their "look" by developing their aesthetic.
Whereas most of us are happy to get the exposure right.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
hah!-
very funny, sid-
(but more right than funny)-
As for feedback on my own shots, I feel I'm experienced enough to know what to dismiss and what to consider. As one of the posters says, some of the feedback has already been considered and dismissed by the shooter.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
"How many photographers does it take to screw in a light bulb"?
"Fifty. One to screw it in and forty nine to say that they would've done a much better job only if given an opportunity"
Cheers!
makes me want to go back and make sure I've put "I think" before all my critique comments
... come along.
It takes time (and talent) to win people over to vision. Art is the combination of vision, creativity, technique, faith, discipline, perserverance, originality... all sorts of qualities are need to make an artist and a piece of art.
I'm pretty sure it's not a single snap with some heavy-handed Photoshopping and a "How's this look?"
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au