Post by: Ivo_B on May 28, 2018, 01:08:26 pm
Here is my first:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/656/20446614858_f77eb3da34_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/x9Nffo)Lier (https://flic.kr/p/x9Nffo) by Ivo Bogaerts (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ivophoto/), on Flickr
Post by: JNB_Rare on May 28, 2018, 01:17:36 pm
Let's try to have a series of contemporary pictures in a row.
Will you define? Will you curate?
Post by: Ivo_B on May 28, 2018, 01:24:19 pm
Will you define? Will you curate?
AB-SO-LU-TE-LY not.
;D
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on May 28, 2018, 01:29:28 pm
I can not deny that it did make me think a bit differently about my own work and for that I’m grateful.
I think you are quite brave to post it here
Post by: Ivo_B on May 28, 2018, 01:49:29 pm
I can not deny that it did make me think a bit differently about my own work and for that I’m grateful.
Exactly what it did with me. Few years ago I was in Art academy and helpless lost in the clew of my photographic contraptions. The lector asked my to trow away everything I had produced so far. After being sick for a few days, only thinking of it, I decided to do what he said.
I deleted a massive number of pictures and photoshop attempts, only kept the pictures of my kids and family. He suggested to restart from ground, and I did. The best thing I ever did (talking about photography...) A totally new world opened.....
Post by: Telecaster on May 28, 2018, 01:49:54 pm
Edit: plus another take on the same pic (11 June 2018).
-Dave-
Post by: Rob C on May 28, 2018, 01:59:36 pm
I will chip in. I can totally get why the New Topgraphic movement occurred which I take this to be a fine example of. My concern with it is it became as formulaic as a lot of the stuff it was kicking against.
I can not deny that it did make me think a bit differently about my own work and for that I’m grateful.
I think you are quite brave to post it here
Brave to suggest such a theme. It could be argued that everything new, as in made this week, month or year is contemporary which, of itself, gets us nowhere.
Unfortunately, it opens the lid to that naughty Pandora's prized possession: her box (no puns etc. and if you buy that you'll buy anything) of definitions which, as you know, can get you killed.
:-)
Post by: Telecaster on May 28, 2018, 02:11:25 pm
-Dave-
Post by: Ivo_B on May 28, 2018, 02:14:37 pm
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3926/14602538890_4df1cf14ef_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/ofnQ4U)Walking (https://flic.kr/p/ofnQ4U) by Ivo Bogaerts (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ivophoto/), on Flickr
Post by: farbschlurf on May 28, 2018, 02:56:55 pm
((Some years ago, a museum in Berlin, called "old" museum (Altes Museum) set up a big neon sign on top of the roof that was: "All art has been contemporary". I found that quite good.))
A more recent picture. I'd probably rather call it "privacy".
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/843/41554189501_3da1ccbd1c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26j15P8) funfair (https://flic.kr/p/26j15P8) by Stefan Berndt (https://www.flickr.com/photos/fototypo/), auf Flickr
Post by: Rob C on May 28, 2018, 03:09:36 pm
:-)
Post by: Ivo_B on May 28, 2018, 03:13:31 pm
"All art has been contemporary". I found that quite good.))
Yep. :-)
Post by: RSL on May 28, 2018, 03:18:10 pm
Post by: Ivo_B on May 28, 2018, 03:26:59 pm
Post by: Farmer on May 28, 2018, 04:09:12 pm
Great. But my question is: why is this on Street Showcase instead of on Landscape Showcase where it belongs?
Because he wanted you to see it, and you're not playing in the Street sandbox anymore?
Post by: RSL on May 28, 2018, 04:28:46 pm
Post by: Farmer on May 28, 2018, 07:41:19 pm
I'm not posting photographs in it. And what I see here is closer to landscape than to street.
I know, I'm just being annoying whilst making a small point. And, I agree.
Post by: RSL on May 28, 2018, 07:47:39 pm
Post by: Farmer on May 28, 2018, 10:12:24 pm
It's okay, Phil. I do that often.
Those here who don't are few in numbers, whether they know it or not :-)
Post by: Ivophoto on May 29, 2018, 04:52:48 am
Here's one.
-Dave-
Could be a Hopper scene. I like it.
Post by: Ivophoto on May 29, 2018, 04:54:45 am
VERY good idea.A two star fair. Nice shot
((Some years ago, a museum in Berlin, called "old" museum (Altes Museum) set up a big neon sign on top of the roof that was: "All art has been contemporary". I found that quite good.))
A more recent picture. I'd probably rather call it "privacy".
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/843/41554189501_3da1ccbd1c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26j15P8) funfair (https://flic.kr/p/26j15P8) by Stefan Berndt (https://www.flickr.com/photos/fototypo/), auf Flickr
Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk
Post by: OmerV on May 29, 2018, 06:26:04 am
Great. But my question is: why is this on Street Showcase instead of on Landscape Showcase where it belongs?
Well, “contemporary” is a euphemism for what is currently considered fine art photography. And what Ivo_B has posted would fit in at Lenscatch.com, a showcase for “contemporary” work.
I don’t oppose it and in fact like what Ivo has shown us. But if it is going to be compartmentalized, a new category under The Art of Photography should be considered. How ‘bout, On the Shoulders of William Eggleston?
Post by: Rob C on May 29, 2018, 10:29:06 am
Well, “contemporary” is a euphemism for what is currently considered fine art photography. And what Ivo_B has posted would fit in at Lenscatch.com, a showcase for “contemporary” work.
I don’t oppose it and in fact like what Ivo has shown us. But if it is going to be compartmentalized, a new category under The Art of Photography should be considered. How ‘bout, On the Shoulders of William Eggleston?
Yeah, the man the galleries and some newer magazines and curators think was the founding father of the "color vernacular" which had been explored and exploited decades earlier by pros such as Leiter and Haas.
And therin the problem: when young people get their information from the Internet and contemporary photo magazines, they get to read the acquired knowledge of a younger generation of editors, themselves either insufficently schooled of the past, or with a very real agenda to market what's still available today and from which they can derive income.
Post by: OmerV on May 29, 2018, 11:09:06 am
Yeah, the man the galleries and some newer magazines and curators think was the founding father of the "color vernacular" which had been explored and exploited decades earlier by pros such as Leiter and Haas.
And therin the problem: when young people get their information from the Internet and contemporary photo magazines, they get to read the acquired knowledge of a younger generation of editors, themselves either insufficently schooled of the past, or with a very real agenda to market what's still available today and from which they can derive income.
The only thing Leiter, Haas, and Eggleston share is the use of color. Do you see something of Leiter or Haas in Ivo’s pictures(please don’t say color?)
While Eggleston is noted for using color, I think his rise is owed as much to Frank, Winogrand, Friedlander, and rest. They all used short lenses, while Leiter seemed to prefer a longer view, setting him apart, maybe.
I do think Leiter is still relevant, but Haas less so. Another question; Do you think Pete Turner was influenced by Leiter?
Post by: Ivo_B on May 29, 2018, 01:38:20 pm
or with a very real agenda to market what's still available today and from which they can derive income.
So true.
Am I correct to say this is what happened with the post mortem success of Vivian Maier?
Post by: Ivo_B on May 29, 2018, 01:46:57 pm
The only thing Leiter, Haas, and Eggleston share is the use of color. Do you see something of Leiter or Haas in Ivo’s pictures(please don’t say color?)
I cannot deny Eggleston hugely inspired me. For a very short while, Leiter as well, but I caught myself in poor attempts to imitate Leiters Kodachrome color palette, after realizing this, I lost interest in Leiters (fantastic) work.
I didn't know Ernst Haas, thanks to bring him to my attention.
I someone familiar with the work of Harry Gruyaert?
Post by: Ivo_B on May 29, 2018, 01:48:38 pm
Post by: Rob C on May 29, 2018, 03:20:39 pm
1. The only thing Leiter, Haas, and Eggleston share is the use of color. Do you see something of Leiter or Haas in Ivo’s pictures(please don’t say color?)
While Eggleston is noted for using color, I think his rise is owed as much to Frank, Winogrand, Friedlander, and rest. They all used short lenses, while Leiter seemed to prefer a longer view, setting him apart, maybe.
I do think Leiter is still relevant, but Haas less so. Another question; 2. Do you think Pete Turner was influenced by Leiter?
1. Really? I was referring, initially, to the manner in which gallerists decided (possibly even believed, bless their souls) that Eggleston was the first guy to use colour in photographing the human habitat and the human mess. Far from the reality.
Like Leiter, Haas shot a lot of street art, too, but as I have mentioned elsewhere when commenting on his book Color Correction, his work strikes me as a lot more clinical, in the sense of things often being very sharp, whereas Leiter's work is not like that at all. That said, some of Haas's shots remind me of Frank: shots in car mirrors, for example, but colour in the case of Haas...
2. To an extent, I think that all people working in the same general time slot will influence one another, though I do not mean in the sense of actively copying. You can't, really, because your circumstances will be different, as will your own, native predilections. That said, I believe that where you see something specially attractive in another's work, that does get injected into your own sense of what works, and what does not; stored within your own taste bank, as it were?
I think Turner was a very different animal, given to a far stronger graphic "look" with strong, saturated colours rather than Leiter's reasonably muted ones. I don't know about Turner, but don't forget that Leiter did a lot of black/white work too, and that also affects the way you see. Turner was apparently no slouch at darkroom magic, and knew how to copy transparencies, double expose them, sandwich etc. and I'm pretty sure the polarizer filter was no stranger to him. Leiter doesn't strike me as technical wizard at all; he strikes me more as a slightly reluctant photographer (much like HC-B ?) who got more pleasure from paint and pencil.
People seem to rivet Leiter to the Kodachrome mast. I'm not at all that certain. From what I've been able to pick up, Leiter was generally pretty broke, and his "personal" work was often made on out-of-date stock, whatever he could find that was cheap. I don't believe he was limited to Kodachrome or even able to major on it. He even said that he quite enjoyed the slightly unpredicatable nature of old stock...
Post by: Rob C on May 29, 2018, 03:40:18 pm
I cannot deny Eggleston hugely inspired me. For a very short while, Leiter as well, but I caught myself in poor attempts to imitate Leiters Kodachrome color palette, after realizing this, I lost interest in Leiters (fantastic) work.
I didn't know Ernst Haas, thanks to bring him to my attention.
I someone familiar with the work of Harry Gruyaert?
As mentioned a minute or two ago, I wouldn't bet the ranch on the Kodachrome thing. Often on the verge of broke, Leiter bought out-of-date film and enjoyed the unexpected results. Also, Kodachrome did not exist in a vacuum; it had competition. Who knows what he picked up at the corner drug strore?
Copying those accidental colours is gonna be a hard thing to do unless you like to degrade your digital files quite a lot.
Also, from what I see in your b/w shots posted here, you like crisp. I don't think Leiter gave a damn, unless it was for the magazines, and even there he used a lot of oof areas and mirrors etc. Perhaps, like me, he felt women look better as a bit ethereal... we think of them as in a dream, so why not make them a part of the fantasy in photographs? That's my no.1 beef with a lot of modern fashion and beauty: far too cruel, and because of that, far too much makeup to hide the reality you'd otherwise see. I remember reading that Norman Parkinson turned down a new free lens from Hasselblad because he preferred the old silver one he had because of its gentle touch.
Post by: OmerV on May 29, 2018, 05:06:15 pm
1. Really? I was referring, initially, to the manner in which gallerists decided (possibly even believed, bless their souls) that Eggleston was the first guy to use colour in photographing the human habitat and the human mess. Far from the reality.
Like Leiter, Haas shot a lot of street art, too, but as I have mentioned elsewhere when commenting on his book Color Correction, his work strikes me as a lot more clinical, in the sense of things often being very sharp, whereas Leiter's work is not like that at all. That said, some of Haas's shots remind me of Frank: shots in car mirrors, for example, but colour in the case of Haas...
I’d forgotten about Haas’ urban work. Thanks for the reminder.
Post by: JNB_Rare on May 29, 2018, 10:35:36 pm
I’d forgotten about Haas’ urban work. Thanks for the reminder.
I remember seeing Haas' motion-blur bullfight images when I was a teenager, and thinking "WOW!"
Post by: Telecaster on May 30, 2018, 12:56:11 am
-Dave-
Post by: KLaban on May 30, 2018, 01:15:07 am
Fewer categories, more photos. IMO.
-Dave-
Yes
I'd add, less talk more photos.
Post by: Rob C on May 30, 2018, 04:41:48 am
I remember seeing Haas' motion-blur bullfight images when I was a teenager, and thinking "WOW!"
I remember posting a reply to one of Founder Michael's images telling him just how Haas-like one of his "slow" pictures was... miss the guy's pictorial input. Unless my memory is worse than I think, he didn't really write that much within the threads of LuLa, but did do a heap of interesting editorial writing.
Rob
Post by: Rob C on May 30, 2018, 05:12:04 am
Yes
I'd add, less talk more photos.
With less talk there's be less interest in participation. Life here would consist of + or, when enthusiastic, of +2.
The Internet is full of pictures; unless there is an interest in discovering how others think about photography, then why would I use LuLa at all? I have almost zero interest in equipment reviews, and an absolute zero minus in shared "doing photography" experiences in the flesh, as it were. Hanging around with somebody else hanging around and wearing a camera would embarrass the ass off me. As my tightend belt already has almost no effect in keeping my jeans near my nominal waist, other than hurt, further loss of avoirdupois would get me arrested.
If it's just to look at snaps, then I already have a massive list of good photographer sites entered in my computer, and could spend my entire waking life looking at them. There are times when I feel that might be the better choice, but I keep hangin' on in there, hoping for something I don't quite know what.
Rob
Post by: Ivophoto on May 30, 2018, 06:00:01 am
With less talk there's be less interest in participation. Life here would consist of + or, when enthusiastic, of +2.
The Internet is full of pictures; unless there is an interest in discovering how others think about photography, then why would I use LuLa at all? I have almost zero interest in equipment reviews, and an absolute zero minus in shared "doing photography" experiences in the flesh, as it were. Hanging around with somebody else hanging around and wearing a camera would embarrass the ass off me. As my tightend belt already has almost no effect in keeping my jeans near my nominal waist, other than hurt, further loss of avoirdupois would get me arrested.
If it's just to look at snaps, then I already have a massive list of good photographer sites entered in my computer, and could spend my entire waking life looking at them. There are times when I feel that might be the better choice, but I keep hangin' on in there, hoping for something I don't quite know what.
Rob
I tend to agree with you.
On the other hand
unless there is an interest in discovering how others think about photography, then why would I use LuLa at all?
I have the impression that another way of thinking about photography is put equal to be an photographic fool be certain fix furniture members here.
Post by: 32BT on May 30, 2018, 06:02:01 am
With less talk there's be less interest in participation. Life here would consist of + or, when enthusiastic, of +2.
The Internet is full of pictures; unless there is an interest in discovering how others think about photography, then why would I use LuLa at all? I have almost zero interest in equipment reviews, and an absolute zero minus in shared "doing photography" experiences in the flesh, as it were. Hanging around with somebody else hanging around and wearing a camera would embarrass the ass off me. As my tightend belt already has almost no effect in keeping my jeans near my nominal waist, other than hurt, further loss of avoirdupois would get me arrested.
If it's just to look at snaps, then I already have a massive list of good photographer sites entered in my computer, and could spend my entire waking life looking at them. There are times when I feel that might be the better choice, but I keep hangin' on in there, hoping for something I don't quite know what.
Rob
Yeah, but talking about photography without the corresponding pictures is like talking about sex without... wel, you get the picture.
Having your jeans half way up your knees is hip, very hip, though you do need to wear the latest branded undies, and it is difficult sometimes to keep up with the latest trendy marks. So, yeah, you might have an embarrasing situation in your undies there. Which brings us right back to the "talking about" part, i suppose.
Post by: KLaban on May 30, 2018, 06:50:40 am
With less talk there's be less interest in participation. Life here would consist of + or, when enthusiastic, of +2.
The Internet is full of pictures; unless there is an interest in discovering how others think about photography, then why would I use LuLa at all? I have almost zero interest in equipment reviews, and an absolute zero minus in shared "doing photography" experiences in the flesh, as it were. Hanging around with somebody else hanging around and wearing a camera would embarrass the ass off me. As my tightend belt already has almost no effect in keeping my jeans near my nominal waist, other than hurt, further loss of avoirdupois would get me arrested.
If it's just to look at snaps, then I already have a massive list of good photographer sites entered in my computer, and could spend my entire waking life looking at them. There are times when I feel that might be the better choice, but I keep hangin' on in there, hoping for something I don't quite know what.
Rob
But far more time for, well, you know, getting the hell out there and making the damn things.
Post by: KLaban on May 30, 2018, 06:54:52 am
Yeah, but talking about photography without the corresponding pictures is like talking about sex without... wel, you get the picture.
Having your jeans half way up your knees is hip, very hip, though you do need to wear the latest branded undies, and it is difficult sometimes to keep up with the latest trendy marks. So, yeah, you might have an embarrasing situation in your undies there. Which brings us right back to the "talking about" part, i suppose.
Or photographing sexy women without...well, I guess you get the picture...if nothing else.
;-)
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 30, 2018, 07:02:27 am
Well, “contemporary” is a euphemism for what is currently considered fine art photography...
And here I thought it is a euphemism for “what the hell am I looking at!?” ;)
Post by: JNB_Rare on May 30, 2018, 08:43:33 am
Post by: OmerV on May 30, 2018, 08:48:31 am
And here I thought it is a euphemism for “what the hell am I looking at!?” ;)
Yep, and that is why we really do need the “art speak” espousing of curators, gallery managers, and MFA graduates. Don’t throw the baby out with water. 8)
Post by: Rob C on May 30, 2018, 08:53:47 am
Contemporary? Contemplative? Street Art? Trash? Considering that yellow "guard", perhaps it's Post Contemporary. ;) Anyway, I take pictures of things that catch my attention, however banal they may seem to many.
The detail made me think of this:
Post by: Ivophoto on May 30, 2018, 09:39:44 am
Contemporary? Contemplative? Street Art? Trash? Considering that yellow "guard", perhaps it's Post Contemporary. ;) Anyway, I take pictures of things that catch my attention, however banal they may seem to many.
I like this one.
Post by: Ivo_B on May 30, 2018, 12:11:52 pm
Post by: RSL on May 30, 2018, 12:13:44 pm
Post by: OmerV on May 30, 2018, 01:15:38 pm
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5240/14029660727_454b8d4acc_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/nnKFmc)Blankenberge (https://flic.kr/p/nnKFmc) by Ivo Bogaerts (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ivophoto/), on Flickr
Funny. The Buddha statue in the background adds the humor. Nice.
Post by: Ivophoto on May 30, 2018, 01:46:13 pm
Funny. The Buddha statue in the background adds the humor. Nice.
Tx Omer
Post by: JNB_Rare on May 30, 2018, 03:29:51 pm
Post by: elliot_n on May 30, 2018, 03:48:30 pm
Post by: Ivo_B on June 02, 2018, 06:52:39 am
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5160/13904863727_4d7ab1fec0_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/nbJ4xM)Royal Greenhouse Belgium (https://flic.kr/p/nbJ4xM) by Ivo Bogaerts (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ivophoto/), on Flickr
Post by: OmerV on June 02, 2018, 08:32:28 am
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/901/41778360154_5a3534df38_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26DP1Wo)Ramada (https://flic.kr/p/26DP1Wo) by Omer Claiborne (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146601120@N02/), on Flickr
Post by: Telecaster on June 12, 2018, 12:11:58 am
-Dave-