Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => But is it Art? => Topic started by: russell a on August 18, 2007, 06:41:57 pm

Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: russell a on August 18, 2007, 06:41:57 pm
I find nothing wrong with Alain's latest essay.  It provides a reasonable summary of a "creativity workshop" approach.  Much like, in fact, might be offered by the art schools about whom Alain takes a potshot (not without justification).  A lot of people can probably take away something useful from the article and it deserves its place in this forum.

I feel it should be said that the essay addresses what I will call "creativity" with a lower case "c".  I don't believe that an essay such as this would have been useful at all to the historic figures Alain cites - Edison, da Vinci, Weston, Benny Goodman**).

The true innovator, one who creates new genres and blazes new trails, as opposed to those who construct a variation within an established canon, operates on a different plane.  I will contend that the true innovator is driven by obsession and has little choice but to pursue an inner agenda.  This is not to say that this awards the true innovator a superior position in the scheme of things but it does result in a different output from what we might term the journeyman approach.  (Read Donald Kuspit's "The Psychoanalytic Construction of the Artist" in Redeeming Art: Critical Reveries)  Think of some of the most brilliant photographers of the last century - W. Eugene Smith, Diane Arbus, Gary Winogrand, Ralph Eugene Meatyard.  All arguably obsessive/compulsives of varying degree and benignity.  These innovators have little need to concern themselves with tricks and dodges, their obsessiveness carries them dashing into the waves rather than tentatively dipping their toe in the swash.  And, by the way, "we" like our innovators this way - it lets us off the hook, to wit "I could be an innovator too, but I don't want to be obsessive and self-destructive."

Sadly, the above discussion has more than a whiff of nostalgia.  Much of art today is motivated, not by vision and obsession (used here in an objective and not necessarily pejorative sense) but by market calculation.  (In the Kuspit cited above refer to the chapter "Art is Dead; Long live Aesthetic Management").  Andy Warhol is a prime example of this.  A couple other examples are Jeff Koons, who subcontracts the fabrication of all his work and, in photography, Vanessa Beecroft.

So, Alain's essay can be helpful in getting one's feet wet, but as an essay to guide you to be an innovator, it is:  1) not Alain's intent, I would expect, 2) impossible to construct, 3) not necessary.


** Benny Goodman?, let me give you a quote from another jazz musician, Rasaan Roland Kirk:  "If you want to learn to be free, spend all day in bed with me!" This is an alternative workshop approach.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: alainbriot on August 18, 2007, 07:58:19 pm
There are 2 more parts to this 4-essay series.

Part 1 is titled Finding inspiration and is available on this site.
Part 2 is the current essay: Exercising Creativity

Part 3 is titled Developing your Vision and is upcoming
Part 4 is the conclusion and is titled Achieving your Personal Style, it is also upcoming

The jest of the series will be complete when all 4 essays are available.

ALain
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Gordon Buck on August 18, 2007, 10:29:43 pm
I enjoyed reading Alain's essay on creativity -- as I've enjoyed and appreciated all his writings and photos.  "Envy" is perhaps the applicable word.

Creativity (notice that I've placed it as the first word and so have cleverly avoided any capitalization controversy) -- or the lack of it -- is a problem for me.  Lack of creativity is a plague upon my personal and professional life and not just on my photography.  I *know* that I need to be more creative; it is just difficult.

I can break the "rules" and I'm constantly telling others in our photo club to, at the very least, be different:  turn off the auto features and think ahead about how *you* want the final picture to look.  Our photo club has field trips; I see everyone standing close together, cameras on auto and firing away in some jpg mode.  I'm always preaching "Your photos will all look the same -- just the way some engineer designed them to look."  So I intentionally break the rules, shoot RAW from a different angle, different depth of field, blur, pan, etc.  I want my photos to be different from those of the others in the group.  But this is only pseudo creativity.

As I write this, I'm listening to Bob Dylan "singing" on the radio.  Now, that's creativity - especially in the early years.  Perhaps a "theme", "inspiration" or, even better, a "calling" combined with economic considerations is the real key to creativity.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: russell a on August 19, 2007, 12:13:02 am
Quote
I can break the "rules" and I'm constantly telling others in our photo club to, at the very least, be different:  turn off the auto features and think ahead about how *you* want the final picture to look.  Our photo club has field trips; I see everyone standing close together, cameras on auto and firing away in some jpg mode.  I'm always preaching "Your photos will all look the same -- just the way some engineer designed them to look."  So I intentionally break the rules, shoot RAW from a different angle, different depth of field, blur, pan, etc.  I want my photos to be different from those of the others in the group.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134060\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It sounds as if your heart is in the right place.  But, if you are interested in your photography above the socialization that your photo club offers, then you need to get away from them.  Why are you even near subject matter that "they" have defined for you?  Creativity is not an attribute of herds.  You need to go where your interests take you (which can be as near as your back yard - photography and globe hopping only works if you can spend as much time there as you could in your back yard) and take a jillion photos.  Look at them and begin to identify what speaks to you and what is deficient.  Go back and take them again, eliminating the deficiencies you identify and enhancing the positives.  Ask yourself what subject matter in your own environment means the most to you and work that angle.  Find a historic photographer whose work you admire and adopt that person as a mentor of sorts - study their work as if it were your own.  Shoot what they would shoot, but then, gradually identify what you are contributing that is unique.  

For example:  say that you identify that your family is the subject matter that means the most to you.  Look at photographers who have made art out of their family (per G. B. Shaw's play"Man and Superman" in which he alludes to the artist "turning Mother's milk into printer's ink.")  Photographers for study could include some of Harry Callahan's photos of his wife and daughter, Ralph Eugene Meatyard, who was The Master at this, Larry Fink, and, on a more acidic note, Richard Billingham.  A similar process of study could find mentors for other types of photography.  It is unlikely, by the way, that no mentors for your subject matter can be found.  Once you start pulling free of your mentor, then you are on your way.  Alain's recommendation to change your equipment could be useful.  Art Sinsabaugh was only able to shake Harry Callahan's influence when he began using a 12x20 "Banquet" view camera.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: DiaAzul on August 19, 2007, 05:39:13 am
Quote
The jest of the series will be complete when all 4 essays are available.

ALain
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Jest? As in joke? You making fun of us?
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 19, 2007, 06:32:28 am
Russell

A nicely written disseration, but sadly, you are also attempting the impossible when you advise a course of action in an effort to teach creativity. As with the musicians you cite - you either have it or you do not.

I would agree wholeheartedly with advice to abandon the society of the club - the inner conversation that creativity comes from cannot survive the external noise, the mooing of the herd, to use your expression. I used to take the family along when I was still working but they were abandoned to the café, the pool or wherever else they elected to be whilst I wandered off and earned the bread. It was the only way: the mind and the eye had to be totally selfish; there was no room for chat, or other distraction, however much one loved them.

Again, the creative moment is not always at your beck and call: you can wander off wherever the muse takes you but that does not mean that every time you go there it works! The same is even more true when your genre is people. On some days the relationship is bountiful whilst on others, with the same model even, not a lot of anything memorable happens.

This is all from the same mind, from the one which can make something from nothing, so to speak, but that is not a learned skill - it´s something with which one is born.

I understand very well that there are those who think otherwise; that there are those who will not accept the cruel fact that it´s a fluke of personality and so seek redemption at the feet of gurus, just as the gurus have always been available to service the need. And if this is mutually helpful, then that´s all that matters, really, but I hope nobody expects miracles. All one can teach is mechanics.

Ciao - Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: russell a on August 19, 2007, 09:39:21 am
Quote
Russell

A nicely written disseration, but sadly, you are also attempting the impossible when you advise a course of action in an effort to teach creativity. As with the musicians you cite - you either have it or you do not.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134093\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The alternative is to provide nothing.  Sometimes it's just a word of encouragement.  Argentinian Astor Piazzolla tells of his encounter with the great teacher Nadia Boulanger.  He had brought several of his compositions to her.  "That one's Debussy, that one's Bartok, this one is Stravinsky.  Where is Piazaolla?", she asked.  Reluctantly, he admitted that the music he played most were tangos, on a bandoneon... in bars.  "Play me one."  He did.  "Ah, that's Piazzolla" she said.  Piazzolla went on to be the creator and leading proponent of what became known as New Tango.  Even if you "have it" (and I question this model) "it" may not bloom without watering and a little nutrient.  In music in particular, while it is a great advantage in many ways to have marvelous equipment (perfect pitch, musical memory) many innovations have come from individuals who combined often incredible misunderstandings of how to proceed with a burning passion to succeed. The results of this were sometimes what someone for whom it was a much easier journey would not have produced.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: alainbriot on August 19, 2007, 12:44:06 pm
Quote
Jest? As in joke? You making fun of us?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134089\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The gest of the series, the general movement and direction. The overall point.  The complete idea developed over the 4 parts that it consists of.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: DiaAzul on August 19, 2007, 01:34:29 pm
Quote
The gest of the series, the general movement and direction. The overall point.  The complete idea developed over the 4 parts that it consists of.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134142\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


It's a classic case of the English getting an old French verb (Gésir) and completely messing up the meaning , though I suspect it has more to do with the 'gist' being the hidden meaning in the article, or the essence of the article.

Good article.  
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: alainbriot on August 19, 2007, 01:39:39 pm
Gist is the proper spelling.  I was trying to find it but couldn't put my finger on it. Thank you.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Gordon Buck on August 19, 2007, 02:23:43 pm
Although I've come to realize that camera clubs are looked on with disapproval by some, I disagree with the recommendation to avoid them.  There is so much to learn about photography:  techniques, equipment -- including Do-It-Yourself, printing, papers, framing, comparison of experiences, repairs, etc., etc.  Especially considering the demise of the local photography store, a camera club has much to offer.  

In fact, I'd say the same thing about any sort of club.  A member gets the opportunity to not only meet others with similar interests but to learn from them.  I think that a club is one of the very best ways to learn the details of a hobby or future profession.

At the same time, I understand the concern that a club membership might be restrictive with respect to creativity.  A cartoon (The Far Side, I think) comes to mind:  A penguin, surrounded by millions of identical penguins, is singing "I gotta be me!!!!!".

Another anecdote, this one about education:  A "fully mature" (as I now describe myself) college dropout explained his youthful decision "There was so much I wanted to learn, but they kept trying to teach me!".
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: russell a on August 19, 2007, 06:21:51 pm
Quote
Although I've come to realize that camera clubs are looked on with disapproval by some, I disagree with the recommendation to avoid them.  There is so much to learn about photography:  techniques, equipment -- including Do-It-Yourself, printing, papers, framing, comparison of experiences, repairs, etc., etc.  Especially considering the demise of the local photography store, a camera club has much to offer. 

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134160\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I happen to be the newly appointed president of a large (100+ member) camera club.  (Don't ask, it's a long story.)   I agree that there are many positive aspects.  Our membership is very diverse.  The club has its roots in nature photography, as is typical of a lot of clubs.  Over the past 3 years we have attracted a number of members whose interests also include urban landscape, street photography, etc.  As a result of this diversity and the essential nature of group dynamics, we do engage in some tribal warfare within the club.  There are both pluses and minuses.  

Some pluses are:  1) critiques, moderated sometimes by outsiders, sometimes by club members, where members may receive sufficiently diverse and ultimately ambiguous opinions to allow them to absorb what they are ready to absorb;  2) a diverse schedule of guest speakers - in particular we have expanded the set of speakers beyond the coterie of "workshop gypsies" who haunt clubs to promote their travel packages and workshops and tend reinforce the least common denominator;  3) field trips to such places as the viewing room of the local Art Museum to see great prints by great photographers;  and 4) the opportunity to find kindred souls and to pick up knowledge and inspiration.  

Some minuses are: 1) contests, because the available set of judges are too often individuals whose outlook is so narrow that it ignores the range of possibilities of photography (and, the impossibility of finding judges whose breadth satisfies the diversity of the membership - from calendar art to post-post-modernism) and awarding ribbons for art is ultimately meaningless and usually totalitarian; 2) the popularity of group shoots that, even with the best of intentions, are more social than photographic experiences;  3) we are trying, but it is difficult to attract younger members.

So, I agree don't avoid all clubs (just most of them) and separate social goals from photographic goals.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Ray on August 19, 2007, 10:25:00 pm
Quote
  Think of some of the most brilliant photographers of the last century - W. Eugene Smith, Diane Arbus, Gary Winogrand, Ralph Eugene Meatyard.  All arguably obsessive/compulsives of varying degree and benignity.  These innovators have little need to concern themselves with tricks and dodges, their obsessiveness carries them dashing into the waves rather than tentatively dipping their toe in the swash.  And, by the way, "we" like our innovators this way - it lets us off the hook, to wit "I could be an innovator too, but I don't want to be obsessive and self-destructive."

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134042\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

These are very difficult subjects to get a handle on, but coincidentally, just last night I watched a British TV crime drama, Midsomer Murders, which caricatured two opposing photography groups in the fictitious county of Midsomer. The group with the digital cameras were portrayed as angry delinquents who were enraged because the established photographic group, the film traditionalists, had excluded them from their exhibitions.

The conflicts between these two groups seemed to encapsulate all the 'pro film' versus 'pro digital' arguments aired on this forum over the years, but in a highly dramatised way with a lot exaggerated of course, which made it entertaining.

The film traditionalists were portrayed as obsessive-compulsives. One guy specialised in photographing just trees, another just cats and yet another would photograph the street scene outside his studio every morning at exactly 9 am, as an archival record.  His son (who turned out to be the murderer) photographed his dinner on the plate every day, without fail. When someone commented all the shots looked the same, the reply was, 'I have the same meal every day.' Apparently, subtle differences in the hue of the green peas, from day to day, excited him.

The leader of the pro digital camp was sporting a Nikon D2X, so I guess this production was quite recent. (I wonder if Nikon agreed to pay for the advertisement.) Highly entertaining anyway, although I failed to see the connection between obsessive-compulsive disorder and any special degree of creativity in this portrayal of photographers   .
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: russell a on August 20, 2007, 12:53:36 am
Quote
The film traditionalists were portrayed as obsessive-compulsives. One guy specialised in photographing just trees, another just cats and yet another would photograph the street scene outside his studio every morning at exactly 9 am, as an archival record.  His son (who turned out to be the murderer) photographed his dinner on the plate every day, without fail. When someone commented all the shots looked the same, the reply was, 'I have the same meal every day.' Apparently, subtle differences in the hue of the green peas, from day to day, excited him.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134233\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's hilarious!  But the screenwriters didn't have to strain their inventiveness.  W. Eugene Smith took up residence in a 6th Ave NYC loft and kept three or four loaded cameras at the ready, determined to photograph everything that happened out his window overlooking the street.  Stephen Shore took a road trip and photographed everything he encountered, every meal, every urinal, etc.  Another photographer, whose name eludes me at the moment, took a photograph outside his store every day for a year.  We're quite a bunch.  And, of course, such behavior is a marketer's dream.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Jonathan Wienke on August 20, 2007, 03:21:44 am
To misquote W.C. Fields: "I believe in camera clubs, if all other forms of persuasion fail..."

A club is a great place to learn the basics of photography; exposure, the effects of focal length, processing techniques, how to use color management, etc. They can even be occasionally useful as a venue for sparking ideas. But as a place to teach creativity, no. That must come from within, and cannot be accomplished by the groupthink of photo contests.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: DiaAzul on August 20, 2007, 04:45:36 am
Quote
Some minuses are: 1) contests, because the available set of judges are too often individuals whose outlook is so narrow that it ignores the range of possibilities of photography (and, the impossibility of finding judges whose breadth satisfies the diversity of the membership - from calendar art to post-post-modernism) and awarding ribbons for art is ultimately meaningless and usually totalitarian; 2) the popularity of group shoots that, even with the best of intentions, are more social than photographic experiences;  3) we are trying, but it is difficult to attract younger members.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134193\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You bring out some good points there and, in the UK, there is also a tendency for Photography clubs to be more third age than youthful. Often containing a fiercely opinionated elder class that are not open to new ideas and ways of working. However, having said that, there are strong signs that digital photography is driving more younger people to seek out clubs where they can socialise with other photographers, be inspired and learn new techniques. Whilst clubs are not necessarily the best place to learn creativity they are good places to be inspired by the work of other clubs members - both to try new approaches and to continue with photography when you don't feel that you are progressing.

I would argue that the reason most clubs get into a rut is that they are top heavy in the age range and have failed to bring in young blood to challenge the new order. Techniques that seem to work are:

:: Club website - this is the numero uno most important marketing tool that a club possesses in order to attract new, especially younger, members. The first thing that people do in this day and age is to look for companies on the web and make an instant judgement the first time the home page comes up. If it looks crap then you won't get new members...on the other hand, if it looks good and there is a wide range of well presented members artwork then why not go and visit?

:: Digital Evenings/Workshops - A lot of the new members are looking for training on how to use Photoshop (Elements) to make their pictures stand out. Even basic techniques, such as sharpening, colour management, why RAW? etc... are much appreciated.

:: Digital competitions - Having effective software for managing digital competitions makes the whole process flow more smoothly (the trend is now away from slide competitions towards digital, unlikely that slide will exist in 2 years). The club at which I am a member has custom software which can record competition results and upload them to the website the next time the competition organiser connects to the internet (i.e. results are available within seconds if we have a connection).

:: Speakers and Judges - I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say on speakers and judges. However, in the UK we have a number of photographic associations that clubs can join providing inter-club, regional and national competitions that can be entered. Within this framework there is a scheme for training, certifying and assessing the performance of judges. Provided (and that is a big proviso) you can get sufficient people to donate their time to do judging you should and can improve the quality of judges at events. Speakers is a similar problem - how do you get more people to speak at clubs? Perhaps that is about clubs giving their own members an opportunity to develop the skills needed to create the next generation of public speakers.

Apologies for diverting off the main thrust of the thread - though the relevance is that clubs provide inspiration and not training in creativity (which is not a million miles from Alan's dissertation).
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: russell a on August 20, 2007, 07:54:38 am
Quote
I would argue that the reason most clubs get into a rut is that they are top heavy in the age range and have failed to bring in young blood to challenge the new order. Techniques that seem to work are:

:: Club website -

:: Digital Evenings/Workshops -

:: Digital competitions -

:: Speakers and Judges -

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134278\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for your insightful input.  I wouldn't say the thread has been hijacked, it has just evolved unpredictably.  

We do have a club website and this coming year it will feature a gallery that will demonstrate the diversity of interests in the club.  We are a club top heavy in age, but some of our firebrands are among the oldest.  Nearly all members have moved to digital and, for critiques and contests, the convenience of submitting digitally over the internet and our digital projector has resulted in the majority of members moving to this model.  We plan to bring in some students from local school programs to present their work to us and expose our club to them.

Other clubs in the area who have not taken the steps we have in diversity, digital friendliness, and anti-totalitarianism are self-extincting.  As a result, we don't have as much inter-club interaction as might be useful.

A problem we have in various workshops is the wide range of skill and knowledge in the club so that a given level of treatment only addresses a small subset of our population.  Many members participate in outside workshops to meet their needs in this regard.  We are brainstorming a multi-thread workshop night to address this but the efficacy of such an approach is unknown.

We do periodically have evenings of short presentations by members on whatever they want to share - their work, techniques, etc.  We call it "15 Minutes of Fame".

I would say that, while the right kind of club environment doesn't directly deal with issues of creativity, it can provide a certain amount of light and heat to the Petri dish.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: larsrc on August 20, 2007, 10:49:55 am
Quote
I happen to be the newly appointed president of a large (100+ member) camera club.  (Don't ask, it's a long story.)   I agree that there are many positive aspects.  Our membership is very diverse.  The club has its roots in nature photography, as is typical of a lot of clubs.  Over the past 3 years we have attracted a number of members whose interests also include urban landscape, street photography, etc.  As a result of this diversity and the essential nature of group dynamics, we do engage in some tribal warfare within the club.  There are both pluses and minuses. 

Some pluses are:  1) critiques, moderated sometimes by outsiders, sometimes by club members, where members may receive sufficiently diverse and ultimately ambiguous opinions to allow them to absorb what they are ready to absorb;  2) a diverse schedule of guest speakers - in particular we have expanded the set of speakers beyond the coterie of "workshop gypsies" who haunt clubs to promote their travel packages and workshops and tend reinforce the least common denominator;  3) field trips to such places as the viewing room of the local Art Museum to see great prints by great photographers;  and 4) the opportunity to find kindred souls and to pick up knowledge and inspiration. 

Some minuses are: 1) contests, because the available set of judges are too often individuals whose outlook is so narrow that it ignores the range of possibilities of photography (and, the impossibility of finding judges whose breadth satisfies the diversity of the membership - from calendar art to post-post-modernism) and awarding ribbons for art is ultimately meaningless and usually totalitarian; 2) the popularity of group shoots that, even with the best of intentions, are more social than photographic experiences;  3) we are trying, but it is difficult to attract younger members.

So, I agree don't avoid all clubs (just most of them) and separate social goals from photographic goals.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134193\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I started a photography club at the University of Illinois while I was there (it has died since I left *sniff*), and at the time (2001) most people were still interested in getting a darkroom organized.  But we did do some things that were good, in particular we did a couple photo trips that were decidedly not social in nature, we mostly spread out over a large area and only occasionally ran into each other and discussed how to take a particular shot or the problems of the area (one trip was in drizzling rain).  So it's not impossible to do group shoots that are photographic experiences, and it makes it easier to discuss the results because you know more of the conditions of the shot.

-Lars
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Chris_T on August 20, 2007, 02:13:50 pm
Quote
A club is a great place to learn the basics of photography; exposure, the effects of focal length, processing techniques, how to use color management, etc. They can even be occasionally useful as a venue for sparking ideas. But as a place to teach creativity, no. That must come from within, and cannot be accomplished by the groupthink of photo contests.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134271\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I fully agree.

Beginners can definitely benefit from photo clubs in learning the basic techniques and the conventional wisdoms on what makes a "good" photo. But sometimes I wonder that in this formative stage, how many are crippled forever by not being exposed to a much wider photo world (like infants deprived of oxygen). After progressively winning contest ribbons over time, some may conclude that they have "done it" and "have arrived".

Ideally, a photo club would introduce its members to what the photo world is made up of, and disclose that it will only touch the tip of the iceberg. I have yet to come across such a club.

"In photography, it is he who is responsible for the majority of mindless photographs.  He is the joiner, the imitator, the photographer who plays it safe. Such people have surrendered their individuality in exchange for approval, approval by the system, the organization, public opinions, their fellows at the photo club. They have succumbed to fads and trends, they are the in-people who belong to a group or school, and they look down on anybody who does not belong."   - Andreas Feininger
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Chris_T on August 20, 2007, 02:21:11 pm
Quote
1) contests, because the available set of judges are too often individuals whose outlook is so narrow that it ignores the range of possibilities of photography (and, the impossibility of finding judges whose breadth satisfies the diversity of the membership - from calendar art to post-post-modernism) and awarding ribbons for art is ultimately meaningless and usually totalitarian.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134193\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well said. Contests seem to be the main stay of all photo clubs. Why? If you are aware of their problems, why not get rid of them? After all, you are in the US, and certainly should know the executive privileges of a president by now.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Chris_T on August 20, 2007, 02:25:36 pm
Quote
You bring out some good points there and, in the UK, there is also a tendency for Photography clubs to be more third age than youthful. Often containing a fiercely opinionated elder class that are not open to new ideas and ways of working.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134278\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The same holds true in the US. These geezers (BTW, I'm one also.) seem to be more interested being in *control* over anything else. Perhaps at their stage of life, the club is the only place where they can do so. Among the many things they control, nothing is more important to them than the membership dues. While some clubs do offer members a chance to provide inputs on programs, etc., I know of none that will opennly discuss how the dues should be budgeted. Clubs in general do not publish annual budget reports or holdings. A local club happens to hold a huge endowment from a generous soul and chooses not to inform its members. Meanwhile they want to raise the membership dues. Go figure. The dues amount is insignificant, but *how* they are being spent should be transparent.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Kirk Gittings on August 20, 2007, 03:26:59 pm
Seeing beautiful, even great images, in a well established way in a well established genre is not creativity. It is competency. True creativity (or creativity with a capital C as Russell said) breaks norms, established traditions and ways of seeing.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: larsrc on August 20, 2007, 03:45:48 pm
Quote
Seeing beautiful, even great images, in a well established way in a well established genre is not creativity. It is competency. True creativity (or creativity with a capital C as Russell said) breaks norms, established traditions and ways of seeing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134370\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The (excellent) author Neil Gaiman once attended an elocution class.  When the teacher noticed him trying to do the most outrageous accents, she told him, "Neil, dear, before you can be eccentric, you need to know where the center is".

I agree that the camera clubs cannot teach Creativity (if it can be taught at all), but they can (if well executed) give the knowledge and competence that can turn the create impulse into something real.

-Lars
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: russell a on August 20, 2007, 04:06:40 pm
Quote
Well said. Contests seem to be the main stay of all photo clubs. Why? If you are aware of their problems, why not get rid of them? After all, you are in the US, and certainly should know the executive privileges of a president by now.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134363\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Even if it were possible for my little presidency to emulate the unilateralism and arrogance to which you allude, I would resist.  And yes, if left to me, I would have tossed all contests but there was so much interest on the part of a traditional subset of the club that we compromised on a reduced number.  Recoding DNA can only be done a gene or two at a time.  As to why they are popular, there are those for whom the game of conforming to a set of rules and receiving an award for doing so provides validation.  Others chafe at taking what becomes "other people's photos" (OPP).  I said ours is a diversely populated club.  It's interesting to see how the dynamics play out.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Gordon Buck on August 20, 2007, 04:15:12 pm
Our club website is http://www.laphotosociety.com (http://www.laphotosociety.com)

We have monthly competition; it's described on the website.  We've recently changed the judging method.  Everyone present (including guests) gets tokens:  blue for 1st place, red for second, white for third.  Each person votes for their choices by dropping a token into a box by the picture.  Since we typically have 40 to 60 people present, the quantity of votes cast outweighs personal feelings, friendships, prejudices, etc (we hope).  A sort of "wisdom of the crowds" approach.  Seems a bit hokie but, at the very least, everyone gets involved and really enjoys the process.  The voting method has also solved the problem of obtaining qualified judges and speeds up the process of determining the winning pictures.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 21, 2007, 11:40:40 am
Chris T

Your quotation of Andreas Feininger was pretty close to what I tend to think too, but the thing is, there should be no need to knock clubs. They are what they are and should simply be accepted or rejected as such. I´ve been guilty of such bashing myself, but I have concluded that it is misplaced; there is no legal obligation to join.

The real problem, which I think is what we are probably all thinking about here, is something more specific: whether creativity can be taught. The answer is that it cannot be taught. As I´ve pointed out already in this thread, all one can teach another person with less knowledge than one has, is the mechanics of going from point A to point B. That has zero to do with creativity.

It´s my opinion that things will probably get worse as we lose more magazines or they downmarket to survive. My memory goes back to the 50s when Popular Photography would put out two annuals: Popular Photography Annual and also Popular Photography Color Annual. Those two publications were an immense inspiration to me, even though I was still at school. They introduced me to the greats of photography as did another magazine published in Britain, called, simply, Photography (this was edited by Norman Hall). Where are these today? Pop Photo has turned into something I have bought just once recently for old-time´s sake - US Camera? Modern Photography? well, the deaths or take-overs tell their own stories.

I see no contemporary sources for people to be inspired, other than the websites of photographers´agents, where the possibility of one doing much in photography that measures up to the standards in some of those is practically nil. It is all team production now and the photographer but a cog in a bloody great wheel of supergloss production. (I do refer primarily to model-related work.)

To tell you the truth, inspiration can´t exist without the related quality of creativity being present in the recipient of that inspiration. Without it, all you can have is ´I wish I could do it too`, which is not inspiration but frustration. If the creativity exists, it will fight its way out regardles of external problems. Let´s face it, most photographers of note had a darn long fight to make it - the ones who simply had the cash to join the game also had to have a spark or they would have fallen foul of the old chestnut: the easiest way to make a small fortune in photography is to start with a big one.

Ciao - Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: DiaAzul on August 21, 2007, 01:59:12 pm
Quote
I see no contemporary sources for people to be inspired, other than the websites of photographers´agents, where the possibility of one doing much in photography that measures up to the standards in some of those is practically nil. It is all team production now and the photographer but a cog in a bloody great wheel of supergloss production. (I do refer primarily to model-related work.)

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134524\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not sure where you are exactly coming from on that one. IMHO there is far more opportunity to come across inspiring images than ever before. Go back 5 years and only a small cotterie of Canadians would ever have heard of Michael Reichmann, as it is his fame now precedes him...and many others that wouldn't have received global exposure as well.

If you want inspiration you can go to any of the photo blogs, flickr, the stock image libraries, the news websites (CNN, BBC, Reuters, Getty, AP, AFP, etc...). There are no shortage of sources for images of all types, tastes and levels of creativity. It's not as if you have to look very far.

Creativity is the result of an inspired journey...if you don't follow the path, or loose your way, then you ain't going to get it.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: alainbriot on August 21, 2007, 02:30:38 pm
Quote
Not sure where you are exactly coming from on that one. IMHO there is far more opportunity to come across inspiring images than ever before. ...

If you want inspiration you can go to any of the photo blogs, flickr, the stock image libraries, the news websites (CNN, BBC, Reuters, Getty, AP, AFP, etc...). There are no shortage of sources for images of all types, tastes and levels of creativity. It's not as if you have to look very far.

Creativity is the result of an inspired journey...if you don't follow the path, or loose your way, then you ain't going to get it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134573\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Very true.  To be creative it is necessary to look forward, not backwards, and to say "I can" not "I cannot".
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 21, 2007, 03:51:01 pm
Quote
Not sure where you are exactly coming from on that one. IMHO there is far more opportunity to come across inspiring images than ever before. Go back 5 years and only a small cotterie of Canadians would ever have heard of Michael Reichmann, as it is his fame now precedes him...and many others that wouldn't have received global exposure as well.

If you want inspiration you can go to any of the photo blogs, flickr, the stock image libraries, the news websites (CNN, BBC, Reuters, Getty, AP, AFP, etc...). There are no shortage of sources for images of all types, tastes and levels of creativity. It's not as if you have to look very far.

Creativity is the result of an inspired journey...if you don't follow the path, or loose your way, then you ain't going to get it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134573\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, you have a point, of course, and perhaps the stock librares turn you on. I was with Tony Stone for quite a few years (became Getty´s prize - Stone, not I!) and even then I used to take professional pleasure from Image Bank´s offerings (another casualty to the same brand of globalisation...) so I don´t think I need instruction from anybody about that industry, if such was intended, of which I´m not quite sure.

But two things:
a. I don´t think I wrote here that I was particularly feeling without the creative spark;
b. creativity is most certainly not the product of following ANY path or journey. If you are creative it will out, no matter how tough it might be or anything else which life might throw at you. It is the START of the journey of your life, not the product. Without it, you might as well join those supermodels in bed untill somebody offers you the 10,000 bucks to get up. Or out, as the case might be.

But those current professional examples that you quoted are not there to tease your juices out; they are there to sell something to somebody and that you look at them for the images is neither here nor there, from the busines point of view, you don´t figure at all. On the other hand, those olde worlde magazines were very much designed for the lover of photography; the images were what it was about and they were chosen because they were just so outstanding for their time. The new magazines, from the minute they start to sell trips to the moon - okay, ´exotic´locations here on this poor old Earth, sponsored by brand X or Y, the alarm bells should be ringing loud and clear. That´s just another commodity wrapped up in dreams, just like watching Angelina or Brad, perhaps, except that you get to pay more so the buzz is bigger. But the creative payoff? Right.

But then, I´m sure not trying to sell anybody a philosophy - not trying to flog anybody anything - just one old guy´s opinion which you are at liberty to ignore at your pleasure.

Ciao - Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: DiaAzul on August 21, 2007, 05:07:25 pm
Quote
b. creativity is most certainly not the product of following ANY path or journey. If you are creative it will out, no matter how tough it might be or anything else which life might throw at you. It is the START of the journey of your life, not the product.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134610\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Interesting comment. If creativity is the start of the journey then are you implying that people are either born creative or not as the case may be.

If someone is not initially creative but over the course of their life becomes creative what is the path that brings enlightenment?

Is someone who is not born creative forever doomed to repeating the works of others? In which case should 99% of this boards readers pack up their cameras and go home as they will never produce a creative photograph in their life?

If there is no path to creativity and people are not born creative then does it strike at random and to the lucky few? Can I increase my luck of being struck?

I'm not disagreeing with what you have written, but posting questions that arise as a result of you postulation.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: alainbriot on August 21, 2007, 05:37:23 pm
Quote
Interesting comment. If creativity is the start of the journey then are you implying that people are either born creative or not as the case may be.

If someone is not initially creative but over the course of their life becomes creative what is the path that brings enlightenment?

Is someone who is not born creative forever doomed to repeating the works of others? In which case should 99% of this boards readers pack up their cameras and go home as they will never produce a creative photograph in their life?

If there is no path to creativity and people are not born creative then does it strike at random and to the lucky few? Can I increase my luck of being struck?

I'm not disagreeing with what you have written, but posting questions that arise as a result of you postulation.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134634\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think that creativity starts with a positive approach to life and to art.  Negativity is definitely a hurdle towards being creative, or towards becoming creative.

For example holding the belief that "everything has already been done" will bring discouragement, not bring about the creation of new work.

We have to keep in mind that creativity shares the same roots as creation: making something new. To make something new one has to believe it can be done, that there is room for it, that it is possible.

Similarly, holding the belief that the best is in the past --exemplified by prefacing statements with "in my time" or something to that effect-- results in discouragement rather than in the desire to go out and make something happen.  Such a belief means, for those who hold it, that the best has already been done, that the ideal time has passed, that the opportunities are gone. The outcome of such beliefs is a lack of desire for engaging in creative endeavors.  A further outcome is a lack of vision for new possibilities.  Such a belief kills excitement and passion for the creation of new work.

Creativity needs a positive approach to life.  Negativity is the enemy of creativity.  Creativity neds passion, excitement and the desire to create.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: russell a on August 21, 2007, 06:18:39 pm
Quote
I think that creativity starts with a positive approach to life and to art.  Negativity is definitely a hurdle towards being creative, or towards becoming creative.

For example holding the belief that "everything has already been done" will bring discouragement, not bring about the creation of new work.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134643\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Creativity, in the sense that we are speaking here, has nothing to do with the Norman Vincent Peale (author: 1952 The Power of Positive Thinking) style of self-hypnotically-induced optimism.  Creative people from history, many of whom were rancorous pessimists and inveterate complainers, didn't kick up their heels and announce "By gum, I think I'll create something new".  It's the obsession, stupid.  The most celebrated artists were, by standard measure, misfits, malcontents, or monsters.  Mozart, Beethoven, Cezanne, Picasso, Miles Davis, Charlie Parker, Charles Mingus, to name a few.  

As far as "everything has been done", that issue is irrelevant to an obsession.  On that point, however, a lot has been done. If you don't think so, you aren't looking and you can pretend that your "sunset over the sand" is innovative rather than one more example, for better or worse, of a well-trod genre.  Not that it isn't fine for someone to do such a thing, just label it correctly.  It depends on one's measure.  Just like, although rumor has it that every snowflake is unique, most snowfalls do not strike us as an innovation.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Gordon Buck on August 21, 2007, 10:23:37 pm
It is easier to be different than it is to be creative; in fact, one can learn to be different through study.  It is especially easy to be the frog that is different if the pond is small.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 22, 2007, 04:05:15 am
Quote
It is easier to be different than it is to be creative; in fact, one can learn to be different through study.  It is especially easy to be the frog that is different if the pond is small.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134693\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

And if you know, in your heart, that you are really a prince...

Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 22, 2007, 04:18:08 am
Should almost everyone just close up shop and go home, it was asked.

Well, as far as this particular shop is concerned I´d hope not. The LuLa has been, and still is, a very usefull source - the best I´ve stumbled upon so far - for all manner of ´new photography´ information; its owner does some very interesting and pleasing pictures which are generally well worth looking at - not a lot of cliché - there are also some very talented writers abroad whose work might be better appreciated were it given its own slot rather than just getting lost in these threads.

Having said that, the answer is also a resounding yes, if only because on the basis of numbers there can only be a tiny percentage of people anywhere with the ability to both entertain, impart information and provide pleasing photography. As I don´t provide you with any photography at all, perhaps I should be one of the first to slink away; sorry, though, I still feel the need to communicate with the wider world.

Even creativity is not there for the keeping; it´s a resource that, like the sex drive, has its best period. You never lose the desire for sex (speaking from a male perspective) and neither do you lose the creative urge of self-expression. Sadly, with both, the desire outlasts the quality of the performance.

Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: russell a on August 22, 2007, 04:21:34 am
Quote
It is easier to be different than it is to be creative; in fact, one can learn to be different through study.  It is especially easy to be the frog that is different if the pond is small.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134693\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Exactly!  The arc of Modernism put a premium on innovation=different.  

Over time Art lost its place as handmaiden to, first, Church, then, State.  As the arc continued into the 20th Century we saw the gradual elimination of 1) subject matter, 2) narrative and social/spiritual relevance, 3) art's position/posture of privilege (Pop Art), and 4) emotion or affect (post-modernism).  We have now come to a period where what we call Art is the serial anointment of aesthetic commodities for marketplace consumption.  It has become difficult to determine the meaning of Creativity now that the arc of Modernism is over.  We are left to ponder the degree to which the capital "C" Creativity was perhaps an illusion, created by the precursors of today's Art Marketing establishment.  

There were always artists who were denied a seat at the main table because they were pursing an individual arc that was out of phase with the "Grand Arc".  Fairfield Porter is a good example.  

There is no longer a Grand Narrative, such as Modernism represented, to which an artist might align or rebel.  To a large extent one's relationship to the Grand Narrative provided definition and meaning to one's Self.  That the would-be Artist is now free of that constraint comes with a price - that is that art may offer little in the way of a framework for self-identity as it once did.  

At this point I am reminded of a quote from deKooning, something to the effect of whenever he felt he was getting close to a Big Truth he would lay down and take a nap.  ZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 22, 2007, 05:18:40 am
Quote
Interesting comment. If creativity is the start of the journey then are you implying that people are either born creative or not as the case may be.

If someone is not initially creative but over the course of their life becomes creative what is the path that brings enlightenment?

Is someone who is not born creative forever doomed to repeating the works of others? In which case should 99% of this boards readers pack up their cameras and go home as they will never produce a creative photograph in their life?

If there is no path to creativity and people are not born creative then does it strike at random and to the lucky few? Can I increase my luck of being struck?

I'm not disagreeing with what you have written, but posting questions that arise as a result of you postulation.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134634\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

To answer you as best I can:

a. yes, I believe people are born either creative or not;
b. I believe the second is impossible;
c. yes and yes, but only if it matters to them that they are doomed to mediocrity of vision (not the same as mediocrity of technique);
d. I believe there is no path, that some are and some are not so struck; only if you can engineer your own gene allocation.

To amplify on your last point, I´d say that if you are born creative (I don´t say that makes you lucky - far better to be born an accountant or lawyer, particularly a mildly creative one) then your environment - possibly a parent, as with my own life - can help you escape to where you want to be more easily.

In the end, we are all different. I live in what some consider a fantastic environment but am not particularly well-off; others of my family have followed the twin-Mercedes syndrome; others in it are working their butts off to put two children through private school because they know (both are teachers) that what the state provides is a programme for disaster. Nothing is perfect and to pretend otherwise is self-deception.

But even when one chats on about creativity with a firmly held idea of what it is, certainty begins to disappear: what of the lady in the kitchen who can drum up a surprisingly good meal from left-overs; what about the guy in the downtown garage who can turn your old jallopy into a hot-rod; what of the unsung hero in that sweatshop in Hong Kong whose talent for design and adaptation makes mass fashion available on the street market for next to nothing? Perhaps few of these would think of themselves as creative - maybe it´s just a conceit of the chattering classes...

Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Ray on August 22, 2007, 08:34:24 am
Quote
To answer you as best I can:

a. yes, I believe people are born either creative or not;
b. I believe the second is impossible;
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134735\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What are you trying to say here, Rob? You don't strike me as a man of 'belief'.

Who on earth could be qualified to assert, when a child is born, this child is not creative, or not going to be creative as he/she grows up?
 
Who can say to what extent our genes or our environment influence our future? Some so-called experts glibly assert it's 50/50, which means they don't really know.

I think Robert Frost's poem, The Road Not Taken, is relevant here.

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;

Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there,
Had worn them really about the same

And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference !
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 23, 2007, 12:28:54 pm
Ray, I don´t think ANYONE is trying to decide whether a newly born child is or is not ´creative´.

I think that what I´m stating (hard to be sure, these days) is that the child´s qualities are formed in the womb at the moment of the magic spark when all hell breaks loose and people sigh, shudder, reflect, either beat a hasty exit without smoking that last cigarette or, perhaps, go all warm all over and sing soft lullabies and dream of nests and things of that ilk, it matters little in the greater scheme of things. What does matter is the particular chemistry of the participants and how they gell at that precise moment.

After that, the child will know by itself which way its cookie is going to crumble. To be or not to be (creative); that is the question, if my poet is a valid as yours.

Ciao - Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Ray on August 23, 2007, 09:36:30 pm
Quote
I think that what I´m stating (hard to be sure, these days) is that the child´s qualities are formed in the womb at the moment of the magic spark when all hell breaks loose and people sigh, shudder, reflect, either beat a hasty exit without smoking that last cigarette or, perhaps, go all warm all over and sing soft lullabies and dream of nests and things of that ilk, it matters little in the greater scheme of things. What does matter is the particular chemistry of the participants and how they gell at that precise moment.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135058\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Rob,
This is still not clear   . You've previously stated you believe that creativity is something you are either born with or not. It cannot be taught. Now you are going back even further than the moment of birth and claiming that it's at the moment of conception when a person's creativity is determined.

The anti-abortionists will love you for such views   .
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 24, 2007, 04:17:32 am
Quote
Rob,
This is still not clear   . You've previously stated you believe that creativity is something you are either born with or not. It cannot be taught. Now you are going back even further than the moment of birth and claiming that it's at the moment of conception when a person's creativity is determined.

The anti-abortionists will love you for such views   .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135162\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ray, I have total belief in magic moments, the Earth moving and so on. I have no belief in personality being a product of gestation periods. How many creative elephants have you spoken with?

However, I have recently been told that creativity is to be had by buying into brand X´s formula of available goodies.

Ciao - Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Ray on August 25, 2007, 08:23:42 am
Quote
I have no belief in personality being a product of gestation periods. How many creative elephants have you spoken with?

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135220\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Rob,
I have not spoken to any creative elephants, that I recall, but I might have. However, I can confirm that I've photographed 'apparently' creative elephants that would appear to have been spoken to by their trainers. Will that do?  

The abstract painting completed by the elephant in the following photo was offered for sale for a mere 50 bucks, but I missed the opportunity to buy it. I was too busy taking photos to get out my wallet and someone else snapped it up.  

[attachment=3080:attachment]
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: russell a on August 25, 2007, 11:34:03 am
Quote
The abstract painting completed by the elephant in the following photo was offered for sale for a mere 50 bucks, but I missed the opportunity to buy it. I was too busy taking photos to get out my wallet and someone else snapped it up.   

[attachment=3080:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135415\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There are a couple of things I really like about this elephant photo.  First is that the trainer is right there to suggest changing colors, etc.  Just the kind of relationship that art handlers like to have with their artists.  Read the biography of Willem deKooning. He received similar help when he was painting in his "Alzheimer's Period".  Then note the position of the left rear leg.  If the elephant is suppressing a need to urinate, that will lend a certain urgency to the expression.  For all I know, that might have been another trick of the Abstract Expressionists.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 25, 2007, 12:03:16 pm
Whilst you were most observant, Russell, about the creature´s lavatorial needs, but did you also realise that it is only our ability to read the notice behind said elephant that allows us to know that it is indeed an elephant? It is sad to think that the illiterate will never know that they were looking at an elephant. Do you think the elephant was literate too? What did you think at the time, Ray?

It strikes me, as an aside to the DOF matter running around the forum, that the little girl to the elephant´s right is sitting in a very dangerous area.

Ciao - Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on August 25, 2007, 12:05:28 pm
Quote
Rob,
I have not spoken to any creative elephants, that I recall, but I might have. However, I can confirm that I've photographed 'apparently' creative elephants that would appear to have been spoken to by their trainers. Will that do?   

The abstract painting completed by the elephant in the following photo was offered for sale for a mere 50 bucks, but I missed the opportunity to buy it. I was too busy taking photos to get out my wallet and someone else snapped it up.   

[attachment=3080:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135415\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Ray,

The way I read the photo is this: The elephant is stamping his/her (?) foot in disgust, muttering "Dagnabbit! Why didn't I clean the sensor on my 5D before I went shooting, or at least clone out the dust spots in PS. Now I have to dab Spottone all over the otherwise finished print."
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 25, 2007, 12:08:25 pm
Eric, you see no dung; what more can either elephant or Ray do or not do that will please you?

Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Ray on August 25, 2007, 06:22:41 pm
As you can see, this is a young elephant who is still learning the intricacies of painting technique. The lifting of the left leg is an indication of right brain activity, the creative part of the brain. As you know, the right brain also controls the left side of the body so I see the lifting of the left leg as a sign that the elephant is trying hard and really concentrating, pretty much in the way that youngsters sometimes stick out the tip of their tongue when struggling to write or draw   .

The apparent position of the lady at the elephant's rear is unfortunate. The stadium was very crowded and I had trouble moving around to get the desired perspective.
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Rob C on August 26, 2007, 03:09:57 pm
Quote
As you can see, this is a young elephant who is still learning the intricacies of painting technique. The lifting of the left leg is an indication of right brain activity, the creative part of the brain. As you know, the right brain also controls the left side of the body so I see the lifting of the left leg as a sign that the elephant is trying hard and really concentrating, pretty much in the way that youngsters sometimes stick out the tip of their tongue when struggling to write or draw   .

The apparent position of the lady at the elephant's rear is unfortunate. The stadium was very crowded and I had trouble moving around to get the desired perspective.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135505\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ah so - you have admitted it! You took a lot of trouble moving around in cramped conditions just catch a  poor, unfortunate damsel in the desired perspective; you will go far, should you think of a new career in the post-Fellini world of Mr Paparazzo; you may not get the Via Veneto as your patch, but SEAsia can´t be far behind in its offerings of the weird and the wicked! Congratulations are in order, both for perseverance and for that study in DOF control, which was where I think we came in.

Rob C
Title: Alain Briot's Reflections #8
Post by: Chris_T on August 28, 2007, 09:54:27 am
This image is obviously about elephant constipation. As noted, there is no dung, but the beast's raised leg and gaping mouth says it is trying hard. The vet in the blue shirt at the right is wondering why the laxative is not working. Behind him the photog in the orange shirt is ready to capture the decisive moment.

Art and interpretation are in the eye of a beholder.

Ray, sorry to pick on you, again.  

Quote
Eric, you see no dung; what more can either elephant or Ray do or not do that will please you?

Rob C
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135452\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]