Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => But is it Art? => Topic started by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 06:01:54 am

Title: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 06:01:54 am
I donít want to start a discussion, just a thread about humanism in photography. .


Iíll throw in one of myself:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190113/881d91a084b0bcf20075f9c811e77475.jpg)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Riaan van Wyk on January 13, 2019, 07:09:47 am
According to Russ any landscape pic has to have people in the frame. Otherwise it cannot and will not be a proper one as "the hand of man" has to evident. So this will rate highly, unless you called this "street"

But I might be wrong as I gave up reading the debate here many years ago.

Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 09:01:20 am
According to Russ any landscape pic has to have people in the frame. Otherwise it cannot and will not be a proper one as "the hand of man" has to evident. So this will rate highly, unless you called this "street"

But I might be wrong as I gave up reading the debate here many years ago.

Please no debate, I want to see Lulaís understanding of humanism in pictures.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 13, 2019, 09:26:14 am
According to Russ any landscape pic has to have people in the frame. Otherwise it cannot and will not be a proper one as "the hand of man" has to evident. So this will rate highly, unless you called this "street"

Oh come on, Riaan, Iíve never said anything of the sort. I have said, and I still maintain that the highest and best use of the camera is to make pictures of people, and within that set the very best use is real street photography. If you check Landscape Showcase youíll find several pictures of mine without people in them. I shoot whatís there to shoot, and for the past couple years I havenít been able to get to places where I can do street photography. So I shoot landscape, or its equivalent, depending on what you think is the definition of landscape. I do believe the best landscape is done with a brush. If youíre painting you can distort linear perspective to produce the kind of convincing mountain scenes Bierstadt did so well, and you also can control the relationship of color: advancing and receding. You canít do that with a camera, which tells the literal truth about landscape, but a truth that often isnít what the observer feels when observing the real thing.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: john beardsworth on January 13, 2019, 09:43:53 am
Please no debate, I want to see Lulaís understanding of humanism in pictures.

How do you define "humanism"? In English it refers to a philosophy (eg Erasmus). Do you just mean "people"?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: faberryman on January 13, 2019, 09:48:49 am
You can’t do that with a camera, which tells the literal truth about landscape, but a truth that often isn’t what the observer feels when observing the real thing.
Go to Flickr. You won't find a literal landscape on the site. They are all science fiction.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 13, 2019, 09:54:59 am
[quote author=RSL link=topic=128553.msg1089261#msg1089261 date=1547389574You canít do that with a camera, which tells the literal truth about landscape, but a truth that often isnít what the observer feels when observing the real thing.
Go to Flickr. You won't find a literal landscape on the site. They are all science fiction.

Whatever that means.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: stamper on January 13, 2019, 10:34:09 am
Quote faberryman.

Go to Flickr. You won't find a literal landscape on the site. They are all science fiction.

Unquote.

Hans Kruse posts very fine landscapes on here and on Flickr. Are you stating his images are science fiction.?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: faberryman on January 13, 2019, 10:38:06 am
Hans Kruse posts very fine landscapes on here and on Flickr. Are you stating his images are science fiction.?
Most of the landscapes I see here and on Flickr are overblown. There are the occasional exceptions.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 13, 2019, 10:48:04 am
Not sure if I have interpreted this correctly. I know little about philosophy. This image shot years ago in Kathmandu was supposed to represent the Buddhist ideal of the bodhisattva. A being with compassion I suppose you could say.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 11:04:23 am
Fill in as you like,
Humanism in photography, humanism how Ďyouí understand it.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190113/d4ba69b14cb0773bf38b23cf6d26db3b.jpg)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 13, 2019, 11:27:06 am
Please no debate, I want to see Lulaís understanding of humanism in pictures.

As John said, Ivo, give us your definition of "humanism." Do you mean kids being athletic? The pictures you've posted don't define the term.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: faberryman on January 13, 2019, 11:37:22 am
As John said, Ivo, give us your definition of "humanism." Do you mean kids being athletic? The pictures you've posted don't define the term.
From the dictionary:

humanism - an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems.

Ivo must be using the term in a different way. Based on the posted photos, it appears humanism to him means humans in the environment.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 13, 2019, 11:58:06 am
Humanist photography is a well defined set of ideas. There's a "school", a list of well known practitioners, a philosophical basis, the whole shebang.

See Wikipedia.

But basically it's just "human-forward pictures" with an emphasis on genuine human experience rather than staged scenes.

I must admit that I find it throughly depressing how out of touch with the history of the medium most photographers seem to be.

Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: john beardsworth on January 13, 2019, 12:30:10 pm
As there's little evidence of humanism in either of the OP's two pictures, you're probably over-thinking it. Not sure they're "human-forward" either, if that means anything. At the risk of calling a spade a spade, they are pictures with people in them.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 12:36:35 pm
Tx Amolitor,
Your finding is what I tray to explain since my first week at Lula. Photography moved on since itís existence.

I find it strange that the great students of photography here on Lula even donít know about this broad and not so young movement in photography.

Should make them singing a lower tone imo.

A wiki search on Humanist Photography, or even humanism in photography will explain more.

Please, show us your pictures.

Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 12:37:51 pm
As there's little evidence of humanism in either of the OP's two pictures, you're probably over-thinking it. Not sure they're "human-forward" either, if that means anything. At the risk of calling a spade a spade, they are pictures with people in them.

No need to argue, Iím not going to elaborate on my perspective, I would be happy to see yours, John.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: john beardsworth on January 13, 2019, 01:35:30 pm
Easy enough. I'll find a nondescript part of town with some randomly-distributed people doing nothing interesting, point my camera vaguely at them and then claim it is Humanist Photography with a big H and a big P. Not much of a challenge though, is it?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 01:37:39 pm
Easy enough. I'll find a nondescript part of town with some randomly-distributed people doing nothing interesting, point my camera vaguely at them and then claim it is Humanist Photography with a big H and a big P. Not much of a challenge though, is it?
I will be glad to see it, John.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: john beardsworth on January 13, 2019, 01:44:17 pm
I don't keep my rejects, let alone frame them!
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 02:31:20 pm
I don't keep my rejects, let alone frame them!

Then focus on other things you understand, John, no need to be denigrating.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: john beardsworth on January 13, 2019, 02:50:40 pm
Not denigrating anyone, Ivo, just refusing to put a crown on a pauper.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 13, 2019, 02:53:20 pm
What's interesting here, john, is that you're clearly saying that Ivo's photos are lousy, but claiming also that your judgement is objective truth and therefore not denigrating.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 03:07:13 pm
Sure there are photographers on Lula with better work.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190113/4c562647a7c0f0af03ce3be428b7c5f5.jpg)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 13, 2019, 03:14:04 pm
Here's an interesting case that might be tangentially related, which I wrote about here a few years ago: https://photothunk.blogspot.com/2016/07/vernacular-enigma.html
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: john beardsworth on January 13, 2019, 03:33:05 pm
What's interesting here, john, is that you're clearly saying that Ivo's photos are lousy, but claiming also that your judgement is objective truth and therefore not denigrating.

Well, aren't they?

I do see some virtue in the first.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 13, 2019, 03:36:06 pm
Outside of some larger context, I see little virtue in Ivo's pictures. This is true, however, of almost all the photos I see on LuLa and elsewhere.

Can I imagine fairly easily a context in which they make sense, and have power? Yes. This, by the way, is not universally true of the photos I see on LuLa and elsewhere.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 13, 2019, 04:02:53 pm
But basically it's just "human-forward pictures" with an emphasis on genuine human experience rather than staged scenes.

Another way to say "street photography."
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 04:06:39 pm
Here's an interesting case that might be tangentially related, which I wrote about here a few years ago: https://photothunk.blogspot.com/2016/07/vernacular-enigma.html

Good article, Andrew.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 13, 2019, 04:11:50 pm
Photography moved on since itís existence.

Right, Ivo. It moved from wet plates to dry plates, then to film, finally to digital. I think most of us are familiar with those moves.
Title: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 04:14:52 pm
Right, Ivo. It moved from wet plates to dry plates, then to film, finally to digital. I think most of us are familiar with those moves.

Yes Russ. And you missed the rest. I Ďm not going any further in discussion with you, itís of no use.

But I would be glad to see some recent work of you fitting in this thread. I will not judge it.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 13, 2019, 04:19:57 pm
I wouldn't have the foggiest idea how to "fit" anything into this thread, Ivo, since I haven't the foggiest idea what it's about. So far there's not a single picture in it worth trying to emulate or follow. You seem to think photography has moved on since its inception, and from a mechanical point of view you're correct. But subject matter hasn't really changed, and never will.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 13, 2019, 04:24:17 pm
Humanist photography is not generally considered to be the same as street photography, although much street is considered humanist. Arguably, street which (for example) makes a mockery of its human subjects or (for another example) denigrates them would not be considered humanist. On the flip side, a great deal of what is far more like documentary photography, or reportage, rather than street is considered humanist.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 13, 2019, 04:30:44 pm
But subject matter hasn't really changed, and never will.

In a literal sense,  I suppose this is true. The subject matter in the sense of "the stuff in the world" remains "the stuff in the world" but not only has the stuff in the world changed in the last 150 years, the way we treat the stuff in the world photographically has changed enormously.

In the first, say, 50 years of photography it would never have occurred to anyone to take a closeup photograph of an eye. Do we claim that the subject matter is the same, because, well, it's basically just someone's face? Whether we choose to split hairs on what "subject matter" means or not, something has changed.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 04:37:19 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190113/0bf14ed1112123b41e1b69e4eac344d2.jpg)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 13, 2019, 04:52:04 pm
Dear Lord! What a load of crap and artsy-fartsy lingo in this thread!? This is Luminous Landscape, not a Crappy Humanity site. We shoot landscape, pure landscape, precisely to avoid idiots otherwise known as humans.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 04:58:00 pm
In a literal sense,  I suppose this is true. The subject matter in the sense of "the stuff in the world" remains "the stuff in the world" but not only has the stuff in the world changed in the last 150 years, the way we treat the stuff in the world photographically has changed enormously.

In the first, say, 50 years of photography it would never have occurred to anyone to take a closeup photograph of an eye. Do we claim that the subject matter is the same, because, well, it's basically just someone's face? Whether we choose to split hairs on what "subject matter" means or not, something has changed.

A century ago, post mortal photography was usual, it isnít today.
In the seventies, certain pictures of naked teenager girls where considered as art, it isnít today.
Not so long ago wedding pictures where expected to show the golden rim around the day, nowadays a straight forward reportage of the day is preferable.
Etc etc

If you consider a person as a subject, didnít it change?For sure society did.

The picture as such is not a main goal for me, itís what it describes on a not literal way. Itís about peoples and what is going on around peoples, peoples are even not necessarily in the frame to search for the circumstances where peoples live in.
If a picture can be a reflection of social circumstances, it better is not Ďgoodí or Ďbeautifulí or according to whatever rules. It better is what it is.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 04:59:43 pm
Dear Lord! What a load of crap and artsy-fartsy lingo in this thread!? This is Luminous Landscape, not a Crappy Humanity site. We shoot landscape, pure landscape, precisely to avoid idiots otherwise known as humans.

I asked to share pictures. Nothing more.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 05:10:51 pm
Dear Lord! What a load of crap and artsy-fartsy lingo in this thread!? This is Luminous Landscape, not a Crappy Humanity site. We shoot landscape, pure landscape, precisely to avoid idiots otherwise known as humans.

You canít turn your back and this shit happens, Slobodan. Tsss...

Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 13, 2019, 05:14:16 pm
Humanism landscape:
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 13, 2019, 05:18:29 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190113/0bf14ed1112123b41e1b69e4eac344d2.jpg)

Nicely done, Ivo.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 05:19:19 pm
Nicely done, Ivo.

Tx Omer
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 13, 2019, 05:23:21 pm
So much bitching lately on LuLa.

I just give thanks that we are all different, if it were not so then what a desperately dull place this would be.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 13, 2019, 05:28:03 pm
So much bitching lately on LuLa.

I just give thanks that we are all different, if it were not so then what a desperately dull place this would be.

You have to be brave to start a topic about something not pre approved by the old farts of Lula.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 13, 2019, 07:52:19 pm
Good one, Omer.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 13, 2019, 11:49:13 pm
I wouldn't have the foggiest idea how to "fit" anything into this thread, Ivo, since I haven't the foggiest idea what it's about. So far there's not a single picture in it worth trying to emulate or follow. You seem to think photography has moved on since its inception, and from a mechanical point of view you're correct. But subject matter hasn't really changed, and never will.

Well well here we go again. I have a dog in this fight having posted an image I am actually quite pleased with. I think generally the criticism is quite one sided coming from you Russ. Itís not the first time you have had a go at Ivoís photos. Not the first time you have had a go at mine either. I remember you telling me the photos I posted on a Street thread were pooor snapshots without merit. I have always found Lula to be quite kind to photographers having a go and trying something and have myself generally refrained from being critical. I have sometimes suggested where I think an image can be improved but I donít think I have ever attacked anyoneís images in the way you do Russ.

Would you be strong enough to take it since you are pretty good at dishing it out?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: john beardsworth on January 14, 2019, 04:11:00 am
You have to be brave to start a topic about something not pre approved by the old farts of Lula.

Or too arrogant (since you throw insults) to expect pictures to go unquestioned when they were dressed up in such fine clothing? Ever read the Emperor's New Clothes?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 14, 2019, 04:18:55 am
Or too arrogant (since you throw insults) to expect pictures to go unquestioned when they were dressed up in such fine clothing? Ever read the Emperor's New Clothes?

Excuse-moi?
There is certainly a serious issue with arrogance here on Lula. All who stumble over each other to condemn the images shown in this thread are sick in the same bed.
Why not simply put the level to your height by posting some of your work? I will not judge it.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: john beardsworth on January 14, 2019, 04:35:07 am
I responded to the pictures because of the words which accompanied them. Why can you not accept it's that simple?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 14, 2019, 05:17:03 am
As the vultures circle I post another photo.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 14, 2019, 05:33:10 am
As the vultures circle I post another photo.

Martin, superb and IMO fits the topic perfectly.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 14, 2019, 05:34:44 am
Martin, superb and IMO fits the topic perfectly.

Thank you kind sir.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 14, 2019, 05:37:26 am
As the vultures circle I post another photo.

Yes, this is a great contribution. Great image!!
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: stamper on January 14, 2019, 05:42:57 am
Humanity in photography would perhaps be better?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 14, 2019, 05:48:02 am
Humanity in photography would perhaps be better?
Not really Stamper.  Check what Wiki is saying about Humanist Photography. But thanks for your open question.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 14, 2019, 06:00:31 am
Yes, this is a great contribution. Great image!!

Thanks Ivo. We walked in close proximity to these two people for 3 days. This was day two and we were at around 5600m altitude. Shortly after taking the photo I caught up with them and went past and then noticed that the old lady on the right was totally blind. The younger woman was talking to her guiding her foot placement on the tricky sections. Imagine the commitment to help getting the old lady around a three day pilgrimage?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 14, 2019, 06:07:15 am
Thanks Ivo. We walked in close proximity to these two people for 3 days. This was day two and we were at around 5600m altitude. Shortly after taking the photo I caught up with them and went past and then noticed that the old lady on the right was totally blind. The younger woman was talking to her guiding her foot placement on the tricky sections. Imagine the commitment to help getting the old lady around a three day pilgrimage?

Marvelous story, Martin.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 14, 2019, 06:38:46 am
Good one, Omer.

Thanks Russ.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 14, 2019, 08:53:31 am
Humanity in photography would perhaps be better?

But that would be street, Robert. Too difficult a concept for a lot of photographers to grasp.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 14, 2019, 09:09:02 am
I've gotta say, Russ, after watching you argue for years that street photography is more than simply sticking a person in the frame, it is surreal to watch you argue the exactly opposite position here. It's almost as if you don't care about anything except butting heads with Ivo.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 14, 2019, 09:09:18 am
Well well here we go again. I have a dog in this fight having posted an image I am actually quite pleased with. I think generally the criticism is quite one sided coming from you Russ. Itís not the first time you have had a go at Ivoís photos. Not the first time you have had a go at mine either. I remember you telling me the photos I posted on a Street thread were pooor snapshots without merit. I have always found Lula to be quite kind to photographers having a go and trying something and have myself generally refrained from being critical. I have sometimes suggested where I think an image can be improved but I donít think I have ever attacked anyoneís images in the way you do Russ.

Would you be strong enough to take it since you are pretty good at dishing it out?

Sorry you're feeling abused, Martin. As I recall, I've commented favorably on a few of your photographs, and I'll give you a thumbs up on the one you just posted. But if I suggested some of the pictures you posted were poor snapshots without merit, I'm sure I saw them that way, and I'm sure a lot of the posters on LuLa quietly agreed, even though they were too polite to say so. All sorts of crap gets posted on LuLa, so don't feel like the lone ranger. One of LuLa's problems is being "quite kind" to photographers whose work richly deserves criticism. Slobodan and a couple others aren't too polite to criticize. I wish more LuLaers would be willing to speak their piece. If you're afraid of criticism, better stay home.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 14, 2019, 09:13:39 am
I've gotta say, Russ, after watching you argue for years that street photography is more than simply sticking a person in the frame, it is surreal to watch you argue the exactly opposite position here.

Sorry, Andrew, you're going to have to explain where you thought I argued "exactly the opposite position here." I don't recall doing that.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 14, 2019, 09:19:50 am
Post #58,while vague enough, I suppose, to allow you to escape, appears to be incapable of being read any other way.

But look, we all know you just want to butt heads with Ivo and are willing to do whatever. You can drop the pretense.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 14, 2019, 09:28:17 am
Okay. I see where you went wrong. Capturing "Humanity" in street photography is a hell of a lot more than putting a person into a picture. But as I said in that post: "Street is too difficult a concept for a lot of photographers to grasp."

And as far as Ivo's stuff is concerned, as soon as he posts something worth a thumbs up, I'll give him one.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: rabanito on January 14, 2019, 09:34:00 am
"We all know" is a weak argument IMHO. You usually write better than that. ;D

As for hard critique:

I HATE being criticized and I LOVE being praised.
On the other hand I am grateful for the critiques since they help me to do better or, if I am of a different opinion, I just discard them.
Nobody gets hurt.
Since my goal is the print, every bit advice is welcome. Much better when I see the defects before they are hanging on the wall  ;D
Just my two cents
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 14, 2019, 10:00:08 am
Martin, superb and IMO fits the topic perfectly.

Which topic?

Oh, you mean the invented, artsy-fartsy new genre for the MFA and the Aperture crowd that Luminous Landscape is turning to?

The above shouldnít be read as a criticism of Martinís fine photo. It already fits well into the existing categories of People and Travel.

ďHuman-forward picturesĒ? What!?

It seems that new genres has to be invented when ďartistsĒ canít find a home for the rejects.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 14, 2019, 10:07:21 am
Which topic?

Oh, you mean the invented, artsy-fartsy new genre for the MFA and the Aperture crowd that Luminous Landscape is turning to?

The above shouldnít be read as a criticism of Martinís fine photo. It already fits well into the existing categories of People and Travel.

ďHuman-forward picturesĒ? What!?

It seems that new genres has to be invented when ďartistsĒ canít find a home for the rejects.

When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 14, 2019, 10:11:47 am
Well, if Andrew Molitor can write "I must admit that I find it throughly depressing how out of touch with the history of the medium most photographers seem to be (post 14)." without being called out, then I think Russ, who is well versed in the history of photography, can write what he thinks.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 14, 2019, 10:12:23 am
I'm sure glad we're not posting stuff about politics any longer. We might get into arguments about that.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: 32BT on January 14, 2019, 10:20:53 am
Which topic?

Oh, you mean the invented, artsy-fartsy new genre for the MFA and the Aperture crowd that Luminous Landscape is turning to?

The above shouldnít be read as a criticism of Martinís fine photo. It already fits well into the existing categories of People and Travel.

ďHuman-forward picturesĒ? What!?

It seems that new genres has to be invented when ďartistsĒ canít find a home for the rejects.

Now, now, Slobodan? If LuLa turns into a new settlement with a different crowd, it is entirely our own fault since the one and a half posters that were still here obviously don't pay the bills and certainly can not dictate the house rules based on seniority or whatever, a basis that probably doesn't even exist in the fluidity of the internutz age.

Humanism is a real, but rather large encompassing concept in art. Ivo is obviously free to start a thread about it, is also free to request photo entries, and is also free to judge whether his own contributions fit the bill or not. I don't mind reading discussions about the merit of photos in whatever genres, but the slush I have to wade through in this thread doesn't seem justified in any way. It doesn't contribute to anyone's understanding.

I'd vote for a restart of this thread with either less, or at least more respectful discussion.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 14, 2019, 10:53:32 am
...  I'd vote for a restart of this thread...

By all means.

But first think about this: you come to a Sons of Anarchy motorcycle club and start a lecture on the art of macrame. You'd think that for the sake of your dear life you'd be better off by explaining first what macrame is and why the bikers might warm up to it, no?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 14, 2019, 10:55:27 am
Humanist Photography, as noted, has been around as a (rather broad) genre for essentially the same length of time as Modernist photography. Neither are, um, leading edge at this point, and from an Art Historical perspective are rather a part of "history" rather than "now"

Still, it is unfair to dismiss Humanist Photography as new, especially in an internet forum on photography which is, like all internet forums on photography, thoroughly locked in, apparently irrevocably, to an extremely Modernist mindset.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: 32BT on January 14, 2019, 11:10:03 am
By all means.

But first think about this: you come to a Sons of Anarchy motorcycle club and start a lecture on the art of macrame. You'd think that for the sake of your dear life you'd be better off by explaining first what macrame is and why the bikers might warm up to it, no?

Of course, if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. But I wouldn't blame anyone for trying the macramťthingy, since the gangmembers still there seem occupants of the retirement home across the street. (Did I just say "street"?)...

;-)

 
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 14, 2019, 11:25:57 am
My point being if one wants to start something new, introduce a new concept, or art history lesson, I am all for it, but with an intro. This is Luminous Landscape site, where the images center around bell curve with "chocolate-box pretty" firmly in the center and most other things one sigma away. You want two or three sigmas? Fine, just tell us something about it, before assuming that the chocolate crowd would swoon over babushkas.

Slobodan
A card-carrying misanthrope
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 14, 2019, 11:44:24 am
Whenever I hear artsy-fartsy I know we're in for a treat.

Let's keep it safe, sterile and over saturated.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Rob C on January 14, 2019, 01:34:12 pm
The trouble is, for anyone under about 70, more or less, the concept of photographic history is a bit distorted.

You can go to some schools, listen to all their old farts telling you about old processes etc. but they never tell you the truth that the ones without a dog in that fight can see. That truth is that photography was something that you learned via apprenticeship or hobby, and from looking at magazines and the very few photographic monographs that you came across. Instead, in recent decades it has become a new, teachable subject in art schools, as distinct from technical colleges where, for a brief period I had to attend, too.

That situation has created a handy niche within the educational establishment where lots of people can make an extra buck from talking about something instead of doing it. That incentive becomes self-perpetuating, there are grants available, and so you get people rabbiting on about images and tacking them onto the tails of other socially motivated ideas and psychological concepts that have nothing to do with photography other than provide playgrounds where anyone, with or without talent, can play and think himself a king; there are ever those other fellow players who will stand up and cheer, if for no other reason that they are swimming in it together.

You can, today, make an absolutely bland, featureless photograph, claim some silly absurdity of a genre for it, and hey, you're on your way. Think of that grim period of fashion photography that made a star of Corinne Day, that gave a platform to Nan Goldin et al. and you begin to get the picture: it's the art establishment that is responsible for this trend, because in my view, it is there to do one thing: make money for itself by building up stables of people that, in a sane world, would never sell anything. Where the age thing comes in, is memory: we/I or any similarly aged person well remembers a time when photographs depended on technique, content and purpose. For younger people this appears to have become an embarrassingly awkward thought, reactionary even, because if your diet is tweeting, texting and living your life in your palm, then no wonder anything goes if only because, in your world of dinner plate art, anything and everything does, indeed, go. Without expectations of excellence, you get no excellence, which is where we came in.

Just another old fart's opinion, of course.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: rabanito on January 14, 2019, 01:47:58 pm
..... Where the age thing comes in, is memory: we/I or any similarly aged person well remembers a time when photographs depended on technique, content and purpose. For younger people this appears to have become an embarrassingly awkward thought, reactionary even, because if your diet is tweeting, texting and living your life in your palm, then no wonder anything goes if only because, in your world of dinner plate art, anything and everything does, indeed, go. Without expectations of excellence, you get no excellence, which is where we came in.
...

Hear, hear ! 
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 14, 2019, 01:58:27 pm
I will allow as how the modern art establishment has, um, not exactly rendered contemporary photography accessible. In many cases, even an open minded fellow like me can't make sense out of it.

Still, this is the same as it ever was. Henry Peach Robinson railed against Julia Margaret Cameron's fuzzy portraits at some length, disparaging the lack of technique and asserting that this produced worthless results. But some people seem to think she was doing rather well in the end.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: faberryman on January 14, 2019, 02:07:54 pm
Where the age thing comes in, is memory: we/I or any similarly aged person well remembers a time when photographs depended on technique, content and purpose. For younger people this appears to have become an embarrassingly awkward thought, reactionary even, because if your diet is tweeting, texting and living your life in your palm, then no wonder anything goes if only because, in your world of dinner plate art, anything and everything does, indeed, go. Without expectations of excellence, you get no excellence, which is where we came in.
It is not limited to youth. Everyone gets a certificate of participation. Even around here where long term members pat each other on the back for mediocre images just to keep up a spirit of bonhomie on an otherwise moribund website.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 14, 2019, 02:15:32 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190114/b4a17ef90d9a223aae3024cad7ab4620.jpg)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Rob C on January 14, 2019, 02:16:51 pm
It is not limited to youth. Everyone gets a certificate of participation. Even around here where long term members pat each other on the back for mediocre images just to keep up a spirit of bonhomie.


In a sense, you are correct, but not in this thread because older farts are not posting images they wouldn't want to make. This may now open the floodgates.

:-)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 14, 2019, 02:18:11 pm
It's no coincidence that many old farts made their best work when they were comparatively young.

God forbid that the young should ever stop challenging the old.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 14, 2019, 02:33:40 pm
... God forbid that the young should ever stop challenging the old.

And who exactly are the youngs we are talking about here?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Rob C on January 14, 2019, 02:36:00 pm
It's no coincidence that many old farts made their best work when they were comparatively young.

God forbid that the young should ever stop challenging the old.


I'm not really convinced of that; Lindbergh is cracking on with great stuff and Feurer too; Avedon didn't exactly go off and Newton would still be doing it had his ticker not done for him as he drove his car out of that hotel...  I think that what does change with some of these older stars is that their interests - if not opportunities - go elsewhere. I can quite understand how that can happen after a while.

The young are constantly challenging the previous generations, and for as long as the challengers produce great stuff, long may it continue. Bailey challenged French and won, but both were/are very good at making photographs. That is a different conversation.

Actually, thinking of the relative youth of the photo-art business, Penn was no slouch, and would send assistants down into the streets to pick up cigarette butts and bits of litter; I believe that one was scolded for trying to make it look more tidy and clean. Quite interesting on 8x10...

:-)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 14, 2019, 02:37:33 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190114/b4a17ef90d9a223aae3024cad7ab4620.jpg)

Another good photo, Ivo.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 14, 2019, 02:39:07 pm
And who exactly are the youngs we are talking about here?

Young people.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 14, 2019, 02:39:43 pm
Another good photo, Ivo.

Tx Omer.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 14, 2019, 02:40:37 pm
The trouble is, for anyone under about 70, more or less, the concept of photographic history is a bit distorted.

You can go to some schools, listen to all their old farts telling you about old processes etc. but they never tell you the truth that the ones without a dog in that fight can see. That truth is that photography was something that you learned via apprenticeship or hobby, and from looking at magazines and the very few photographic monographs that you came across. Instead, in recent decades it has become a new, teachable subject in art schools, as distinct from technical colleges where, for a brief period I had to attend, too.

That situation has created a handy niche within the educational establishment where lots of people can make an extra buck from talking about something instead of doing it. That incentive becomes self-perpetuating, there are grants available, and so you get people rabbiting on about images and tacking them onto the tails of other socially motivated ideas and psychological concepts that have nothing to do with photography other than provide playgrounds where anyone, with or without talent, can play and think himself a king; there are ever those other fellow players who will stand up and cheer, if for no other reason that they are swimming in it together.

You can, today, make an absolutely bland, featureless photograph, claim some silly absurdity of a genre for it, and hey, you're on your way. Think of that grim period of fashion photography that made a star of Corinne Day, that gave a platform to Nan Goldin et al. and you begin to get the picture: it's the art establishment that is responsible for this trend, because in my view, it is there to do one thing: make money for itself by building up stables of people that, in a sane world, would never sell anything. Where the age thing comes in, is memory: we/I or any similarly aged person well remembers a time when photographs depended on technique, content and purpose. For younger people this appears to have become an embarrassingly awkward thought, reactionary even, because if your diet is tweeting, texting and living your life in your palm, then no wonder anything goes if only because, in your world of dinner plate art, anything and everything does, indeed, go. Without expectations of excellence, you get no excellence, which is where we came in.

Just another old fart's opinion, of course.

Well said, Rob. As the oldest fart on here, I endorse your view.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 14, 2019, 02:44:14 pm
As opposed to old people.

(http://www.keithlaban.co.uk/Old_Folks.jpg)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Rob C on January 14, 2019, 02:48:37 pm
Keith, is that a diversionary tactic into a bokeh fight?

:-)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 14, 2019, 02:50:24 pm
Keith, is that a diversionary tactic into a bokeh fight?

:-)

Too many fights going on here as it is.

;-)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 14, 2019, 03:04:27 pm
As opposed to old people.

(http://www.keithlaban.co.uk/Old_Folks.jpg)

Good photo, Keith.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 14, 2019, 03:05:41 pm
As opposed to old people.

(http://www.keithlaban.co.uk/Old_Folks.jpg)

Nice One!
Title: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 14, 2019, 03:09:38 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190114/fc1fb747593be661240158421a565a88.jpg)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Paulo Bizarro on January 15, 2019, 06:35:34 am
It's getting increasingly sad to see this sort of discussion becoming recurrent in Lula. One may not appreciate the subject/topic/photos posted, but there is no need to denigrate posters.

Here is my contribution.

P.S. As for the argument of this site being dedicated or called "Luminous Landscape", have a look at the recent articles posted by the new management. Even during Michael's time, the site was already about more than "landscape".
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 15, 2019, 07:02:40 am
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190114/fc1fb747593be661240158421a565a88.jpg)

Well done, Ivo. It is surreal.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 15, 2019, 07:15:19 am
+1
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 15, 2019, 07:15:36 am
Well done, Ivo. It is surreal.

Thank you very much, Omer, I value your appreciation.


Your photos are a pleasure to look at.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 15, 2019, 07:16:36 am
It's getting increasingly sad to see this sort of discussion becoming recurrent in Lula. One may not appreciate the subject/topic/photos posted, but there is no need to denigrate posters.

Here is my contribution.

P.S. As for the argument of this site being dedicated or called "Luminous Landscape", have a look at the recent articles posted by the new management. Even during Michael's time, the site was already about more than "landscape".

Interesting picture, Paulo. And thanks for your support.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Rob C on January 15, 2019, 09:07:12 am
Of a girl who can do traditional well, and rocks with this modern stuff that I dislike and, somehow, whether by dint of volume or talent, makes it work:

https://www.sarahmlee.com/

Rob
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 15, 2019, 09:27:03 am
Of a girl who can do traditional well, and rocks with this modern stuff that I dislike and, somehow, whether by dint of volume or talent, makes it work:

https://www.sarahmlee.com/

Rob

I see neither traditional nor modern, only excellent image making.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 15, 2019, 09:52:25 am
...P.S. As for the argument of this site being dedicated or called "Luminous Landscape", have a look at the recent articles posted by the new management. Even during Michael's time, the site was already about more than "landscape".

Exactly my point, Paulo. The new direction should result in the change of name into Hipster Whateverscape, otherwise it should be reported for false advertising.

As for Michael, please. Coincidentally, I just got one of the few remaining copies of his book for LensWorks, about San Miguel de Allende. A beautiful reminder just how different his street and people photography was from the hipster crap seen here recently. The same eye, the same sense of esthetics, the same feel for color and design that were part of his landscape work, just applied to street scenes.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 15, 2019, 10:17:59 am
Perhaps Rockhopper Workshops will put a forum in place to attract those who are no longer happy with the direction here?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: John R on January 15, 2019, 11:14:51 am
Of a girl who can do traditional well, and rocks with this modern stuff that I dislike and, somehow, whether by dint of volume or talent, makes it work:

https://www.sarahmlee.com/

Rob
It is interesting work, some of it very good, IMHO. All I know, is when I attempt to photograph people in the circumstances this photographer has, especially some of the more exotic looking subjects, I regularly get threatened. Not for me. I note she works for a Newspaper, and that would give her access that none of us could get. Even in public on her own time, if she runs into trouble, she can pull out her credentials and avoid a lot of confrontations that the rest of would surely encounter. I suspect being female makes it much easier as I have observed when I go on outings with female club members. They get way less hassle than males. In most of the images by Vivian Maier, it becomes apparent that the subjects ignored her and her camera. This kind of photography is difficult to do these days. You have to be furtive. We can never go back and should not compare what we do today with what older generation photographers were able to do. Times were different. People who are able to do so so-called "personal work" involving people in close, sometimes intimate circumstances, have to become embedded in their families and communities to do anything worthwhile. Most of us will never do this kind of work. A lot of the work I see online, I regard as intrusive, bordering on voyeurism. I can't see myself subjecting my family, friends, or neighbors to that kind photography. This is why I don't understand why the critiques on this subject are so harsh. And I think the urban work, including graphic style images are just as valid and worthwhile as any perceived "Street" type images. Bottom line for me, Street, Urban, travel, architecture or landscape, it has to be good!

JR
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: D Fuller on January 15, 2019, 11:33:25 am
Of a girl who can do traditional well, and rocks with this modern stuff that I dislike and, somehow, whether by dint of volume or talent, makes it work:

https://www.sarahmlee.com/

Rob

Thanks for sharing that, Rob. She has an interesting eye.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Paulo Bizarro on January 15, 2019, 11:45:52 am
Of a girl who can do traditional well, and rocks with this modern stuff that I dislike and, somehow, whether by dint of volume or talent, makes it work:

https://www.sarahmlee.com/

Rob

thanks for sharing, I like her style.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 15, 2019, 11:51:18 am
Iím very disappointed in some of the Ďrespected membersí of this community. Even the ones I had high in regards lower themselves to call the work posted in this thread Ďcrapí without any attempt of nuance.

I donít have any problem to get harsh critic, Iím very well aware Iím touching particular subjects and have a style not popular among average photographers. I know my work balances on a difficult edge, itís a choice. I know what Iím doing, photographically spoken....
Iím very aware my photographic quest is still on going, I will be probably death if I arrive at the complacency level of the big mouths here.


So no problem to get loads of shit over me.

But letís stay normal.

The venom spitting in this thread is beyond believe. How some pretend to have the monopoly of wisdom about photography and esthetics is laughable and sad at same time.

.....

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190115/8699cea01166404bf5159ec9137eb08a.jpg)


Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Paulo Bizarro on January 15, 2019, 11:54:28 am
Exactly my point, Paulo. The new direction should result in the change of name into Hipster Whateverscape, otherwise it should be reported for false advertising.

As for Michael, please. Coincidentally, I just got one of the few remaining copies of his book for LensWorks, about San Miguel de Allende. A beautiful reminder just how different his street and people photography was from the hipster crap seen here recently. The same eye, the same sense of esthetics, the same feel for color and design that were part of his landscape work, just applied to street scenes.

Slobodan, I see your point. I hate to categorize photography in genres, because, if you have a good eye, the basics of a good photo are transversal to genres: good light, interesting subject, good composition, click that shutter at the right time. Easier said than done!

I remember Michael's work, I learned a lot from his advice and photo analysis. In the early days of Lula, he even was gracious enough to encourage people to send images for his personal and valuable analysis. Indeed he was very strong on composition, lines, geometry, and light.

I also separate what was/is shown in terms of photography under the official editorial line and Lula content, from what is shown in the forum. In the latter, I feel there is more freedom to show more than "landscape". In the former, after Michael's departure, there was hardly anything about landscape, even from Kevin et al.

Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 15, 2019, 12:17:55 pm
Ivo, nothing personal meant, just expressing my blunt, yet non-monopolistic opinion on the direction this site seems to be going. And "here" meant not just this thread, but LuLa overall.

As John R said above, rightly, "it has to be good," no matter the genre. And your last one is good. Not because it fits (or not) the dreaded "humanism" category, but because it is photographically good. It has a tangent to Edward Hopper, not only in the name, but also atmosphere. It works well as a play on words, "hopper," with the guy in mid-hop, so to speak. It pays homage to HCB's jumper too. The overall color palette, and in particular the blue/orange combination, I very much like. Fog is another lucky addition.

See? There is still hope for you (and me) ;)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 15, 2019, 12:25:41 pm
Iím very disappointed in some of the Ďrespected membersí of this community. Even the ones I had high in regards lower themselves to call the work posted in this thread Ďcrapí without any attempt of nuance.

I donít have any problem to get harsh critic, Iím very well aware Iím touching particular subjects and have a style not popular among average photographers. I know my work balances on a difficult edge, itís a choice. I know what Iím doing, photographically spoken....
Iím very aware my photographic quest is still on going, I will be probably death if I arrive at the complacency level of the big mouths here.


So no problem to get loads of shit over me.

But letís stay normal.

The venom spitting in this thread is beyond believe. How some pretend to have the monopoly of wisdom about photography and esthetics is laughable and sad at same time.

.....

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190115/8699cea01166404bf5159ec9137eb08a.jpg)

Thatís a great shot in my opinion. Well done.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: stamper on January 15, 2019, 12:39:59 pm
Thatís a great shot in my opinion. Well done.

Agreed.
Title: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 15, 2019, 12:40:38 pm
Ivo, nothing personal meant, just expressing my blunt, yet non-monopolistic opinion on the direction this site seems to be going. And "here" meant not just this thread, but LuLa overall.

As John R said above, rightly, "it has to be good," no matter the genre. And your last one is good. Not because it fits (or not) the dreaded "humanism" category, but because it is photographically good. It has a tangent to Edward Hopper, not only in the name, but also atmosphere. It works well as a play on words, "hopper," with the guy in mid-hop, so to speak. It pays homage to HCB's jumper too. The overall color palette, and in particular the blue/orange combination, I very much like. Fog is another lucky addition.

See? There is still hope for you (and me) ;)

Thanks for you reply, Slobodan.

I knew this shot would be accepted.

Can you understand this is close to a reject for me? Not because it is not good or because in contrary it is likable, but because it is don a zillion times.

As said, I know what Iím doing with my camera, the boundaries of my comfort zone and beyond are my playground. Itís my choice.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 15, 2019, 12:41:55 pm
Agreed.

Thanks Martin and Stamper.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 15, 2019, 12:43:03 pm
Isn't it interesting, Ivo? For some of us, some of the time, we can tell that something we shot will be well received, people will like it.

And, for many reasons, but among them the fact that people will like it, we ourselves hate it.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 15, 2019, 12:46:15 pm
Isn't it interesting, Ivo? For some of us, some of the time, we can tell that something we shot will be well received, people will like it.

And, for many reasons, but among them the fact that people will like it, we ourselves hate it.

Yep. That is definately true for me. Another tricky thing to negotiate.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on January 15, 2019, 12:51:11 pm
... And, for many reasons, but among them the fact that people will like it, we ourselves hate it.

David said something interesting along those lines in another thread:

... Actually I derive a good degree of grim satisfaction from nobody agreeing with me :-)
Title: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 15, 2019, 12:52:06 pm
Isn't it interesting, Ivo? For some of us, some of the time, we can tell that something we shot will be well received, people will like it.

And, for many reasons, but among them the fact that people will like it, we ourselves hate it.

Yes Andrew. It is interesting. Itís part of moving on I guess. Or part of being visually borderline perhaps?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: 32BT on January 15, 2019, 12:58:03 pm
What then is it that you're trying to achieve with imagesharing?
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: KLaban on January 15, 2019, 01:00:03 pm
Good is subjective. What I think of as good is not necessarily what others think of as good.  What I do think of as bad are closed minds.

Art has always challenged, I'd go as far to say that it is the job of art to challenge. Impressionists, dadaists, surrealists, cubists, the fauves, pop artists, instillation artists...all had contemporary criticism and lack of understanding yet now take pride of place in our galleries and museums. Some of this work has become so acceptable that it is now to be seen on chocolate boxes.

I like to be challenged by work that differs from my own, better that than everything put in front of me being safe and samey.   
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 15, 2019, 01:01:22 pm
Thanks for you reply, Slobodan.

I knew this shot would be accepted.

Can you understand this is close to a reject for me? Not because it is not good or because in contrary it is likable, but because it is don a zillion times.

As said, I know what Iím doing with my camera, the boundaries of my comfort zone and beyond are my playground. Itís my choice.

I've relaxed in regards to the opinions of others on my work. If someone likes something that seems to me obvious, well, okay then. It is after all, my work.

Nice hopper, by the way.  8)
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: amolitor on January 15, 2019, 01:04:18 pm
What then is it that you're trying to achieve with imagesharing?

I'm not sure if you're addressing me here, but the answer for me is twofold:

1. I do not in general share pictures.
2. When I do the reasons are usually pretty opaque to me, but generally include an aspect of experiment "let me see if I have correctly gauged the audience reaction"

Sometimes I dare say I do it because I want the ego strokes, even though I don't much like the pictures.
Title: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 15, 2019, 01:06:00 pm
What then is it that you're trying to achieve with imagesharing?

I guess you are asking me?

Thanks for asking.

I donít share to have the biggest or the best, I ask to share because I learn from the images posted.

I would like to ask: why did you made this image? Not to scoff but to understand.

All the negative feedback in this thread can not take away the moment I had when I saw that phenomenal shot of Martin. Or minimize the pleasure I had looking at Omers shots, or the one of Paulo...... and others.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 15, 2019, 01:08:50 pm
I guess you are asking me?

Thanks for asking.

I donít share to have the biggest or the best, I ask to share because I learn from the images posted.

I would like to ask: why did you made this image? Not to scoff but to understand.

All the negative feedback in this thread can not take away the moment I had when I saw that phenomenal shot of Martin. And the pleasure looking at Omers shots, or the one of Paulo...... and others.

Hahahaha. Thanks Ivo. Iím not actually very fond of that image. I just liked the people. Funny really.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 15, 2019, 01:10:41 pm
Hahahaha. Thanks Ivo. Iím not actually very fond of that image. I just liked the people. Funny really.

Haha, well I mean it. Maybe your story made me mellow.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 15, 2019, 01:13:42 pm
Well Ivo itís a perfect example of what you were saying a moment ago. Most people I show it to like it so there is something they see that i dont. It just wasnít what I saw and I was disappointed in myself.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Paulo Bizarro on January 16, 2019, 06:21:31 am
Agreed.

Yup, fine shot.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 19, 2019, 12:13:04 pm
At the rodeo:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4864/46077512684_7078f94eec_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2dcHicS)At rodeo (https://flic.kr/p/2dcHicS) by Omer Claiborne (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146601120@N02/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: RSL on January 19, 2019, 12:30:40 pm
Good street, Omer.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: 32BT on January 19, 2019, 01:58:31 pm
At the rodeo:

Omer! Utterly brilliant!
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 19, 2019, 02:45:57 pm
Omer! Utterly brilliant!
Good street, Omer.

Well, thank you very much guys.
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 19, 2019, 03:46:07 pm
At the rodeo:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4864/46077512684_7078f94eec_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2dcHicS)At rodeo (https://flic.kr/p/2dcHicS) by Omer Claiborne (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146601120@N02/), on Flickr

Nice One Omer!
Title: Re: Humanism in photography.
Post by: OmerV on January 19, 2019, 05:40:05 pm
Quote from: Ivophoto
Nice One Omer!

Thanks Ivo.