Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: jeremyrh on January 25, 2019, 05:09:40 am
-
Interesting and inspirational - thanks for this. Well worth 12 bucks !!
Always good to hear of someone who managed to "give up the day job"!!
-
Loved 'Spill'.
-
I heard Rachael talk about her work at a UK Royal Photographic Society meeting last year. She is an excellent speaker and her images are really interesting.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
-
I loved this article, what an amazing photographer.
-
+1 An inspiring article.
-
Good stuff. Great landscapes/seascapes. "Fire Within" being my favorite. Congrats.
-
Excellent images - such subtle compositions and colours are a great reminder that landscape photography is so much more than technicolor wonders.
-
...Whose charming voice and matchless landscapes mov'd
The savage beasts,...
::)
-
Excellent images - such subtle compositions and colours are a great reminder that landscape photography is so much more than technicolor wonders.
I could not have said it better. Let the subtlety play on.
JR
-
I just ordered her book, because of the the excellent article/images
Larry
-
Lovely work! (Note to Josh - this is sincere... :D )
Rand
-
^ appreciated Rand ! :D
-
Wow, amazing work! Inspirational indeed and keep stuff like this coming!
Cheers,
Ray
-
Wow, amazing work! Inspirational indeed and keep stuff like this coming!
Cheers,
Ray
I second the motion. Articles like this will keep me subscribing for a long time.
Eric
-
Yawn.
-
Sorry, but I found the article tedious and virtually impossible to finish. This is in no way an issue with Ms. Talibart's work or words. The interview appears to be an email correspondence between the two parties. To me, it lacks a clear and direct person to person dynamic. I think it also tries too hard with overly constructed sentences and "concepts". But hey, it's just my two cents. As was once quite often said here on Lula, horses for courses. :)
-
Very nice series! Thanks for publishing.
Dal
-
Ms. Talibart's words are very interesting. Her pictures are superb, I think. Josh's writing is tortured and very pretentious, I think.
-
Having been mocked in the past for my own accent and phraseology I think that how we speak, or write, is very much part of one's individual personality and character ... and whilst simplicity is much to be encouraged the meaning is far more important than any particular personal idiosyncrasies of delivery and often repays patience and forebearance.
-
... I found the article tedious and virtually impossible to finish... I think it also tries too hard with overly constructed sentences and "concepts"...
... Josh's writing is tortured and very pretentious...
Perhaps. But only if one is accustomed to reading and comprehension skills of a 5th grader or below. Or if someone finds that landscape photography is "just another tree, another rock (ARAT)," then describing it in anything above 5th grade might certainly feel "tortured." Sorry if I offended any 5th graders.
Those who think that landscape photography is just about snapping what's already there, and requires mostly a bladder fortitude, finding anything else in it (landscape) would certainly seem like an intellectual overkill.
I find Josh' intro text and questions well written, in terms of meaning and concept, concise, intellectual (gasp!), and addressing all the major points about landscape photography that the ARAT crowd is missing.
Josh is rightly using the following words and concepts that elevate landscape photography above a snap: primordial force, elemental and mythic, archetypal, pre-civilization tethers, collective psyche, etc. Every one of those words carries a weight that explains why landscape photography is the most popular genre - it hits our primordial links to nature, elements, survival, fear.
Me thinks.
-
I'm just happy that the article brought Rachel Talibart's enjoyable and inspiration work to our attention.
-
Perhaps. But only if one is accustomed to reading and comprehension skills of a 5th grader or below. Or if someone finds that landscape photography is "just another tree, another rock (ARAT)," then describing it in anything above 5th grade might certainly feel "tortured." Sorry if I offended any 5th graders.
Those who think that landscape photography is just about snapping what's already there, and requires mostly a bladder fortitude, finding anything else in it (landscape) would certainly seem like an intellectual overkill.
I find Josh' intro text and questions well written, in terms of meaning and concept, concise, intellectual (gasp!), and addressing all the major points about landscape photography that the ARAT crowd is missing.
Josh is rightly using the following words and concepts that elevate landscape photography above a snap: primordial force, elemental and mythic, archetypal, pre-civilization tethers, collective psyche, etc. Every one of those words carries a weight that explains why landscape photography is the most popular genre - it hits our primordial links to nature, elements, survival, fear.
Me thinks.
Nonsense, Slobodan; it's "most popular" here because in a place called Luminous Landscape, that's unsurprisingly the name of the big game.
For many people, landscape is an available photographic option open to them for a lot of reasons, not least being that travel costs aside, it's usually free. I can imagine city folks could find in it a catharsis of sorts, so that might be a factor worth considering, but most important of all, it's the least demanding of all the respectable genres for the viewer to understand. As I'm reliably informed that it takes two to tango, the chances of landing a Like and even a +1 might be fairly strong, giving that sense of fulfilment so beloved of artists the world over... Because something is fairly readily available and people take the option because it's there does not, of itself, imply popularity, which is a different measure. In fact, the story goes that the most "popular" genre of photography (measured by viewings online) is pornography. So what about that, then, as measure of homo sapiens and popular tastes?
I wonder what you might think about the old gag about a photograph being worth a thousand words; it is certainly the best reason for using a cellphone as camera, especially when you want to have a plumber come fix something in your house. However, if I wish to indulge myself in some amazing plot or flight of fantasy, I think the words in a good book probably outweigh any number of photographs.
Regarding the "ARAT" folks, I generally consider myself to fit well outwith said group; nothing at all wrong with it of course, it just doesn't do it for me, and yes, I have tried, both to do it and to like it. I'm afraid that very few people seem to be able to be creative with it, unless the heavy use of Photoshop is valid in landscape (I'm not sure about the rules), but then I think that's possibly a matter of dulled senses because of too many photographs being seen everywhere people look, robbing the genre of surprise unless, of course, one thinks of it in terms of black and white. In the case of the latter, then yes, especially today, there are places to go with that thing.
Insofar as writing is concerned, I think one should be vary wary of anything that approaches gallerist or artist's statement psychobabble.
Rob
-
Nonsense, Slobodan; it's "most popular" here because in a place called Luminous Landscape, that's unsurprisingly the name of the big game....
Rob
Nope, Rob, everywhere. Just check any photographic magazine to see what is the most popular genre. Go over to Fred Miranda and see which subforum has the most postings and views, for example. Check any competition and see which genre has the most submissions as well. Whether it is because it is the "easiest" genre is irrelevant for what I said.
-
Nope, Rob, everywhere. Just check any photographic magazine to see what is the most popular genre. Go over to Fred Miranda and see which subforum has the most postings and views, for example. Check any competition and see which genre has the most submissions as well.
Finish reading my post: it sort of explains the why of the ubiquity. Which is distinct from popularity.
-
Finish reading my post: it sort of explains the why of the ubiquity. Which is distinct from popularity.
I just updated my post with the following: "Whether it is because it is the "easiest" genre is irrelevant for what I said." As for distinction between ubiquity and popularity, same difference. Besides, you are sidetracking the essence of my post. I do not really care or feel the need to prove or not what is the most popular or not.
EDIT: Just in case someone else wants to debate popularity, have at it. I will gladly concede the point, because that wasn't the point, just a passing remark. The point of my post is a compliment to Josh' writing, so if anyone wants to respond to that, I will appreciate.
-
I will, by simply saying : Thank you.
Clearly I agree both in theory and in practice.
Best,
Josh
-
I agree with Slobodan on this topic
-
I agree with Slobodan on this topic
As do I, including his recognition of "Fire Within" as an exceptional standout amongst an already strong collection of images.
Good job on the interview, Josh, and great work, Rachel.
One point - earlier someone noticed that it reads like an email exchange - a point I agree with. However, I think that's entirely appropriate and enlightening, as it allows us to see how the conversation flows and, IMHO, gives great insight into the artists creative process. Could an exceptional writer take that content and perhaps weave an even more compelling study of the photographer? Perhaps, perhaps not, but in either case it's no problem.
-
It is disturbing and troubling how rapidly as a civilization the markers of our daily unique consciousness, language, have been abandoned, as tortuous monologues.
I think you've touched on something Slobodan, at the core of the complaints and discomfort. Thank you for thinking, me thinks~
-
It is disturbing and troubling how rapidly as a civilization the markers of our daily unique consciousness, language, have been abandoned, as tortuous monologues.
I think you've touched on something Slobodan, at the core of the complaints and discomfort. Thank you for thinking, me thinks~
I've a cold, Patricia, as I generally do all winter long, so that may be dulling the inner parts somewhat. However, the kitchen roll people remain perfectly happy with the situation.
I'm not sure what you are really communicating here: is it that gallerist-speak is fine, or that it gilds the faded lily? Not, of coure, that I am referring to the pix in this context as faded.
I am of the belief that art speaks for itself or it does not; I also think that should the artist decide to use captions or even short tales in conjunction with the display of his/her oeuvre, that's perfectly acceptable too, because it is presented as a holistic experience.
I further believe that when another person indulges in throwing angel dust at a work - or should that be into the eyes of the reader? - then something is a bit off in Denmark.
Maybe the advertising industry has played a useful part in my life after all.
;-)
Rob
-
It is disturbing and troubling how rapidly as a civilization the markers of our daily unique consciousness, language, have been abandoned, as tortuous monologues.
I think you've touched on something Slobodan, at the core of the complaints and discomfort. Thank you for thinking, me thinks~
Yes - we now have to reduce discussion to emojis, or some written equivalent.
-
Removal of tongues, shutting down of internet for an entire country, pressure against the expression of idiosyncratic thought. Should these not make us, at minimum, ill at ease? And then? Willed post human life, as we slept? Language described as tortured? Never cease to be stunned by how it can be possible we do not recognize the curve of earth, the paths to seeing other, and the luxury of expression. I concede a grain of sand may cause us to perceive that our shoe causes us pain, but to willfully pressure for elimination or restriction of clamornauticus seems to indicate that post human may be in closer proximity than perceived. (Caution, objects in mirror are closer than they appear. )
-
I concede a grain of sand may cause us to perceive that our shoe causes us pain,
To grasp this sorry Scheme of Things entire
And heaven in a wild flower.
-
Removal of tongues, shutting down of internet for an entire country, pressure against the expression of idiosyncratic thought. Should these not make us, at minimum, ill at ease? And then? Willed post human life, as we slept? Language described as tortured? Never cease to be stunned by how it can be possible we do not recognize the curve of earth, the paths to seeing other, and the luxury of expression. I concede a grain of sand may cause us to perceive that our shoe causes us pain, but to willfully pressure for elimination or restriction of clamornauticus seems to indicate that post human may be in closer proximity than perceived. (Caution, objects in mirror are closer than they appear. )
"... closer than they appear." On one mundane, optical level, they are twice as distant, yet on another scale of the metaphysical, right inside the transmitter.
We live in a world that is possibly itself within another. It's the very thought that prompted my title for the much later galleries of my non-pro photography, where I have mostly abandoned thing in preference for idea of signal. Hence, Glimpsed Parallels (which is the only growing section in my website) that, to me, is absolutely about an impression that comes my way, usually at the time of clicking, but quite often much later on when I get around to looking at it again on the monitor. It's sometimes quite a delay and change of rail before the picture finalizes. Really, it's why it actually doesn't matter a hill of beans if anyone else sees anything there or not: sufficient, for me, that I did. It's the leaks, you see, the tiny tears in the fabrics of the two realities that allows the sightings. Now there's a fine, unoriginal idea!
Shutting down of the Internet? Curiously, there is, today, a thing going on in the UK about a little fourteen-year-old girl, the most public of these events to date, who took herself out after an intensive exposure to Instagram self-harm postings. The government is "seriously considering this" and the Internet companies make the same claim. Nothing will happen until the advertising people also object to the juxtaposition of their sales stuff and such material... how strange that only money removes these things, and that freedom to spread mayhem is otherwise considered more important than some impressionable young lives.
Language is about communication. I feel that all the separists of this world, the ones who scream for tv stations (on the national purse) for verbal codes not used outwith some remote croft in uncharted UK Scottish wilderness, on some Welsh farm or even in tourist meccas in the Mediterranean are remarkably strange manifestations of eased communication, of getting to know one another better. I don't know if common sense has resolved this yet or not, but in the Balearics, Spanish doctors are/were? obliged to speak Catalan as well as the official Castilian; the native islander language is a version of Catalan - yet in all my years here, I have never come across a local who cannot speak Castilian. In one fell swoop the language freaks have decided that it's better to die than be attended by a doctor who can't also speak the local lingo. The lunatics, the asylum...
Of course, that's quite a leap sideways from the topic to hand, but yes, the use of hype and flashy vocabulary certainly has its place, but I don't think it ever helps communication when out of its comfort zone. Then, I think it just slips into the pretentious, which does nobody a lot of good. If you want to be - or are - a poet or writer for some literary vehicle, then go for it, throw open your thesaurus and have an orgy. For a humble photography website?
:-)
-
Humble photography website? Have you noticed how many PhDs, MBAs, etc,. and generally well-educated members are here? Are you (rhetorical you) really scared of a few big words like “primal” or “archetypal” ? Even if yes, help is just a google-click away. You (rhetorical you) might even expand your horizons (gasp!).
-
Humble photography website? Have you noticed how many PhDs, MBAs, etc,. and generally well-educated members are here? Are you (rhetorical you) really scared of a few big words like “primal” or “archetypal” ? Even if yes, help is just a google-click away. You (rhetorical you) might even expand your horizons (gasp!).
Humble, Slobodan, in the rhetorical sense.
That aside, it's been a long time since degrees impressed me very much; mostly, the folks I know who did well in life had pretty much none of those badges of early honour. Especially in photography, though if you really apply yourself, I'm sure you'll be able to pull up a list to the contrary.
Of course, that's not to say that they don't work miracles within their own world, as I know from my own brood. Oddly, their conversation isn't riddled with hype, but then maybe they are compensating for me - the rhetorical me, naturally.
:-)
-
There wasn't anything hype-riddled about the sections of the interview concerned with technique, printing or gear. It could be that some think the interview should have stuck to those topics and let the superb images do the rest of the talking, but I think the sections on inspiration, background and philosophy/vision added balance and value.
You can always skip that stuff if it doesn't float your boat, so why spend longer carping on about it than the interviewer/interviewee spent writing it?
By the way,
You can enjoy those images and more with musical accompaniment by Rachael's daughter here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o1B2Gr13U0
-
There wasn't anything hype-riddled about the sections of the interview concerned with technique, printing or gear. It could be that some think the interview should have stuck to those topics and let the superb images do the rest of the talking, but I think the sections on inspiration, background and philosophy/vision added balance and value.
You can always skip that stuff if it doesn't float your boat, so why spend longer carping on about it than the interviewer/interviewee spent writing it?
By the way,
You can enjoy those images and more with musical accompaniment by Rachael's daughter here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o1B2Gr13U0
Now THAT is simply beautiful.
You get the best of two worlds: the beauty of exceptional imagery and the added, sensual kick in the head from music that matches perfectly.
So what has happened? What has happened is that there are no external voices nattering in your ears and seeking to say "look a me! aren't I brilliant? Waddya think of my added value, huh?" What you get in the video, instead, is peace and the privilege of making and enjoying your own interpretation or spiritual journey on your own terms.
It should always be like this.
Now: "so why spend longer carping on about it than the interviewer/interviewee spent writing it?"
Because this is a chat space, and chat is what makes this thing go round and exist at all. Without responses this would be a primitive blog. And I, for one, would have missed your musical link.
Rob
-
Because this is a chat space, and chat is what makes this thing go round and exist at all. Without responses this would be a primitive blog. And I, for one, would have missed your musical link.
Rob
+100
-
Now THAT is simply beautiful.
You get the best of two worlds: the beauty of exceptional imagery and the added, sensual kick in the head from music that matches perfectly.
So what has happened? What has happened is that there are no external voices nattering in your ears and seeking to say "look a me! aren't I brilliant? Waddya think of my added value, huh?" What you get in the video, instead, is peace and the privilege of making and enjoying your own interpretation or spiritual journey on your own terms.
It should always be like this.
Now: "so why spend longer carping on about it than the interviewer/interviewee spent writing it?"
Because this is a chat space, and chat is what makes this thing go round and exist at all. Without responses this would be a primitive blog. And I, for one, would have missed your musical link.
Rob
Good stuff. We're in agreement that the written word in the forms of commentary and interaction have their place alongside the visual and acoustic artistry we love to absorb in solitary contemplation. I'm certain that so long as we make him feel welcome to, Josh will relax into the chat space and that will inform his role in crafting interview introductions.
In the meantime, I'm willing to absorb with equanimity the hi-folutin' words I understand, and allow those I don't to sail over my shoulder into the numinous, but ever absorbant and forgetful offing. Or for us below-decks types, the oggin. (https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=oggin). 8)
-
Good stuff. We're in agreement that the written word in the forms of commentary and interaction have their place alongside the visual and acoustic artistry we love to absorb in solitary contemplation. I'm certain that so long as we make him feel welcome to, Josh will relax into the chat space and that will inform his role in crafting interview introductions.
In the meantime, I'm willing to absorb with equanimity the hi-folutin' words I understand, and allow those I don't to sail over my shoulder into the numinous, but ever absorbant and forgetful offing. Or for us below-decks types, the oggin. (https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=oggin). 8)
Whoa! It's not about failure to understand words: those are certainly not beyond me, but it's their use in what I consider the wrong context that irks!
It all goes back a long way to an encounter in Hamilton's Gallery in London, where I learned to suspect gallerist-speak.
;-)
Rob
-
I thought that given the work on view the wording of Josh's questioning was both fitting and insightful.
-
:D Dire Straits
In the Gallery
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEl7devfqdc
-
:D Dire Straits
In the Gallery
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEl7devfqdc
Comes with a problem, for me: trying to get the words via the speakers in the little Sony system attached to the computer just fries my ears. However, using a little set of Panasonic earbud thingies, I get more of the words, enough to conclude it's about an artist, death and the gathering gallerist vultures. Kinda reminded me of the Tower of Silence in Bombay.
I know that I have the price list from that Hamilton's Gallery show; there were shots of Annie Lennox, amongst others, and I remember it as the snapper being Robert Mapplethorpe's brother, printer (or was he both?) or somebody like that. I think he used the maternal name rather than the paternal. To escape the brother, maybe? Or was escape impossible and not really a clever thing to seek, so it was a device used to create more interest rather than separation? I shall never know.
Rob
-
Comes with a problem, for me: trying to get the words via the speakers in the little Sony system attached to the computer just fries my ears.
Ah, sorry, Knopfler is a dreadful mumbler. Here's a version with the lyrics onscreen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lflL-EFhPIA
I know that I have the price list from that Hamilton's Gallery show; there were shots of Annie Lennox, amongst others, and I remember it as the snapper being Robert Mapplethorpe's brother, printer (or was he both?) or somebody like that. I think he used the maternal name rather than the paternal. To escape the brother, maybe? Or was escape impossible and not really a clever thing to seek, so it was a device used to create more interest rather than separation? I shall never know.
Rob
My brother in law had a day job as a sports photographer for a London paper. He used his press pass to wangle his way into gigs of an evening. He hid all the negatives of Pink FLoyd, Queen, Rod Stewart, Ritchie Havens, Stevie Marriot and many many more for years in case he was found out.
He's now living in retirement off the proceeds of the prints being published by Rock Archive. :D
(https://www.cranekalmanbrighton.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Rock-Archive_62.jpg)
Nice trousers Rod!
-
Yeah, but sometimes rather than orthopnea and diaphoresis, saying that you have trouble breathing when reclined, and that you’re sweaty, gets the point across more directly and with greater clarity. Often sesquipedalian tendencies are merely a mask for fears of inadequacy. Using more quotidian language, in active rather than passive voice, is often to be preferred. (There’s a joke here.)
Sighted sub. Sank same.
Rand
-
Yeah, but sometimes rather than orthopnea and diaphoresis, saying that you have trouble breathing when reclined, and that you’re sweaty, gets the point across more directly and with greater clarity. Often sesquipedalian tendencies are merely a mask for fears of inadequacy. Using more quotidian language, in active rather than passive voice, is often to be preferred. (There’s a joke here.)
Sighted sub. Sank same.
Rand
I can run with that analysis!
BBC 4 tv has another Art of America show on tonight at 9pm - UK time, so I'll have to watch it at 10pm, weather permitting. (We have a massive satellite dish, but it still suffers in stormy weather.) It's presented by Andrew Graham-Dixon (no, not the dish), who also did the BBC's Keith Richards interview some years ago when the latter's biographical book Life came out. I like both of those guys; Andrew also speaks good Italian, which is nice. I watched his shows on Rome (and cooking there), recently, and loved some of the long lens cinematographic travel set pieces; did the city proud, and gave me longings.
TV ain't all bad: you just have to use your judgement.
Rob
-
(https://www.cranekalmanbrighton.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Rock-Archive_62.jpg)
Nice trousers Rod!
Ah, the Faces! The last time Rod made really great music...
-
I can run with that analysis!
BBC 4 tv has another Art of America show on tonight at 9pm - UK time, so I'll have to watch it at 10pm, weather permitting. (We have a massive satellite dish, but it still suffers in stormy weather.) It's presented by Andrew Graham-Dixon (no, not the dish), who also did the BBC's Keith Richards interview some years ago when the latter's biographical book Life came out. I like both of those guys; Andrew also speaks good Italian, which is nice. I watched his shows on Rome (and cooking there), recently, and loved some of the long lens cinematographic travel set pieces; did the city proud, and gave me longings.
TV ain't all bad: you just have to use your judgement.
Rob
Andrew - it's almost as if - Graham-Dixon.
It's almost as if he's an art critic.
God, I miss the passing of Robert Hughes. Now, there was a critic with true passion!
;-)
-
Andrew - it's almost as if - Graham-Dixon.
It's almost as if he's an art critic.
God, I miss the passing of Robert Hughes. Now, there was a critic with true passion!
;-)
I know, our Andrew is one of your favourites. :-)
I used to enjoy Waldemar Something Unpronounceable in the Sunday Times, but on tv he was, for me, unwatchable. What chance most wannabes on LuLa?
I found Jeremy Clarkson was exactly the same: great in the ST but unwatchable on Top Gear.
Just those different strokes and bloody folks again...
:-)
-
I know, our Andrew is one of your favourites. :-)
I used to enjoy Waldemar Something Unpronounceable in the Sunday Times, but on tv he was, for me, unwatchable. What chance most wannabes on LuLa?
I found Jeremy Clarkson was exactly the same: great in the ST but unwatchable on Top Gear.
Just those different strokes and bloody folks again...
:-)
Agreed about Waldemar Januszczak. As for Clarkson, well, better not said.
;-)
-
Maybe I am feeling especially "liverish" this morning but I feel bad for Rachel Talibart and feel she deserves an apology.
How is it that what started out as a serious, respectful and focussed discussion of some clearly wonderful photographic work - and was generally acknowledged as such by the initial comments - has now degenerated into a saloon-bar/undergrad common room brawl about esoteric approaches to communication which would be better suited to the Coffee Corner area ? I am obviously wrong in my assumption that this recent trend had a lot to do with the previous administration of the site - although I am sure that Michael would have discouraged it swiftly, courteously but quietly effectively.
Rachael Talibert's work is excellent and one very valid approach to photography - there are many others - and it deserves discussion and recognition as such without all of this distraction.
Disputation on whatever for its own sake is great entertainment for old men - I know as I am one of them - but in the right place please, if only out of respect for worthwhile feature contributors who might otherwise be discouraged from contributing.
-
What can I say... chatters gonna chat ;)
On a serious note, though, I agree with John, regarding respect for the original article. Discussing approaches to photographic communication at least has something to do with the article. Rod Stewart’s trousers, or some obscure (outside a local pub) TV personalities, however ....
-
Maybe I am feeling especially "liverish" this morning but I feel bad for Rachel Talibart and feel she deserves an apology.
How is it that what started out as a serious, respectful and focussed discussion of some clearly wonderful photographic work - and was generally acknowledged as such by the initial comments - has now degenerated into a saloon-bar/undergrad common room brawl about esoteric approaches to communication which would be better suited to the Coffee Corner area ? I am obviously wrong in my assumption that this recent trend had a lot to do with the previous administration of the site - although I am sure that Michael would have discouraged it swiftly, courteously but quietly effectively.
Rachael Talibert's work is excellent and one very valid approach to photography - there are many others - and it deserves discussion and recognition as such without all of this distraction.
Disputation on whatever for its own sake is great entertainment for old men - I know as I am one of them - but in the right place please, if only out of respect for worthwhile feature contributors who might otherwise be discouraged from contributing.
Actually, I don't think people have been taking issue with the photography. If anything, I think she gets a good vote of well done! The video with music was wonderful; perhaps it's all a matter of presentation, that's a problem a lot wider across the 'net than just what goes down here in humble cosy LuLa.
As most know, one of my favourite photographic artists is the redoubtable Sarah Moon; her work is visible in various modes, but I feel that there is a couple of them where stills are accompanied by music which, perhaps not entirely to my taste, is at least non-invasive and, should you like the musical idiom itself, an even better way of looking at her work. At worst, you can kill the sound. In almost all cases, I think the written word is simply too distracting for the basic reason that you have to remove your eye from the image in order to get the drift of the opinion being flaunted. In other words, the mechanics are flawed.
If one is willing to hang one's washing out on the line in the village green, then one has to be prepared to live with all the consequences of that act. Hell, some people just hate pink! Or blue.
Rob