Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => Discussing Photographic Styles => Topic started by: Ivo_B on February 06, 2020, 07:16:30 am
-
https://petapixel.com/2020/02/05/fujifilm-pulls-x100v-promo-video-after-backlash-over-photogs-shooting-style/
-
https://petapixel.com/2020/02/05/fujifilm-pulls-x100v-promo-video-after-backlash-over-photogs-shooting-style/
Hi Ivo,
Thank you for sharing.
I watched the video and that's not my brand of street. This is more like spraying or cropdusting a field in the hope of a magic crop. Most of those shots are going to be hands and shoulder straps and partial faces. To me nothing meaningful...
Peter
-
Thanks, Ivo. I'm always interested in seeing material about street photography, but it's pretty obvious that the people who put this together haven't a clue as to what street photography is all about.
-
Hi Ivo,
Thank you for sharing.
I watched the video and that's not my brand of street. This is more like spraying or cropdusting a field in the hope of a magic crop. Most of those shots are going to be hands and shoulder straps and partial faces. To me nothing meaningful...
Peter
Not really, Peter. Tatsuo’s style is very recognizable. Men can elaborate about how he works, but stating that ‘who put this together doesn’t have a clue’ as some think, is nonsense.
Check out his website.
https://www.tatsuosuzuki.com
-
There's nothing wrong with his photography, Ivo. It just isn't street photography.
-
Not really, Peter. Tatsuo’s style is very recognizable. Men can elaborate about how he works, but stating that ‘who put this together doesn’t have a clue’ as some think, is nonsense.
Check out his website.
https://www.tatsuosuzuki.com
I Know his work and I do like it. It's just not the photography that I prefer.
Peter
-
His work is amazing. As a person who grew up deep rural and has lived in many cities and still lives in a city it perfectly captures the random chaos I experience moving around a city.
A long way from the incomprehensible dullness of images nervously made at flea markets, farmers markets and tourist restaurants.
I find it inspiring.
-
His work is amazing. As a person who grew up deep rural and has lived in many cities and still lives in a city it perfectly captures the random chaos I experience moving around a city.
A long way from the incomprehensible dullness of images nervously made at flea markets, farmers markets and tourist restaurants.
I find it inspiring.
Yes, and shows the dividing line between the truly dedicated and the wannado.
I found his Tokyo lot by far the best of the galleries, probably because he understands his own place better. I'm not sure how I'd classify his work - it certainly does show chaos and also makes me glad I don't live in those areas.
Whilst I enjoy looking at that kind of work, I don't really think I'd want to do it. I prefer the beautiful in life rather than the hard and ugly, which is not to say that hard and ugly is not exciting; it just depends where you want to spend your time.
Rob
-
Results are good, however unsettling his method might be.
-
Results are good, however unsettling his method might be.
I find his eyebrows the most unsettling thing. ;D check out the clip
No, agreed.
I like his photography a lot and it is contemporary street photography. His ‘style’ is another thing.
The discussion is about his style and the fact Fuji decided to withdraw his clip from the X100V campaign.
-
... Fuji decided to whit draw his clip from the X100V campaign.
Another win for terrorists (SJW) :(
-
Another win for terrorists (SJW) :(
No, for political correctness, the one aspect of it that I find myself in some sympathy with most of the time.
It's a form of assault, and an invasion of the personal freedom to walk around unmollested by rude, camera-toting weirdos.
Rob
-
I agree, Rob. As I said in On Street Photograhy (https://luminous-landscape.com/on-street-photography/): "One thing most of us shouldn’t do is walk down the street like Bruce Gilden, wearing a mesh photographer’s vest, carrying a camera in one hand and a flashgun in the other, shoving the camera and flashgun into people’s faces and blinding them. I’m always amazed when I see a decent street picture by Gilden, and I’m always amazed when I realize Gilden’s still alive."
But that doesn't mean street photography should be banned. Real street photography, as opposed to this kind of thing can show us the attitudes of our forbears. Again, from my article: ". . .people change; it’s not just their surroundings and the way they dress that change. Their attitudes toward life change, and really good street photography can give later generations a revealing glimpse at the attitudes and the outlook of their forebears."
What this guy is doing isn't street photography. It's his own way of looking at the particular chaos around him. He may not be wearing a photographer's vest or carrying a flashgun, but his approach is very close to Gilden's. What he's doing is legitimate, but it's not street photography.
-
I agree, Rob. As I said in On Street Photograhy (https://luminous-landscape.com/on-street-photography/): "One thing most of us shouldn’t do is walk down the street like Bruce Gilden, wearing a mesh photographer’s vest, carrying a camera in one hand and a flashgun in the other, shoving the camera and flashgun into people’s faces and blinding them. I’m always amazed when I see a decent street picture by Gilden, and I’m always amazed when I realize Gilden’s still alive."
But that doesn't mean street photography should be banned. Real street photography, as opposed to this kind of thing can show us the attitudes of our forbears. Again, from my article: ". . .people change; it’s not just their surroundings and the way they dress that change. Their attitudes toward life change, and really good street photography can give later generations a revealing glimpse at the attitudes and the outlook of their forebears."
What this guy is doing isn't street photography. It's his own way of looking at the particular chaos around him. He may not be wearing a photographer's vest or carrying a flashgun, but his approach is very close to Gilden's. What he's doing is legitimate, but it's not street photography.
And here we go again.
::)
-
And here we go again.
::)
Of course, the problem of the rogue photographer spoiling it for others has never gone away, and is stlll very much with us. I am not sure what your position is on this: do you believe that because a guy has a camera in his hands he is entitled to do anything he wants to do regardless of how it impacts upon other people, his "subjects" or what some might see as his victims?
It sometimes helps clear the mind if one brings the matter right up close and personal: how would you react if the guy did it to your daughter?
Even as an old man I think I would have something to say to the guy.
People are not just photographic props to be used as desired.
-
... how would you react if the guy did it to your daughter?...
I would approach him, give him my email address, and ask him to send me the pictures.
Whoever is in public space is a fair game.
-
I would approach him, give him my email address, and ask him to send me the pictures.
Whoever is in public space is a fair game.
Yeah, right; you forgot the :-) part. Coming from European roots, both of us, I don't buy that for one moment.
Public space is fair game. Really? Interesting new defence for flashers, child-assault etc.
-
... Public space is fair game. Really? Interesting new defence for flashers, child-assault etc.
Oh, please, Rob! There is no way you can honestly connect what I said with criminal behavior.
-
Of course, the problem of the rogue photographer spoiling it for others has never gone away, and is stlll very much with us. I am not sure what your position is on this: do you believe that because a guy has a camera in his hands he is entitled to do anything he wants to do regardless of how it impacts upon other people, his "subjects" or what some might see as his victims?
It sometimes helps clear the mind if one brings the matter right up close and personal: how would you react if the guy did it to your daughter?
Even as an old man I think I would have something to say to the guy.
People are not just photographic props to be used as desired.
No, I don’t think a camera is a license to assault others space. I strongly believe that my freedom ends where yours start, and visa versa.
But there is something to consider in this discussion. Can you tell us what you think of this picture of Nan Goldin?
-
Whoever is in public space is a fair game.
This is not the case in a fair part of theworld.
-
I agree, Rob. As I said in On Street Photograhy (https://luminous-landscape.com/on-street-photography/): "One thing most of us shouldn’t do is walk down the street like Bruce Gilden, wearing a mesh photographer’s vest, carrying a camera in one hand and a flashgun in the other, shoving the camera and flashgun into people’s faces and blinding them. I’m always amazed when I see a decent street picture by Gilden, and I’m always amazed when I realize Gilden’s still alive."
But that doesn't mean street photography should be banned. Real street photography, as opposed to this kind of thing can show us the attitudes of our forbears. Again, from my article: ". . .people change; it’s not just their surroundings and the way they dress that change. Their attitudes toward life change, and really good street photography can give later generations a revealing glimpse at the attitudes and the outlook of their forebears."
What this guy is doing isn't street photography. It's his own way of looking at the particular chaos around him. He may not be wearing a photographer's vest or carrying a flashgun, but his approach is very close to Gilden's. What he's doing is legitimate, but it's not street photography.
A selfie Ad verecundiam... Priceless. ;D
-
No, I don’t think a camera is a license to assault others space. I strongly believe that my freedom ends where yours start, and visa versa.
But there is something to consider in this discussion. Can you tell us what you think of this picture of Nan Goldin?
AIDS.
I have never understood her popularity.
Ditto that woman who used to make selfies standing by the side of the road. Imaginary movies.
-
AIDS.
I have never understood her popularity.
Ditto that woman who used to make selfies standing by the side of the road. Imaginary movies.
I didn’t ask what you think about the maker......... See my point?
-
And here we go again.
Where?
-
I would approach him, give him my email address, and ask him to send me the pictures.
Whoever is in public space is a fair game.
Perhaps you should try that approach in Morocco, Slobodan.
;-)
-
I didn’t ask what you think about the maker......... See my point?
But I did tell you: it looks like somebody saying adios to somebody else dying of AIDS. What else is there, worth the writing, to say? If anything, it's a pretty sordid looking image, much in keeping with the rest of the stuff that made her name - for better or for worse. It symbolises what I dislike about her and that world: it's ugly and I don't need it in my life.
It might even be the most tender moment in two lives, but I still don't want to be there, and the colour balance is the stuff of nightmares. Exactly as I guess she wanted: sensational, in the wrong sense of that word.
Rob
-
This is not the case in a fair part of theworld.
Unfortunately. That’s why America remains the only truly free country for photographers... and in general.
-
I didn’t ask what you think about the maker......... See my point?
Your points are as opaque as your photography (hint: need a written explanation the length of War and Peace to get the point across).
-
... Can you tell us what you think of this picture of Nan Goldin?
Was the guy lying on the street? If not, than your “point” is totally irrelevant for this thread.
-
But I did tell you: it looks like somebody saying adios to somebody else dying of AIDS. What else is there, worth the writing, to say? If anything, it's a pretty sordid looking image, much in keeping with the rest of the stuff that made her name - for better or for worse. It symbolises what I dislike about her and that world: it's ugly and I don't need it in my life.
It might even be the most tender moment in two lives, but I still don't want to be there, and the colour balance is the stuff of nightmares. Exactly as I guess she wanted: sensational, in the wrong sense of that word.
Rob
And the rest is projection?
Is your initial dry comment ’AIDS’ including all what this picture shows?
Don’t misunderstand, nothing wrong, even unavoidable to project, but there is a huge gap between what an image is and how it is understood. And then: opinions about the maker, it troubles the perception even more.
Wagners music is pulled down, not because of the music, but because someone nasty liked it so much....
-
Unfortunately. That’s why America remains the only truly free country for photographers... and in general.
I suppose you can find peoples in the US who have another opinion, it only takes a walk outside the gold plated ivory tower to see.
-
I suppose you can find peoples in the US who have another opinion...
I rest my case.
-
Your points are as opaque as your photography (hint: need a written explanation the length of War and Peace to get the point across).
It needs a bit of thinking out of the box. To much asked?
-
Was the guy lying on the street? If not, than your “point” is totally irrelevant for this thread.
Read your comment again and again, and perhaps you will figure out why you reaction is so on the person.
Is it because of me? Or because of what the image shows? Or is it because of the subject? Or are there cognitive things in the game? Politics perhaps? I don’t know. But it is relevant to this discussion.
-
It needs a bit of thinking out of the box. To much asked?
Please explain this post at length, Ivo. The cliché "thinking out of the box" really needs an explanation of what you think "the box" is. :o
-
Please explain this post at length, Ivo. The cliché "thinking out of the box" really needs an explanation of what you think "the box" is. :o
Exactly!
-
Read your comment again and again, and perhaps you will figure out why you reaction is so on the person.
Is it because of me? Or because of what the image shows? Or is it because of the subject? Or are there cognitive things in the game? Politics perhaps? I don’t know. But it is relevant to this discussion.
As Ronald Reagan once famously said: "There you go again."
"Cognitive things in the game?", Ivo? You use abstractions that I suspect even you don't understand. Once you make a simple statement like that one, in order for it to have meaning you'd have, as Slobodan suggests, to write a book-length explanation to get your point across. You may think you know what you mean, but throwaway phrases don't enlighten anyone else.
-
Please explain this post at length, Ivo. The cliché "thinking out of the box" really needs an explanation of what you think "the box" is. :o
The box is you idea of photography
-
Please explain what you mean by that post, Ivo. As usual, you say something that might mean something to you, but doesn't mean anything to anyone else reading it.
-
As Ronald Reagan once famously said: "There you go again."
"Cognitive things in the game?", Ivo? You use abstractions that I suspect even you don't understand. Once you make a simple statement like that one, in order for it to have meaning you'd have, as Slobodan suggests, to write a book-length explanation to get your point across. You may think you know what you mean, but throwaway phrases don't enlighten anyone else.
I know you quickly suspect other peoples as clueless. On whatever subject.
It always boils down to:
This is not real street, the person clearly doesn’t have a clue.
When other opinions are given, some old baked forum semantics mingled with cameraclub knowledge take over and the whole discussion turns out in a discussion which could easily be compared with the pathetic comedy between Trump and Pelosi. The one overrules common sense with brutality and the other rips apart what she does not like.
Im not into this.
Cheers
-
Well, as usual your "arguments" boil down simply to insults, Ivo. I'm not sure whether your problem is with the English language or with a thinking problem. As I pointed out once before, I was in politics for eight years, so insults don't bother me, but you're not getting your point across. It's pretty obvious it's not getting across to others either.
-
And the rest is projection?
Is your initial dry comment ’AIDS’ including all what this picture shows?
Don’t misunderstand, nothing wrong, even unavoidable to project, but there is a huge gap between what an image is and how it is understood. And then: opinions about the maker, it troubles the perception even more.
Wagners music is pulled down, not because of the music, but because someone nasty liked it so much....
Ivo, it may clear the waters if you tell us what you see in that photo that I or anyone else is missing.
It's not going to be good enough simply to write a different scenario to anyone else: you really need to latch onto something that is a convincing reading of the image, and then tell it in words.
Even if the picture had been published without a credit, the reaction (mine) would have been no different. It would remain a place I don't want to go.
I have nothing against Wagner or any other musical genius: I don't go for that side of the scale at all, preferring simple stuff that makes my feet tap and gives me a little exercise even when at home. I don't think of music as a mental adventure, as something that's going to better me in any way; just like it to keep me happy company, even when it's blue and the message is heartbreakingly familiar. I don't seek further education, I'm afraid.
Rob
-
Not really, Peter. Tatsuo’s style is very recognizable. Men can elaborate about how he works, but stating that ‘who put this together doesn’t have a clue’ as some think, is nonsense.
Check out his website.
https://www.tatsuosuzuki.com
I understand That this is Tatsuo's style of Photography. I just don't like the brand. Good for some others. By the way Ivo, I never said his work is nonsense. Just not my kind of street. Is that ok with you?
Peter
-
...mingled with cameraclub knowledge . .
I can't pass this one by, Ivo. I'm not into "camera club" stuff, but you ought to be careful with your insults. I've seen "camera club" photography a good deal better than anything I've seen you do.
-
Why is it not ok to stick a camera in someone’s face but it is ok to take a photo of them from a distance without their permission? And then publish that photo?
Mr. Suzuki’s style is not something I would emulate, but his results are not unflattering. I would rather have him take my photo than someone who from a distance took an ugly shot of me with my mouth open talking or eating. Or maybe caught me in an awkward moment or stance. His photos show an attitude towards people that is not unkind.
I do not like the way Fuji handled this. They should not have let the cancel culture people win, imo.
Sharon
-
... I do not like the way Fuji handled this. They should not have let the cancel culture people win, imo.
+1
-
Why is it not ok to stick a camera in someone’s face but it is ok to take a photo of them from a distance without their permission? And then publish that photo?
Mr. Suzuki’s style is not something I would emulate, but his results are not unflattering. I would rather have him take my photo than someone who from a distance took an ugly shot of me with my mouth open talking or eating. Or maybe caught me in an awkward moment or stance. His photos show an attitude towards people that is not unkind.
I do not like the way Fuji handled this. They should not have let the cancel culture people win, imo.
Sharon
I don't believe that it is. Paparazzi are a collective pest. Catching someone, intentionally, in an unflattering mode (unless a paid model gig), whether close up or from afar, ammounts to the same thing, Sharon. In fact, working with a long lens usually makes models look a helluva lot better. IMO. Catching anyone without their permission is a problem all its own.
Fuji is acting no differently than did one of my own best clients - perhaps the very best - by reacting to the dangers of political correctness and how those loud voices can damage reputations. That was back in the mid-eighties. And before that, in the early seventies when I first began to produce calendars for them, they were already well aware of the problems that pictures of women could potentially create for their clients: their calendars were shot so that they could provide pages which were topless or nude, portraits, and fully clothed. That meant that the calendar had to have independently interchangeable pages, which was solved by having a second wiro-bound date section hanging from the backing board where the upper photo section ended. The recipient could flip the illustrations up top to suit the guessed perspective of whoever was going to come visit him in his office. It all created extra cost, but hey, I was working!
I wrote that paparazzi are a pest; that doesn't even begin to say what I think of PC obsessives. They brought premature retirement.
All that said, I think he does what he does extremely well. And make me thirst for the city.
Rob
-
... Paparazzi are a collective pest...
Not at all.
Paparazzi, like any other profession, serve to satisfy a collective need (for gossip) on one side, and on the other side the need of budding celebrities to become real ones, and have-beens to maintain their status.
Budding celebrities would give one kidney for paparazzi to chase them. Only when they get there, to the top, with the help of paparazzi, they start whining about "privacy." Give me a break.
-
Not at all.
Paparazzi, like any other profession, serve to satisfy a collective need (for gossip) on one side, and on the other side the need of budding celebrities to become real ones, and have-beens to maintain their status.
Budding celebrities would give one kidney for paparazzi to chase them. Only when they get there, to the top, with the help of paparazzi, they start whining about "privacy." Give me a break.
When I was young, I saw the Dolce Vita syndrome through different eyes. My mother lived there (Rome) for a while, and after she left, I went there again to spend some days with a relative. I was asked along to a birthday party one night and after the meal was over, some of us breezed down to the Via Veneto for a giggle, and as I had the ubiquitous camera and little grey Braun flash with me, we decided to play a game of faux paps, with myself annoying one of the prettier girls from the party as she walked down through the pavement tables, waving a dismissive hand at me and calling out no photos! no photos! Caught up in the excitement, I also shot some total strangers sitting at tables, and as you suggest, those girls were delighted - if possibly surprised - to be snapped. But that was another era.
And yep, my knowing anything about paps came from the Italian magazines that I used to get sent sometimes, which were full of Rome film gossip and snaps. Cinecitta was the European equivalent of Hollywood for several years. (I linked here to photographer Chiara Samugheo some while ago - she had hundreds of star covers and features from Rome.) Then, I saw the DV film and understood the origin of the word. I stoppd having access to Silver Screen, Photoplay etc. when we left India, so I'd forgotten all about columnists Walter Winchell, Hedda Hopper and Louella Parsons. Instead, I found lots of books by photographers Peter Basch, Peter Gowland and Don Ornitz (Fawcett Publications?) where they featured stars and starlets from around the world movie industry. I realised, years later, that the movie stills those guys shot as PR for stars were so superior to the anodyne, interchangeable Photoshopped plastic replica people of today's publications.
But the magazines. They moved from entertainment to gutter crawling, catering to the unfathomed depths of readership minds. I really don't care to know if some tart is or is not wearing knickers as she gets out of the hired limo.
If "stars" need them, great, but they and their hunters have their closed niche in society too, and as long as they work it out amongst their own ranks, cool. But street's another ballgame where people play at paps but don't have the outlets to make the sales nor the opportunities to snap the celebs they would seek. Instead, they annoy the casual passer by.
So yeah, there's the break for which you asked
;-)
-
I understand That this is Tatsuo's style of Photography. I just don't like the brand. Good for some others. By the way Ivo, I never said his work is nonsense. Just not my kind of street. Is that ok with you?
Peter
Yes it is, Peter. It was not you who turned the discussion into the old same debate about clueless people doing street. It was Russ.
-
Ivo, it may clear the waters if you tell us what you see in that photo that I or anyone else is missing.
Rob
Rob, let’s start back with my question.
Your answer was short: AIDS. And then you expressed your opinion on the photographer. And that explains my point. Also in Tatsuo’s case, suddenly, it is not anymore about the pictures, but about the photographer.
-
Why is it not ok to stick a camera in someone’s face but it is ok to take a photo of them from a distance without their permission? And then publish that photo?
Mr. Suzuki’s style is not something I would emulate, but his results are not unflattering. I would rather have him take my photo than someone who from a distance took an ugly shot of me with my mouth open talking or eating. Or maybe caught me in an awkward moment or stance. His photos show an attitude towards people that is not unkind.
I do not like the way Fuji handled this. They should not have let the cancel culture people win, imo.
Sharon
I can not agree more.
-
Rob, let’s start back with my question.
Your answer was short: AIDS. And then you expressed your opinion on the photographer. And that explains my point. Also in Tatsuo’s case, suddenly, it is not anymore about the pictures, but about the photographer.
Photographer, style and produced images are inseperable when there is no external client with his own desires. You describe the image you have described the photographer. At least, for any photographer who has a body of work substantial enough to have allowed him to develop into himself rather than remain an embryo.
-
Photographer, style and produced images are inseperable when there is no external client with his own desires. You describe the image you have described the photographer. At least, for any photographer who has a body of work substantial enough to have allowed him to develop into himself rather than remain an embryo.
Yes, that is true.
But does this justify a declassification of the work as such? That’s what happened with the Tatsuo video clip.
Suddenly it is not about the work he makes with Fuji gear, but about how he works.
Fujifilm as a brand prefers not to be associated with the photographers style of working, regardless the result.
-
Unfortunately. That’s why America remains the only truly free country for photographers... and in general.
Like carrying guns, then. The hell with the collateral damage.
Your foot, your bullet.
:-)
-
Yes, that is true.
But does this justify a declassification of the work as such? That’s what happened with the Tatsuo video clip.
Suddenly it is not about the work he makes with Fuji gear, but about how he works.
Fujifilm as a brand prefers not to be associated with the photographers style of working, regardless the result.
Don't you believe Fuji has the right to make up its own mind about what does or does not harm its image? It's their image, remember, their call.
-
Rob, let’s start back with my question.
Your answer was short: AIDS. And then you expressed your opinion on the photographer. And that explains my point. Also in Tatsuo’s case, suddenly, it is not anymore about the pictures, but about the photographer.
You have still not told me what there is about the Goldin picture that I missed.
-
Don't you believe Fuji has the right to make up its own mind about what does or does not harm its image? It's their image, remember, their call.
According to people who shot with Suzuki, he isn't really that aggressive. What I wonder is if Fuji wanted the excitement for their video and then caved when the criticism rolled in. This is what I object to. If you produce the video, then why fire the photographer over it? Why not fire whoever produced the video? They used Suzuki as a scapegoat. I think the story is more than what is on the surface but to fire Suzuki was really wrong. Again, just my opinion. They could have taken down the video without firing Suzuki.
Sharon
-
I do not like the way Fuji handled this. They should not have let the cancel culture people win, imo.
Corporations in general are very risk-averse when it comes to their reputation. They are not there to fight for your causes.
-
Don't you believe Fuji has the right to make up its own mind about what does or does not harm its image? It's their image, remember, their call.
Fuji has that right, for sure.
-
You have still not told me what there is about the Goldin picture that I missed.
If your reaction is : “Aids”, and then a personal take on the photographer: Or you missed everything , or you block what the picture shows, for one or another reason.
-
If your reaction is : “Aids”, and then a personal take on the photographer: Or you missed everything , or you block what the picture shows, for one or another reason.
Ivo, that is still just your projection about what you think that I think; I asked you about what you thought about the image that I - or the rest of us - may be missing.
;-)
-
Ivo, that is still just your projection about what you think that I think; I asked you about what you thought about the image that I - or the rest of us - may be missing.
;-)
No Rob, this was your answer, not what I think your answer was. 😉
It is not about what you or I may be missing, it’s about the think process behind the appreciation of an image.
Anyhow. I can tell you:
1: What I see as a viewer: a man kissing another very sick, maybe dying man.
2: What I feel as a viewer: I feel uncomfortable close, I have double feelings, I’m not sure why (is it context or the knowledge of Goldin’s body of work?) but I feel on one hand a bit aversion because I’m not into kissing men. And on the other hand I feel the tenderness how the one man approaches the other man. Strange enough, if it where two brothers, the emphatic element would not poke me the same way as the image does now, because I assume to look at a homosexual couple.
The tenderness of the scene makes me shameful for the pejorative feelings I have.
2: What I feel as photographer: TL lights, always difficult. But somehow it add’s to the discomfort of the image. I wish I was there, with my camera.
Is that a reply?
-
. . .it’s about the think process behind the appreciation of an image.
Is that a reply?
No, it isn't, Ivo. The "think process" has nothing to do with the appreciation of great art. You react to great art with a part of your soul that has nothing to do with thinking. I know you won't read it, or if you do, you won't understand it, but at least try "Touching the Seer. (http://www.russ-lewis.com/essays/TouchingTheSeer.html)"
-
No Rob, this was your answer, not what I think your answer was. 😉
It is not about what you or I may be missing, it’s about the think process behind the appreciation of an image.
Anyhow. I can tell you:
1: What I see as a viewer: a man kissing another very sick, maybe dying man.
2: What I feel as a viewer: I feel uncomfortable close, I have double feelings, I’m not sure why (is it context or the knowledge of Goldin’s body of work?) but I feel on one hand a bit aversion because I’m not into kissing men. And on the other hand I feel the tenderness how the one man approaches the other man. Strange enough, if it where two brothers, the emphatic element would not poke me the same way as the image does now, because I assume to look at a homosexual couple.
The tenderness of the scene makes me shameful for the pejorative feelings I have.
2: What I feel as photographer: TL lights, always difficult. But somehow it add’s to the discomfort of the image. I wish I was there, with my camera.
Is that a reply?
It's the reply you give me, no argument about that. However, it doesn't reveal anything beyond what my Aids comment did in a single acronym. It just carries all the baggage straight people carry. It falls neatly into Goldin's bag: the downside of life and relationships, the more grim the better.
Rob
-
It's the reply you give me, no argument about that. However, it doesn't reveal anything beyond what my Aids comment did in a single acronym. It just carries all the baggage straight people carry. It falls neatly into Goldin's bag: the downside of life and relationships, the more grim the better.
Rob
No problem Rob.
I think the bottom line lies in the bold text in your reply....
=> not all straight people carry that bagage. This is a generation formed bagage. I don’t carry the same bagage about the subject as other generations do. And probably, younger generation even don’t understand our debate about kissing men.
Question on the side, what does the following image do with your straight bagage? ;) ;) :)
-
It's the reply you give me, no argument about that. However, it doesn't reveal anything beyond what my Aids comment did in a single acronym. It just carries all the baggage straight people carry. It falls neatly into Goldin's bag: the downside of life and relationships, the more grim the better.
Rob
Yes, very true. But is this not one of the merits of here work? Reveal what was not seen? I met Nan Goldin in Rotterdam where she opened here exhibition. She didn’t search for this extravaganza, this was here life. And she documented it.
One of the Dutch speaker talked about how she documented the downside of society, it made here pissed off. She answered something like this: You don’t understand one single thing of my work. I did not search to document the downside of life. It was my life, my best friends, my loved ones, it is who I was.
....
-
... what does the following image do with your straight bagage? ;) ;) :)
It tells me that the alphabet soup of freaks is going to get humanity extinct faster than the global warming ;)
-
It tells me that the alphabet soup of freaks is going to get humanity extinct faster than the global warming ;)
Wow....
-
No, it isn't, Ivo. The "think process" has nothing to do with the appreciation of great art. You react to great art with a part of your soul that has nothing to do with thinking. I know you won't read it, or if you do, you won't understand it, but at least try "Touching the Seer. (http://www.russ-lewis.com/essays/TouchingTheSeer.html)"
It is a mental thing, Russ. That is exact what it is. But don’t judge my mental state lesser than yours. That would be a mistake.
-
It tells me that the alphabet soup of freaks is going to get humanity extinct faster than the global warming ;)
If AIDS and Coronavirus don't do it just before global warming does.
Well, the 60s ushered in some good things, but also the opposite. It sure didn't invent them, but before that they were broadly off the menu and not advertised, and you know why folks advertise: it works. That's why we have curry shops where there were none before: news spreads and people try... do you remember flypaper?
Rob
-
If AIDS and Coronavirus don't do it just before global warming does.
Well, the 60s ushered in some good things, but also the opposite. It sure didn't invent them, but before that they were broadly off the menu and not advertised, and you know why folks advertise: it works. That's why we have curry shops where there were none before: news spreads and people try... do you remember flypaper?
Rob
Well, I know one generation that didn’t spare any effort to distinct humanity and this was not by kissing same sex. But i admit, there was something ‘gay’
-
It is a mental thing, Russ. That is exact what it is. But don’t judge my mental state lesser than yours. That would be a mistake.
I haven't a clue what you just said, Ivo, but you can be sure I won't even attempt to judge your mental state. I'm not a psychiatrist.
-
I haven't a clue what you just said, Ivo, but you can be sure I won't even attempt to judge your mental state. I'm not a psychiatrist.
You are saying I’m a looney-tick, Russ? Is that what you are saying? Be a real hero, and just say it.
-
I wouldn't deign to answer a question like that, Ivo.
-
I wouldn't deign to answer a question like that, Ivo.
Hero... ;D ;D ;D
-
Unfortunately. That’s why America remains the only truly free country for photographers... and in general.
See how free you are pointing your camera into the faces of people in east LA.
-
See how free you are pointing your camera into the faces of people in east LA.
Your free to do it...But is it wise? In much of life, that is always the question.
Peter
-
See how free you are pointing your camera into the faces of people in east LA.
It's different in the United States, Chez.