Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: stamper on February 10, 2014, 07:40:31 am
-
Russ's idea of Street is there should be a story & ambiguity in an image to qualify for Street photography. Is there a story and ambiguity in this one?
-
For me Yes. Story is very much present.
Peter
-
Yes. The story is there. I don't see much ambiguity, but then, sometimes the ambiguity is weak in Frank's pictures -- even in HCB's. It's kind of like this one in that respect. I wouldn't hesitate to call it street.
-
Much as I truly like a lot of stamper's work, this isn't one.
There's nothing going on beyond 'happy snaps'. I see absolutely no reason that makes it worth the computer labour. Think about the 'Necropolis' and you see what stamper really can do; this does him no favours.
Rob C
-
Rob,
Such a cold heart.....LOL.
Peter
-
After reading the critics,
I allowed myself to correct some tonalities ...
Cheers
~Chris
-
You're getting the hang of it, Chris... focussed critique!
;-)
Rob C
-
You're getting the hang of it, Chris... focussed critique!
;-)
Rob C
Yeah - I'm very much for constructive criticism.
Cheers
~Chris
-
You're getting the hang of it, Chris... focussed critique!
;-)
Rob C
Moreover, Chris's version has at least 17.3 units of Ambiguity!
-
Moreover, Chris's version has at least 17.3 units of Ambiguity!
That's because of hanging by the feet; any old hanging by the neck wouldn't have raised an eyebrow.
Rob C
-
After reading the critics,
I allowed myself to correct some tonalities ...
Cheers
~Chris
I have been a member here for over 6 years and frequently looked at the critique forum. This is the first time that I have seen a member's image treated in such a manner. I can tolerate someone tweaking an image but "desecrating" it as you have done goes beyond what is acceptable. In Scotland we have a name for such a person that does strange things. He is an eejit. >:(
-
I have been a member here for over 6 years and frequently looked at the critique forum. This is the first time that I have seen a member's image treated in such a manner. I can tolerate someone tweaking an image but "desecrating" it as you have done goes beyond what is acceptable. In Scotland we have a name for such a person that does strange things. He is an eejit. >:(
This is highly interesting.
I'll tell you why.
My idea about this manipulation was about the father doing something odd - standing on his head - and thus evoking interest and astonishment in the youngster.
Also the term "ambiguity" - something containing one and the other in the same moment was part of this process - the father standing and suddenly standing upside down.
The interesting thing is what has being done out of this editing by the discussion - being a hanging man and things like this.
I personally had absolutely no intent to desacrate anything - actually I liked the image as it already was.
It also appears to me, that the understatement in my post "I allowed myself to correct some tonalities ..." could have made something clear which unfortunately has evaded you.
My edit was more a humoristic answer to the critics, like:
"Now - is this ambuguity enough?"
"Now - do you finally have the extraordinary you so desperately desire in an image?"
But as it is - once something is created people do with it what they want and the artist (I consider myself here as an artist interacting with the work of another artist) plays no role in it anymore.
Cheers
~Chris
EDIT: Couldn't you just say I'm an idiot?
Clear and precise in the full conscience of knowing the right thing and judging it all properly?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
eejit
ˈiːdʒɪt/
noun
informal
noun: eejit; plural noun: eejits
1.
Irish and Scottish form of idiot.
"don't stand there like a gormless eejit!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Chris your explanation would have possibly been acceptable if you had stated it when you posted the altered image. I have looked at the forum rules and it doesn't specifically - unlike other sites - ban the use of altering an image and reposting. I think it should. I posted the image with the idea of getting some feedback as to story and ambiguity in the context of Street Photography. Unfortunately it was mocked and altered by more than one person. I find your alteration unacceptable because it looked as if you was portraying some kind of personal attack. As stated I have never seen this type of "desecration" of an image in a critique. Others can judge for themselves. :o
-
Chris your explanation would have possibly been acceptable if you had stated it when you posted the altered image. I have looked at the forum rules and it doesn't specifically - unlike other sites - ban the use of altering an image and reposting. I think it should. I posted the image with the idea of getting some feedback as to story and ambiguity in the context of Street Photography. Unfortunately it was mocked and altered by more than one person. I find your alteration unacceptable because it looked as if you was portraying some kind of personal attack. As stated I have never seen this type of "desecration" of an image in a critique. Others can judge for themselves. :o
What you see in an image is usually highly subjective.
You know me well enough from my posts and history here,
that I never desecrate or mischievously mock or otherwise attempt to
behave derogatively towards others.
Ignoring this, ignoring the understatement in my post and using severe allegations and also insults in your first answer to my edit also speaks for itself.
I understand, that the critique you received here (not from me) was harsh and possibly hurting.
And if my edit hurt you unnecessarily and unintended I feel sorry for that. Really !
But I also must say, that you had an alternative how to read and interpret my edit and the according post and
what you finally saw in it also was your own choice - consciously or unconsciously.
Cheers
~Chris
-
I want to go back to my opinion on ambiguity in street photography. Actually, ambiguity is a relatively small part of what defines a street photograph, but ambiguity is what makes a powerful street photograph. I covered the subject more fully in an article that's posted at: http://www.russ-lewis.com/essays/WhyDoStreetPhotography.html. There's also an earlier, related article at: http://www.russ-lewis.com/essays/OnStreetPhotography.html that covers some of the same ground.
I'm afraid I tend to over-emphasize the role of ambiguity. I think it's an important part of the best street work, but it's not critical. I always look for it in a street shot, because it's delicious. I do think that great street photography stands head and shoulders above other genres.
-
Chris, you have to understand: men from Glasgow have a reputation to defend - that of being hard. As I know that you know this through knowing me, the hardest of the hard, I thought you were simply showing the man doing the Glaswegian version of the pogo dance, much to the child's amusement; a hung version, as it were. Had you instead also added a little motion blur, a better dance shot would have followed.
Now, insofar as stamper's concerns about 'editing' posted images: I agree that none should even be copied, never mind changed, but having aired this view before, it seems that the majority disagrees, and so in that case, communal custom seems to be on your side.
Regarding stamper's actual shot: IMO he's repeatedly shown himself a far better photographer than that, and again IMO, this shot does him no favours at all. If that's being unpleasant, so be it - post in Without Prejudice, as I do most of the time, because I hate the second-guessing game that amateurs seem to thrive upon and with which they apparently try to score brownie points and appear more clever than they really are. Critique is a waste of time. It helps nobody, despite some 'willing victims' actually thinking that somebody else can think for them in matter of art. What nonsense. All anyone can do is show another how to do things mechanical, in which category I include Photoshop. That's not art. Your art starts well before you go click!
Rob C
-
I want to go back to my opinion on ambiguity in street photography. Actually, ambiguity is a relatively small part of what defines a street photograph, but ambiguity is what makes a powerful street photograph. I covered the subject more fully in an article that's posted at: http://www.russ-lewis.com/essays/WhyDoStreetPhotography.html. There's also an earlier, related article at: http://www.russ-lewis.com/essays/OnStreetPhotography.html that covers some of the same ground.
I'm afraid I tend to over-emphasize the role of ambiguity. I think it's an important part of the best street work, but it's not critical. I always look for it in a street shot, because it's delicious. I do think that great street photography stands head and shoulders above other genres.
The best of, perhaps...
Of course that's a personal view, as are all of our views, but some of the early street snappers certainly did a lot to interest me in the medium of photography, if not street per se; but street isn't devoid of its naked emperors either.
I think the problem with all of these genres comes along once fame is connected. That starts the copycat trend, which by force, is just that: a weak copy of something original and strong, and which, very importantly, had a genuine raison d'être now lost and totally redundant. Those old boys in videos, hanging about New York streets with their black Leicas in hand look like nothing but a bunch of rich old men looking for their next decisive moment. For all the world, they remind me of nothing as much as rich old perverts slumming.
I think street has a bad press, and I can absolutely see and understand why.
Rob C
-
That starts the copycat trend, which by force, is just that: a weak copy of something original and strong, and which, very importantly, had a genuine raison d'être now lost and totally redundant
...vraiment
-
I certainly agree with you and Brandt about the copycats, Rob. But a tendency to copy isn't confined to street. How many Ansel Adams copies are out there in the world? Of course Ansel copiers have the advantage that Half Dome doesn't walk on down the street or give them dirty looks, so it's easier and less intimidating for them to copy. People sometimes fall back on Picasso's dictum: "Good artists borrow. Great artists steal," but there's a lot of difference between stealing an idea and copying a completed work.
-
I certainly agree with you and Brandt about the copycats, Rob. But a tendency to copy isn't confined to street. How many Ansel Adams copies are out there in the world? Of course Ansel copiers have the advantage that Half Dome doesn't walk on down the street or give them dirty looks, so it's easier and less intimidating for them to copy. People sometimes fall back on Picasso's dictum: "Good artists borrow. Great artists steal," but there's a lot of difference between stealing an idea and copying a completed work.
Yeah - where I sort of stole Stampers work and copied my own idea into it ....
I think its called collage or something.
-
I certainly agree with you and Brandt about the copycats, Rob. But a tendency to copy isn't confined to street. How many Ansel Adams copies are out there in the world? Of course Ansel copiers have the advantage that Half Dome doesn't walk on down the street or give them dirty looks, so it's easier and less intimidating for them to copy. People sometimes fall back on Picasso's dictum: "Good artists borrow. Great artists steal," but there's a lot of difference between stealing an idea and copying a completed work.
I don't question that at all, but my general feelings about the ARAT genre are too well-known for me to comment. However, having written that, I accept without reservation that there is a handful of photographers out there with the ability to take that genre and make it look different, more personal, an experience we mortals don't generally have. That that's generally the case only since the advent of Photoshop goes a long way to undermining the value of it - at least, for me. Technical expertise with an electronic manipulation medium isn't worth that much to me; it shares much the same emotion in my heart as those makeup shots that show plasticized women looking exactly like well-painted window mannequins. Take away the essential humanity and you are left with not a lot to write home about. That's why I think good painting a real art and good photography something different, more a highly developed skill than anything else.
People copying 'street' in the sense of style is not really my problem with it - you can't - the circumstances then are not the circumstances now; the problem seems to be that back then there was a purpose, publications trying to make a socio/political point, whereas today its about trying to recreate something that has no purpose anymore beyond the doubtful proving of the size of the practioner's cojones. Those photographs have no home today: they mean nothing. At best they record the message of the selfie, and at worst they embarrass somebody.
But then there is the photographer who takes that genre and turns it into something quite different, giving us the flavours of places we are not familar with, doesn't mock or laugh, but shows us life's funny moments in a different way. That take huge camera skill as well as a deep sense of humanity. Hell, it almost shows love.
Rob C
-
If you remove "almost," I'd agree, Rob.
-
a deep sense of humanity. Hell, it almost shows love. Rob C
I suspect many acquire a camera to fill the void that exists in them in the absence of love and humanity.
-
I suspect many acquire a camera to fill the void that exists in them in the absence of love and humanity.
Your suspicion is well-founded: it's the main reason why I'm doing it in more concentrated manner these past five years. It's the purpose behind cellpix, Cokes, a website and pretty much everything else: to fill the hours between eating and sleeping.
Ironic, really; when I was young it was for love of the medium and to earn my living, see the world on expenses and enjoy some glamour in my life, and now it's therapy to pacify the mind when the original motivations and possibilities no longer exist for me.
Nature abhors a vacuum, they say...
Rob C