Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: 14 Photos That Challenge the Definition of Landscape Photography | TIME  (Read 23107 times)

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: 14 Photos That Challenge the Definition of Landscape Photography | TIME
« Reply #40 on: October 09, 2015, 04:41:58 pm »

I can understand ever more clearly the impossibility of getting through to, of communicating with someone who has absolutely no natural understanding about human nature, its subtleties and layers of expressional complexity.

It's always someone else's fault that you are so misunderstood.
Logged

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: 14 Photos That Challenge the Definition of Landscape Photography | TIME
« Reply #41 on: October 09, 2015, 04:46:22 pm »

ROFL

"I'm the god-damn emperor and if I say my clothes are stunning, what right do you have to tell me they're... undefined..."

They aren't my clothes -- say what you like about them, without making condescending remarks about me.
Logged

jeremyrh

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1169
Re: 14 Photos That Challenge the Definition of Landscape Photography | TIME
« Reply #42 on: October 20, 2015, 05:01:17 am »

Can you show us some of your imaginative work then please, so we can be inspired?

Or as a good substitute, show us some work you find inspiring along with some explanation of why that is.
Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: 14 Photos That Challenge the Definition of Landscape Photography | TIME
« Reply #43 on: October 20, 2015, 12:58:07 pm »

Or as a good substitute, show us some work you find inspiring along with some explanation of why that is.
Why is the onus on the person who is not slagging of other's work to find inspiring work?
Not a huge fan of landscape photography anyway, so I'd be the wrong person to ask to for suggestions in that area. However I did post one of the pictures in question along with what you just quoted,  because I thought that was rather interesting. It wasn't just a pretty picture, which I tend to find rather anodyne.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

sarrasani

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 435
Re: 14 Photos That Challenge the Definition of Landscape Photography | TIME
« Reply #44 on: November 09, 2015, 08:00:57 am »

I only saw the I and the II.
terrific colour rendition, snapshot detail, so-so composition.....
Logged
Film cameras (13X18, 2,4X3,6), digital-foveon and digital-mosaic cameras.
Only manual focus lenses.

torger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3265
Re: 14 Photos That Challenge the Definition of Landscape Photography | TIME
« Reply #45 on: December 04, 2015, 09:27:34 am »

You can't just pick a picture out of it's context and say if it's good or bad. Oh well, you can of course if you like, but if the photo comes from a series in an art project I think you need to consider the art project as a whole, and how that image fits into that particular context.

In most art photography projects there is no intention to make pictures that people hang on the wall in their own homes over their fireplace. They're made to be shown as a series in an art gallery, together with a text that provides the context of the images that makes you think when you watch the images, and that's what that type of art is about. It's not about making school-book perfect compositions of all-beautiful scenes.

Take the second picture for example of Richard Mosse which I happened to recognize, it's from his Infra series shot on Kodak Aerochrome, covering the conflict in Democratic Republic of Congo. It's not just landscape, there's pictures of soldiers in war too.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2015, 01:44:27 pm by torger »
Logged

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1799
    • Some of my photos
Re: 14 Photos That Challenge the Definition of Landscape Photography | TIME
« Reply #46 on: December 09, 2015, 10:08:46 am »

In most art photography projects there is no intention to make pictures that people hang on the wall in their own homes over their fireplace. They're made to be shown as a series in an art gallery, together with a text that provides the context of the images that makes you think when you watch the images, and that's what that type of art is about.

Taking your comment partly out of context :)...

Does this mean that there is necessarily a schism between an artist who aspires to sell to (or just exhibit in) a museum and one who hopes to sell to private individuals through a commercial gallery? What about the notion that a museum should not be trying to define (good) art, but merely capture and preserve what is the state of Art at a given time?

Questions posed in genuine naïvété...
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up