Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 14   Go Down

Author Topic: from the front page: adam krawesky  (Read 6519 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22192
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #140 on: January 07, 2019, 05:27:06 pm »

At that point the photographer needs to move on: cerebrally would do.


The mind bits are always the difficult bits. My mind turns out to have a mind of its own, which is confusing for me, as host to both.

:-)

elliot_n

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 908
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #141 on: January 07, 2019, 06:45:19 pm »

Fraction Magazine may not be 100% gold, and maybe not more than half to any particular person's taste, but I don't see how you could spend 10 minutes on that web site and then come back to LuLa's current lead article and still think "Oh yeah, Adam Krawesky, he's amazing."

But, you know, it's a big world and it contains multitudes.


I like Fraction Magazine, but it's a very specific take on contemporary photographic practice. After a while, it starts to feel same-y (or Soth-y).

I don't think Karawesky's work is amazing, but I do quite like it. I also like that Lula is publishing contemporary, urban photography, rather then pictures of icebergs.

Jeff Wall doesn't shoot series.

Logged

32BT

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3089
    • Pictures
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #142 on: January 08, 2019, 03:14:55 am »

I like Fraction Magazine, but it's a very specific take on contemporary photographic practice. After a while, it starts to feel same-y (or Soth-y).

I don't think Karawesky's work is amazing, but I do quite like it. I also like that Lula is publishing contemporary, urban photography, rather then pictures of icebergs.

Jeff Wall doesn't shoot series.

+100 on the bold, +1 to the rest. (And no, i don't mind an occasional iceberg).

Additionally, for what this site is or may become, I prefer an artist who is willing to share his/her thoughts over one who may produce exceptional work but can't be reached to talk about it. Alternatively, I wouldn't mind if somebody with reasonable writingskills would write about one of their preferred artists. (Yes, that includes Rob and Andrew too).

I do have a bit of a problem with the comparisons made in this thread. It doesn't seem to be comparing the same "genres". Not that I want to get in another genre war.

Logged
Regards,
~ O ~
If you can stomach it: pictures

Ivophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #143 on: January 08, 2019, 03:22:28 am »

Indeed. He has good sequences and a substantial body of work. But his sequences feel very familiar. Alex Soth and Jem Southam come to mind, as do many of the contributors to Fraction magazine - http://www.fractionmagazine.com . It's a way of doing things.

Tx for the link, I like it.
Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 865
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #144 on: January 08, 2019, 05:57:39 am »


I don't think Karawesky's work is amazing, but I do quite like it. I also like that Lula is publishing contemporary, urban photography, rather then pictures of icebergs.

Well I started not long ago at LuLa because of those "Luminous" and the "Landscape" words.
I've been here for a short time and all those "icebergs" and the like have inspired me to re-take photography with new elan, learn from many people who know their metier and are more than willing to help and I feel that my dollar a month is worth it.
In my youth my models were HCB, Robert Capa, Ernst Haas, Rene Burri and such.
Somehow they touched my soul.
I still like to see modern urban photography but it doesn't impress me that much. Probably I'm getting older. Or colour killed the spirit. I don't know.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22192
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #145 on: January 08, 2019, 01:45:23 pm »

Well I started not long ago at LuLa because of those "Luminous" and the "Landscape" words.
I've been here for a short time and all those "icebergs" and the like have inspired me to re-take photography with new elan, learn from many people who know their metier and are more than willing to help and I feel that my dollar a month is worth it.
In my youth my models were HCB, Robert Capa, Ernst Haas, Rene Burri and such.
Somehow they touched my soul.
I still like to see modern urban photography but it doesn't impress me that much. Probably I'm getting older. Or colour killed the spirit. I don't know.

I think you do know, and have just nailed it! Colour prettifies everything, even war; it has no place in visual Tamla Motown.

;-)

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1157
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #146 on: January 08, 2019, 11:38:35 pm »

I think you do know, and have just nailed it! Colour prettifies everything, even war; it has no place in visual Tamla Motown.

;-)

I was firmly in the camp of Black and White. Never liked R14 or Cibachrome. Now I tend to think of Black and White as romantic and burdened with nostalgia, Iím not a fan of nostalgia.

Sometimes when I have an image Iím attached to and I canít get it to work I convert to Black and White in a last desperate effort to drag something out of it. I never show these efforts anymore

I have noticed that the older more traditional members of LuLa, those most concerned about the sanctity of the genre, tend to prefer black and white.

Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7886
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #147 on: January 09, 2019, 03:01:59 am »

I don't think Karawesky's work is amazing, but I do quite like it. I also like that Lula is publishing contemporary, urban photography, rather then pictures of icebergs.

Absolutely. A site called luminous-landscape.com is publishing landscape photographs! Whatever next? Pornography at youporn.com?

Jeremy
Logged

32BT

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3089
    • Pictures
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #148 on: January 09, 2019, 03:14:58 am »

Absolutely. A site called luminous-landscape.com is publishing landscape photographs! Whatever next? Pornography at youporn.com?

Jeremy

Ha, just another example of the loose morality regarding genre definitions around here. What are you trying to tell us: don't f**k with the icebergs?

;-)   <---------
Logged
Regards,
~ O ~
If you can stomach it: pictures

Ivophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #149 on: January 09, 2019, 03:16:50 am »

Absolutely. A site called luminous-landscape.com is publishing landscape photographs! Whatever next? Pornography at youporn.com?

Jeremy

ĎThey Ď told me there is also a contemporary and vintage section on youporn.com. If there is an area where firm genre segregation is a must........

Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1675
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #150 on: January 09, 2019, 04:46:49 am »

I think you do know, and have just nailed it! Colour prettifies everything, even war; it has no place in visual Tamla Motown.

;-)

Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 865
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #151 on: January 09, 2019, 06:03:24 am »


I have noticed that the older more traditional members of LuLa, those most concerned about the sanctity of the genre, tend to prefer black and white.

Just for the sake of the argument:

If a great painter has a talent of, say, 100T(Talent Units) or more (to set a benchmark)
The most talented photographers I know have - I would say - about 50T
B&W photography manages way less parameters than colour photography (It is easier to manage)

For a great painting you need at least 100T (Velazquez, Rubens, Rembrandt...)

For a truly great B&W photography you need at least 50T.
That's why there are many great B&W photographs. Some people reach 50T

For great colour photography you would need much more talent (all those colours...) than for B&W.
That's why there is so little great colour photography. Great color photography looks like out of gamut for photographers

And really talented people would paint instead of photographing (much more freedom), color or whatever
Although the race of great painters is as extinct as the dinosaurs I guess  ;D

Am I right?
Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1675
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #152 on: January 09, 2019, 06:14:51 am »

As has already been said, photography is at best a secondary art form. Could be that as such it relies heavily on artifice to succeed.

;-)
« Last Edit: January 09, 2019, 06:25:22 am by KLaban »
Logged

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1157
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #153 on: January 09, 2019, 07:11:12 am »

As has already been said, photography is at best a secondary art form. Could be that as such it relies heavily on artifice to succeed.

;-)

Itís not the medium thats artistic. Itís the artist. An artist can work in any medium. Some creative people dance, some sing or play musical instruments, some paint or print or sculpt.

The problem with photography is that uncreative people can produce a plausible result and then they confuse themselves for a while. They think they are artists of high ability. Eventually they figure out somewhere in their subconscious that they donít actially have anything to say but they just like shiny gear. With nothing to say you cannot be an artist. The next step is the ego wakes up to all of this and in order to defend itself it is forced to condem the entire endevour as futile.

How many photographers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? It takes all of them, one to do the screwing and the rest to stand around explaining how they could have done it.
Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.

elliot_n

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 908
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #154 on: January 09, 2019, 07:17:37 am »

Am I right?

No ó but you get 1T (Talent Unit) for trying.
Logged

JNB_Rare

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 946
    • JNB54
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #155 on: January 09, 2019, 07:24:57 am »

Just for the sake of the argument:

If a great painter has a talent of, say, 100T(Talent Units) or more (to set a benchmark)
The most talented photographers I know have - I would say - about 50T
B&W photography manages way less parameters than colour photography (It is easier to manage)

For a great painting you need at least 100T (Velazquez, Rubens, Rembrandt...)

For a truly great B&W photography you need at least 50T.
That's why there are many great B&W photographs. Some people reach 50T

For great colour photography you would need much more talent (all those colours...) than for B&W.
That's why there is so little great colour photography. Great color photography looks like out of gamut for photographers

And really talented people would paint instead of photographing (much more freedom), color or whatever
Although the race of great painters is as extinct as the dinosaurs I guess  ;D

Am I right?

If an image resonates with me, it doesn't matter what the medium might be. However, medium and technique can certainly affect how much that image resonates. When I look at (for example) some of Wynn Bullock's work (I'm referencing his B&W photographs, although he did experiment in colour), I can't imagine them having the same impact in another medium (or in colour).
Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1675
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #156 on: January 09, 2019, 07:29:03 am »

As has already been said, photography is at best a secondary art form. Could be that as such it relies heavily on artifice to succeed.

;-)
Itís not the medium thats artistic. Itís the artist. An artist can work in any medium. Some creative people dance, some sing or play musical instruments, some paint or print or sculpt.

The problem with photography is that uncreative people can produce a plausible result and then they confuse themselves for a while. They think they are artists of high ability. Eventually they figure out somewhere in their subconscious that they donít actially have anything to say but they just like shiny gear. With nothing to say you cannot be an artist. The next step is the ego wakes up to all of this and in order to defend itself it is forced to condem the entire endevour as futile.

How many photographers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? It takes all of them, one to do the screwing and the rest to stand around explaining how they could have done it.

Indeed, and just like to be clear, I don't believe secondary art forms exist, just secondary artists.

;-)
Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 865
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #157 on: January 09, 2019, 07:36:56 am »

No ó but you get 1T (Talent Unit) for trying.
That could explain why so few people like my pictures. Thanks.

But this topic is not about "rabanito" but about photography
« Last Edit: January 09, 2019, 07:48:42 am by rabanito »
Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 865
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #158 on: January 09, 2019, 07:46:03 am »

Itís not the medium thats artistic. Itís the artist. An artist can work in any medium. Some creative people dance, some sing or play musical instruments, some paint or print or sculpt.

The problem with photography is that uncreative people can produce a plausible result and then they confuse themselves for a while. They think they are artists of high ability. Eventually they figure out somewhere in their subconscious that they donít actially have anything to say but they just like shiny gear. With nothing to say you cannot be an artist. The next step is the ego wakes up to all of this and in order to defend itself it is forced to condem the entire endevour as futile.

How many photographers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? It takes all of them, one to do the screwing and the rest to stand around explaining how they could have done it.

I agree with most of this.

But if the artist inside the person chooses photography instead of painting (or dancing or cooking...) he sets limits for himself because of the medium
You cannot make much music with a piece of clay. Some with a flute and a lot with an orchestra.
Imagine "Las Meninas" done by a photographer.
Impossible IMHO, besides that not everyone is Velazquez.
Photography lets you obtain some good results but not the greatness. The medium itself is restricting.
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12860
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: from the front page: adam krawesky
« Reply #159 on: January 09, 2019, 07:51:21 am »

Itís not the medium thats artistic. Itís the artist. An artist can work in any medium. Some creative people dance, some sing or play musical instruments, some paint or print or sculpt.

Well said, Martin. Right on.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 14   Go Up