Humanism in photography.

[KLaban]

Of a girl who can do traditional well, and rocks with this modern stuff that I dislike and, somehow, whether by dint of volume or talent, makes it work:

https://www.sarahmlee.com/

Rob

I see neither traditional nor modern, only excellent image making.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...P.S. As for the argument of this site being dedicated or called "Luminous Landscape", have a look at the recent articles posted by the new management. Even during Michael's time, the site was already about more than "landscape".

Exactly my point, Paulo. The new direction should result in the change of name into Hipster Whateverscape, otherwise it should be reported for false advertising.

As for Michael, please. Coincidentally, I just got one of the few remaining copies of his book for LensWorks, about San Miguel de Allende. A beautiful reminder just how different his street and people photography was from the hipster crap seen here recently. The same eye, the same sense of esthetics, the same feel for color and design that were part of his landscape work, just applied to street scenes.

[KLaban]

Perhaps Rockhopper Workshops will put a forum in place to attract those who are no longer happy with the direction here?

[John R]

Of a girl who can do traditional well, and rocks with this modern stuff that I dislike and, somehow, whether by dint of volume or talent, makes it work:

https://www.sarahmlee.com/

Rob

It is interesting work, some of it very good, IMHO. All I know, is when I attempt to photograph people in the circumstances this photographer has, especially some of the more exotic looking subjects, I regularly get threatened. Not for me. I note she works for a Newspaper, and that would give her access that none of us could get. Even in public on her own time, if she runs into trouble, she can pull out her credentials and avoid a lot of confrontations that the rest of would surely encounter. I suspect being female makes it much easier as I have observed when I go on outings with female club members. They get way less hassle than males. In most of the images by Vivian Maier, it becomes apparent that the subjects ignored her and her camera. This kind of photography is difficult to do these days. You have to be furtive. We can never go back and should not compare what we do today with what older generation photographers were able to do. Times were different. People who are able to do so so-called "personal work" involving people in close, sometimes intimate circumstances, have to become embedded in their families and communities to do anything worthwhile. Most of us will never do this kind of work. A lot of the work I see online, I regard as intrusive, bordering on voyeurism. I can't see myself subjecting my family, friends, or neighbors to that kind photography. This is why I don't understand why the critiques on this subject are so harsh. And I think the urban work, including graphic style images are just as valid and worthwhile as any perceived "Street" type images. Bottom line for me, Street, Urban, travel, architecture or landscape, it has to be good!

JR

[D Fuller]

Of a girl who can do traditional well, and rocks with this modern stuff that I dislike and, somehow, whether by dint of volume or talent, makes it work:

https://www.sarahmlee.com/

Rob

Thanks for sharing that, Rob. She has an interesting eye.

[Paulo Bizarro]

Of a girl who can do traditional well, and rocks with this modern stuff that I dislike and, somehow, whether by dint of volume or talent, makes it work:

https://www.sarahmlee.com/

Rob

thanks for sharing, I like her style.

[Ivophoto]

I’m very disappointed in some of the ‘respected members’ of this community. Even the ones I had high in regards lower themselves to call the work posted in this thread ‘crap’ without any attempt of nuance.

I don’t have any problem to get harsh critic, I’m very well aware I’m touching particular subjects and have a style not popular among average photographers. I know my work balances on a difficult edge, it’s a choice. I know what I’m doing, photographically spoken....
I’m very aware my photographic quest is still on going, I will be probably death if I arrive at the complacency level of the big mouths here.


So no problem to get loads of shit over me.

But let’s stay normal.

The venom spitting in this thread is beyond believe. How some pretend to have the monopoly of wisdom about photography and esthetics is laughable and sad at same time.

.....

[Paulo Bizarro]

Exactly my point, Paulo. The new direction should result in the change of name into Hipster Whateverscape, otherwise it should be reported for false advertising.

As for Michael, please. Coincidentally, I just got one of the few remaining copies of his book for LensWorks, about San Miguel de Allende. A beautiful reminder just how different his street and people photography was from the hipster crap seen here recently. The same eye, the same sense of esthetics, the same feel for color and design that were part of his landscape work, just applied to street scenes.

Slobodan, I see your point. I hate to categorize photography in genres, because, if you have a good eye, the basics of a good photo are transversal to genres: good light, interesting subject, good composition, click that shutter at the right time. Easier said than done!

I remember Michael's work, I learned a lot from his advice and photo analysis. In the early days of Lula, he even was gracious enough to encourage people to send images for his personal and valuable analysis. Indeed he was very strong on composition, lines, geometry, and light.

I also separate what was/is shown in terms of photography under the official editorial line and Lula content, from what is shown in the forum. In the latter, I feel there is more freedom to show more than "landscape". In the former, after Michael's departure, there was hardly anything about landscape, even from Kevin et al.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Ivo, nothing personal meant, just expressing my blunt, yet non-monopolistic opinion on the direction this site seems to be going. And "here" meant not just this thread, but LuLa overall.

As John R said above, rightly, "it has to be good," no matter the genre. And your last one is good. Not because it fits (or not) the dreaded "humanism" category, but because it is photographically good. It has a tangent to Edward Hopper, not only in the name, but also atmosphere. It works well as a play on words, "hopper," with the guy in mid-hop, so to speak. It pays homage to HCB's jumper too. The overall color palette, and in particular the blue/orange combination, I very much like. Fog is another lucky addition.

See? There is still hope for you (and me)

[Martin Kristiansen]

I’m very disappointed in some of the ‘respected members’ of this community. Even the ones I had high in regards lower themselves to call the work posted in this thread ‘crap’ without any attempt of nuance.

I don’t have any problem to get harsh critic, I’m very well aware I’m touching particular subjects and have a style not popular among average photographers. I know my work balances on a difficult edge, it’s a choice. I know what I’m doing, photographically spoken....
I’m very aware my photographic quest is still on going, I will be probably death if I arrive at the complacency level of the big mouths here.


So no problem to get loads of shit over me.

But let’s stay normal.

The venom spitting in this thread is beyond believe. How some pretend to have the monopoly of wisdom about photography and esthetics is laughable and sad at same time.

.....

That’s a great shot in my opinion. Well done.

[stamper]

That’s a great shot in my opinion. Well done.

Agreed.

[Ivophoto]

Ivo, nothing personal meant, just expressing my blunt, yet non-monopolistic opinion on the direction this site seems to be going. And "here" meant not just this thread, but LuLa overall.

As John R said above, rightly, "it has to be good," no matter the genre. And your last one is good. Not because it fits (or not) the dreaded "humanism" category, but because it is photographically good. It has a tangent to Edward Hopper, not only in the name, but also atmosphere. It works well as a play on words, "hopper," with the guy in mid-hop, so to speak. It pays homage to HCB's jumper too. The overall color palette, and in particular the blue/orange combination, I very much like. Fog is another lucky addition.

See? There is still hope for you (and me)

Thanks for you reply, Slobodan.

I knew this shot would be accepted.

Can you understand this is close to a reject for me? Not because it is not good or because in contrary it is likable, but because it is don a zillion times.

As said, I know what I’m doing with my camera, the boundaries of my comfort zone and beyond are my playground. It’s my choice.

[Ivophoto]

Agreed.

Thanks Martin and Stamper.

[amolitor]

Isn't it interesting, Ivo? For some of us, some of the time, we can tell that something we shot will be well received, people will like it.

And, for many reasons, but among them the fact that people will like it, we ourselves hate it.

[Martin Kristiansen]

Isn't it interesting, Ivo? For some of us, some of the time, we can tell that something we shot will be well received, people will like it.

And, for many reasons, but among them the fact that people will like it, we ourselves hate it.

Yep. That is definately true for me. Another tricky thing to negotiate.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... And, for many reasons, but among them the fact that people will like it, we ourselves hate it.

David said something interesting along those lines in another thread:

... Actually I derive a good degree of grim satisfaction from nobody agreeing with me :-)

[Ivophoto]

Isn't it interesting, Ivo? For some of us, some of the time, we can tell that something we shot will be well received, people will like it.

And, for many reasons, but among them the fact that people will like it, we ourselves hate it.

Yes Andrew. It is interesting. It’s part of moving on I guess. Or part of being visually borderline perhaps?

[32BT]

What then is it that you're trying to achieve with imagesharing?

[KLaban]

Good is subjective. What I think of as good is not necessarily what others think of as good.  What I do think of as bad are closed minds.

Art has always challenged, I'd go as far to say that it is the job of art to challenge. Impressionists, dadaists, surrealists, cubists, the fauves, pop artists, instillation artists...all had contemporary criticism and lack of understanding yet now take pride of place in our galleries and museums. Some of this work has become so acceptable that it is now to be seen on chocolate boxes.

I like to be challenged by work that differs from my own, better that than everything put in front of me being safe and samey.   

[OmerV]

Thanks for you reply, Slobodan.

I knew this shot would be accepted.

Can you understand this is close to a reject for me? Not because it is not good or because in contrary it is likable, but because it is don a zillion times.

As said, I know what I’m doing with my camera, the boundaries of my comfort zone and beyond are my playground. It’s my choice.

I've relaxed in regards to the opinions of others on my work. If someone likes something that seems to me obvious, well, okay then. It is after all, my work.

Nice hopper, by the way.