Will the Real Landscape Photography Please Stand Up ?

[Isaac]

Profound = demanding deep study or thought

Difference = the state or condition of being dissimilar or unlike

What is the profound difference you say exists between artists using photography as a medium, and photographers striving to create art?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Rob and Isaac,

Like a joke, if you do not get it, there is no point in explaining it. But I might help you with a visual clue: Andreas Gursky vs. Peter Lik.

[Isaac]

Apparently there was no point behind your profound statement.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Apparently there was no point behind your profound statement.

Apparently, some people, like Mike Johnston (of The Online Photographer fame), do find a point in it, enough to use it as a featured comment on their site:

[jjj]

Who said anything about objecting to post-processing? I said post-processing needs to be undetectable. You need to learn to read more carefully, Jeremy.

Right back atcha. Post processing is almost invariably evident and as as you object to evidence of PPing, you object to PPing. 

Oh, and it's not just "images shot raw" that need post-processing. Jpeg images also need post-processing, but it's the software maker who decides on the post-processing.

I actually hate the term post processing. 'Post' what?. It should simply be processing. Then your statement re JPEGs would make some sense.

[jjj]

Apparently, some people, like Mike Johnston (of The Online Photographer fame), do find a point in it, enough to use it as a featured comment on their site:

Though still not convinced how you separate the two.

[Isaac]

Mike Johnston (of The Online Photographer fame)

Please provide a link so we can understand the context, and see if he was able to elucidate the point.

[RSL]

Post processing is almost invariably evident and as as you object to evidence of PPing, you object to PPing.

You're absolutely right, Jeremy. Since a file, by itself, can't be seen, you need either to turn it into a jpeg that can be viewed by digital means, or you need to make a print that can be viewed directly. That's definitely post-processing. I don't object to that at all. But if I can see that you dorked around with the thing in Photoshop or any other software to make it something it wasn't to begin with, I won't object, I'll just throw it away.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Please provide a link so we can understand the context, and see if he was able to elucidate the point.

The first article is: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2010/11/ort-as-they-say-in-texas.html

And the second: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/11/the-difference.html

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Though still not convinced how you separate the two.

I sympathize with your predicament. As the dictionary definition states, it is "demanding deep study or thought" Are you capable of that?

[Isaac]

Please provide a link so we can understand the context, and see if he was able to elucidate the point.

The first article is: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2010/11/ort-as-they-say-in-texas.html
And the second: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/11/the-difference.html

Thanks. Apparently Mike Johnston (of The Online Photographer fame) had nothing to say about your comment.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Thanks. Apparently Mike Johnston (of The Online Photographer fame) had nothing to say about your comment.

You mean other than selecting it as the first featured comment, which is a statement in itself. You do understand the concept of featured comments, I hope? Or shall I find you a dictionary definition?

[Isaac]

Or shall I find you a dictionary definition?

Just show The Online Photographer's description of why they select certain comments to be "featured comments".

[elliot_n]

Apparently, some people, like Mike Johnston (of The Online Photographer fame), do find a point in it, enough to use it as a featured comment on their site:

It's a different quote. Here you have omitted 'who just happen to be'. That changes the meaning.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Just show The Online Photographer's description of why they select certain comments to be "featured comments".

Feel free to parse his site or ask Mike directly. Any other reader of average intelligence would, however, easily grasp the meaning of "featured comments."

[elliot_n]

Gursky is both an 'artist using photography as a medium' and a 'photographer striving to create art'. Peter Lick I don't know.

It doesn't make sense to say that Gursky 'just happens to be using photography as a medium'. He's a photographer through and through, having studied under the Bechers at the Dusseldorf Kunstacademie. He's never made work in any medium other than the photography.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

It's a different quote. Here you have omitted 'who just happen to be'. That changes the meaning.

You are kidding, right!?

[amolitor]

A very successful trolling method is to always find another chore for the other chap to do. If you can spend ten seconds goading him into doing ten minutes of work, you... um... win. In some weird sense.

[Isaac]

You mean other than selecting it as the first featured comment, which is a statement in itself.

Perhaps the words look pretty even though they are empty.

[elliot_n]

Perhaps the words look pretty even though they are empty.

The words are often used to distinguish between modernist and postmodernist/conceptualist photographic practices. The modernists (Weston, Strand, Adams etc) attempted to create art from within the photographic medium, whereas the postmodernists just use photography, either appropriating other photographers' images (Richard Prince, Sherrie Levine), or making pictures which are significant only to the extent that they operate in a semiotic network (e.g. Cindy Sherman's Untitled Film Stills).