srt101fan

Interesting and valuable commentary.

I hope you would agree that some "captured" images can also exhibit a level of artistry. Some of Cartier-Bresson's work comes to mind (even though he didn't think of his photographs as art).

flyboy61 Loc: The Great American Desert

Duplicate

flyboy61 Loc: The Great American Desert

User ID

And he thunk right.

Hes a well known cautionary example for todays gearheads. A new toy may get you moving or keep you busy but doent really generate any actual artistry or creativity.

srt101fan

Oh well, I think...(I know you think I think wrong)...he took/made/created some great photographs that rise to the level of art (whatever that may be).

I still hope to someday see your list of criteria for what makes a good photograph, or a photograph you like.

User ID

Wben you take one, put one back.

(Download)

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

"Take only pictures.
Leave only footprints.
Kill only time."

John Muir
Key influencer of Ansel Adams

User ID

A really good photo need not be art, or artisic. Art is art. Photography is photography. And theres always the possibility for a meeting of the two. The idea that someones photos may, on occasion, *rise* to the *level* of "Art" is implying a heirarchical climb, on a common ladder or mountain trail, *from* photography *to* art. Im not buying that. I see separate "ladders". The possibility that they may meet tells me that theyre not parallel.

Obviously I am nevvvvuh gonna post a list of criteria. Aside from any philosophical problem to that, theres pragmatism. Such a list posted on UHH would surely bring about Tsunami of argument waaaaaaay too idiotic to serve as entertainment and, acoarst, resolving nothing.

As to "a photograph [I] like" ? I hope its no sooprize that I like most bestest my own. So heres a little taste:

I see waaaaaay too much chatter about how to achieve "subject isolation". What a crock.

(Download)

Liking this one more and more over long time.

(Download)

Bare simplicy. Offhanded "compositon".

(Download)

DoF is a very valuable commodity. I hoard it.

(Download)

ATM my fave but maybe cuz its only about an hour old. I could possibly change my mind ...

(Download)

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

[quote=User ID]A really good photo need not be art, or artisic. Art is art. Photography is photography. And theres always the possibility for a meeting of the two. The idea that someones photos may, on occasion, *rise* to the *level* of "Art" is implying a heirarchical climb, on a common ladder or mountain trail, *from* photography *to* art. Im not buying that. I see separate "ladders". The possibility that they may meet tells me that theyre not parallel.

Obviously I am nevvvvuh gonna post a list of criteria. Aside from any philosophical problem to that, theres pragmatism. Such a list posted on UHH would surely bring about Tsunami of argument waaaaaaay too idiotic to serve as entertainment and, acoarst, resolving nothing.

As to "a photograph [I] like" ? I hope its no sooprize that I like most bestest my own. So heres a little taste:[/quote]


I think you are confusing art and an art medium. Photography can be an art medium just like painting or sculpture. It wouldn't make sense to say painting is painting and art is art. I also believe there is no hierarchy to decide what is art and what isn't. There is good art and lousy art and it may take posterity to decide which is which.

User ID

Truly, photography is way more than an "art medium", although acoarst its clearly that as well. And painting is more than paint (as you wrote), but photography is much more than materials and processes (at least "out there", beyond the reach of UHH).

And the judgements of posterity ? I am rather self assured, but Id never consider addressing my efforts to those who dont exist today, and wont exist until Im gone, where the world has moved along into a different context than the present one in which my efforts work or not.

----------------------------------------------

The judgement of posterity is in itself a new creation, only tenuously related to whatever earlier creations posterity winds up judging.

Acting as the present day edition of posterity, to be judging what has or has not "stood the test of time" is just hubris.

srt101fan

[quote=User ID]A really good photo need not be art, or artisic. Art is art. Photography is photography. And theres always the possibility for a meeting of the two. The idea that someones photos may, on occasion, *rise* to the *level* of "Art" is implying a heirarchical climb, on a common ladder or mountain trail, *from* photography *to* art. Im not buying that. I see separate "ladders". The possibility that they may meet tells me that theyre not parallel.

Obviously I am nevvvvuh gonna post a list of criteria. Aside from any philosophical problem to that, theres pragmatism. Such a list posted on UHH would surely bring about Tsunami of argument waaaaaaay too idiotic to serve as entertainment and, acoarst, resolving nothing.

As to "a photograph [I] like" ? I hope its no sooprize that I like most bestest my own. So heres a little taste:[/quote]

=======================================================================

Thank you for your reply; very much appreciated. Much to engage whatever "little grey/gray cells" I have left. I am interested in what you like in a photograph because of the strong dislikes you have expressed. Many times I view a photograph or work of art that I like but can't really say why. But I did come up with some criteria that seem to generally support the reasons why I react to certain images the way I do.

I find your photographs "interesting" but I can't really connect with most of them. But they are certainly worth looking at, especially since you have expressed such strong disdain for most of the UHH offerings. I'll have to think about all this when my brain is a little more awake....Thanks again for your reply.

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

I don't know either but he is the king and B&W is the best!!

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

Yes, I would agree with that--the amount of artistry in illustration varies. The artistry of Cartier-Bresson is in the very artful selection of the right moment and being ready to exploit it skillfully. (Compare to Norman Rockwell's artful illustrations.) The skill of spiders in catching food can certainly manifest art in it in their preparation and waiting for the decisive moment.

Ellen101 Loc: Manhattan NY ..now Spring Hill, Fl

Wonderfully said