Technical versus artistic proficiency (Page 8): I am not artistic but trying to learn that aspect of photography.

al13

I am not artistic but trying to learn that aspect of photography.

al13 wrote:

Topping off an addition to our hospital.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

tdekany wrote:

It isn’t? If you claim that you can LEARN to be artistic, do you really think that providing proof is off topic?

That would not be proof of anything since I have not claimed, in this thread, to have photographic artistic ability.

Did you bother to actually read this thread or to think through your statements prior to pushing the send button?

TheDman Loc: USA

dsmeltz wrote:

Then you should work that belief into your comment. This is a conversation. You should not just out a request with no link to the conversation. You just asked to see his work. You might have said something like "could you post some of your work that shows this artistic ability?" But you did not, you just tossed out a demand with no explanation.

Translation: "Dumb it down so I can understand it."

TheDman Loc: USA

dsmeltz wrote:

That would not be proof of anything since I have not claimed, in this thread, to have photographic artistic ability.

Did you bother to actually read this thread or to think through your statements prior to pushing the send button?

He's referring to the poster he was replying to, not you. Comprehending this thread is really kicking your butt, isn't it?

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

tdekany wrote:

It isn’t? If you claim that you can LEARN to be artistic, do you really think that providing proof is off topic?

The problem is that this is a no-win scenario for the person posting the images. Since you have a belief that artistic talent is inherent and not learned, someone could post the photographic equivalent of the Mona Lisa and you could claim that you don't feel it's very artistic and hence artistic ability can't be learned. You can claim that you would make a fair judgement, but it's like being on trial for burglary and the Judge is the guy you stole from - hard not for him to have bias.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

TheDman wrote:

He's referring to the poster he was replying to, not you. Comprehending this thread is really kicking your butt, isn't it?

I ended up asking him as well to provide some proof in a follow up reply.

Only on UHH do you get such resistance for wanting to see examples.

TheDman Loc: USA

tdekany wrote:

I ended up asking him as well to provide some proof in a follow up reply.

Only on UHH do you get such resistance for wanting to see examples.

He's just being lazy.

TheDman Loc: USA

As for this topic, art is like sports or anything else - it requires talent. Everyone has some talent. Practice can develop your talent to it's full potential, but because everyone has different amounts of it, everyone's ceiling is different. No amount of tennis practice is going to make me Roger Federer, but that doesn't stop me from practicing more and having fun trying to improve.

srt101fan

Steve Perry wrote:

The problem is that this is a no-win scenario for the person posting the images. Since you have a belief that artistic talent is inherent and not learned, someone could post the photographic equivalent of the Mona Lisa and you could claim that you don't feel it's very artistic and hence artistic ability can't be learned. You can claim that you would make a fair judgement, but it's like being on trial for burglary and the Judge is the guy you stole from - hard not for him to have bias.

Good point, Steve. Goes back to my earlier comment that it depends on where you set the bar for laudable artistic achievement...

srt101fan

TheDman wrote:

As for this topic, art is like sports or anything else - it requires talent. Everyone has some talent. Practice can develop your talent to it's full potential, but because everyone has different amounts of it, everyone's ceiling is different. No amount of tennis practice is going to make me Roger Federer, but that doesn't stop me from practicing more and having fun trying to improve.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Steve Perry wrote:

The problem is that this is a no-win scenario for the person posting the images. Since you have a belief that artistic talent is inherent and not learned, someone could post the photographic equivalent of the Mona Lisa and you could claim that you don't feel it's very artistic and hence artistic ability can't be learned. You can claim that you would make a fair judgement, but it's like being on trial for burglary and the Judge is the guy you stole from - hard not for him to have bias.

And, if you have tracked past posts by tdekany and TheDman, you know fairness has little to do with it. No-win scenarios, the non-sequitur and "Do you still beat your wife?" questions are the forte of most trolls like them.

TheDman Loc: USA

dsmeltz wrote:

And, if you have tracked past posts by tdekany and TheDman, you know fairness has little to do with it. No-win scenarios, the non-sequitur and "Do you still beat your wife?" questions are the forte of most trolls like them.

Quit being lazy and post some images!

tdekany Loc: Oregon

Steve Perry wrote:

The problem is that this is a no-win scenario for the person posting the images. Since you have a belief that artistic talent is inherent and not learned, someone could post the photographic equivalent of the Mona Lisa and you could claim that you don't feel it's very artistic and hence artistic ability can't be learned. You can claim that you would make a fair judgement, but it's like being on trial for burglary and the Judge is the guy you stole from - hard not for him to have bias.

Just because I can’t create art, doesn’t mean that I can’t recognize it.

I recognize you talent, don’t I? Or Art Wolfe’s, or Lisa Holloway’s or Mark Metternich’s, or TheDman’s, or Mark1729’s etc...

Your posts are usually spot on, but not this time. As far as what I believe, I base it on my personal experience. Can most of us improve? Of course!! Even I will admit that my pictures are way better today than what they were when I first got into this hobby in late 2011. But that doesn’t make me an artist. All one needs to do is visit 500pix. Comparing yourself to real talent will put us snapshot shooters back in reality.

Now, you are a real talent, and humble. A really great combo. But please don’t try to tell us that you learned to be artistic. If it was that simple, everyone who has been shooting as long as yourself would be producing the same quality of work as you have. We both know that that is simply not the case. In fact, based on that logic, anyone who has been shooting longer than you would be producing better work. We also know, that that is not true either.

Who knows, maybe I just have a very high standard as far as what I consider great photography, but I was sincere in my request to see examples. I would love to be proven wrong. That would mean that even I had a chance, even if it is very unlikely.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

TheDman wrote:

As for this topic, art is like sports or anything else - it requires talent. Everyone has some talent. Practice can develop your talent to it's full potential, but because everyone has different amounts of it, everyone's ceiling is different. No amount of tennis practice is going to make me Roger Federer, but that doesn't stop me from practicing more and having fun trying to improve.

Finally some common sense!!!!

Thank you!!!!

tdekany Loc: Oregon

dsmeltz wrote:

And, if you have tracked past posts by tdekany and TheDman, you know fairness has little to do with it. No-win scenarios, the non-sequitur and "Do you still beat your wife?" questions are the forte of most trolls like them.

Please provide just one example, where I called work of art SNAPSHOTS.

I understand that ignorance is bliss, but wouldn’t you rather live in reality?