I just watched a great video by Hugh Brownstone of Three Blind Men and an Elephant.
Hugh is a wise old man from NYC who does analysis like NO ONE does analysis. He goes deep with his observations, comparisons, and conclusions. He uses an overview of the late Saul Leiter, a New York Street photographer, painter, and self-described "lazy man," to conclude many of the same things about photographers and photographs and photography that I do.
I found myself saying, "Yes! Yes!" at every turn. I'd love to hear what you think. You will have to watch to the end to get the whole "picture."
Superficial mumbojumbo. A caricature that takes itself too seriously. Toadall waste of time.
burkphoto wrote:
I just watched a great video by Hugh Brownstone of Three Blind Men and an Elephant.
Hugh is a wise old man from NYC who does analysis like NO ONE does analysis. He goes deep with his observations, comparisons, and conclusions. He uses an overview of the late Saul Leiter, a New York Street photographer, painter, and self-described "lazy man," to conclude many of the same things about photographers and photographs and photography that I do.
I found myself saying, "Yes! Yes!" at every turn. I'd love to hear what you think. You will have to watch to the end to get the whole "picture."
I just watched a great video by Hugh Brownstone of... (
show quote)
Being able to enjoy it/them without talking about it.
---
I know what makes a photograph great, and it wont keep the lights lit and wont make your obit go viral.
burkphoto wrote:
I just watched a great video by Hugh Brownstone of Three Blind Men and an Elephant.
Hugh is a wise old man from NYC who does analysis like NO ONE does analysis. He goes deep with his observations, comparisons, and conclusions. He uses an overview of the late Saul Leiter, a New York Street photographer, painter, and self-described "lazy man," to conclude many of the same things about photographers and photographs and photography that I do.
I found myself saying, "Yes! Yes!" at every turn. I'd love to hear what you think. You will have to watch to the end to get the whole "picture."
I just watched a great video by Hugh Brownstone of... (
show quote)
Hype and good self promotion.
A true photograph doesn't need to be explained.
Will watch the rest later, as on my way to work, but just saw at 5:50 where someone had paid $200 mil for a Pollock work of , of, don't even know..., but $200 m?? (and it looks like you might find it dusty in a Kentucky flea market for $5.)
My view: The craft of photography may rise to art in the right hands. This craft has four parts: effective composition, good exposure, interesting subject, and perceived intention or purpose.
This practice assumes that photography functions as a wordless medium of human expression. In this realm, a given photograph offers a visual voice. A worthy photograph speaks for itself.
Understanding photography this way skips talk of objectivity and subjectivity, as if one over the other, when both apply.
All said, the medium of photography has room for every expression.
Thank you for sharing. I was not familiar with Saul Leiter. I found it interesting that he lived in an era with no auto focus, in body stabilization, or photoshop, and still created interesting photographs. I welcome information that can broaden my perspective.
ELNikkor wrote:
Will watch the rest later, as on my way to work, but just saw at 5:50 where someone had paid $200 mil for a Pollock work of , of, don't even know..., but $200 m?? (and it looks like you might find it dusty in a Kentucky flea market for $5.)
It has been said by some that Jackson Pollock's works are largely about "the art of selling it." I put him in the same category as Maurizio Cattelan, the guy who duct taped a banana to a wall and sold it for $120,000. "Any excuse to support a charity or the collector's wealth." (It was sold twice more before the banana was ripped off the wall and eaten by a performance artist.)
anotherview wrote:
My view: The craft of photography may rise to art in the right hands. This craft has four parts: effective composition, good exposure, interesting subject, and perceived intention or purpose.
This practice assumes that photography functions as a wordless medium of human expression. In this realm, a given photograph offers a visual voice. A worthy photograph speaks for itself.
Understanding photography this way skips talk of objectivity and subjectivity, as if one over the other, when both apply.
All said, the medium of photography has room for every expression.
My view: The craft of photography may rise to art... (
show quote)
I buy most of that. As a communicator, I have always thought that the perceived message (intention or purpose) is the selling point of prose, poetry, music, and images.
In evaluating my own work, I look at all the things you mentioned. I don't call it art, as that is for others to decide. But I always ask, "Do I have a point, and did it register with others?" Once I can say, "Yes," I move on.
An artist can capture beauty with any camera. The rest of us need the best camera.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.