advertisement


Sensor size and life.

O

omers

pfm Member
Quoting Mattew from a different thread,

matthewr said:
As for "Arty-Farty", personally I would like to see a lot more discussion about the artistic aspects of photography as that is the interesting bit. 98% of photography is boring and pointless precisely because people will not engage with the subject on this level and all we end up with is the utter tedium of the digital vernacular as perfectly encapsulated in flickr (outside of a small number of good, narrow interest groups) which is really just the photo.net car crash with more javascript.
Click to expand...


green in photography but being an Arty Farty type myself, can we somehow develop this ?
perhaps try to indeed discuss pictures more deeply ? or general idea's ? other ideas ?

Omer.
 
omer.

one idea would be to pick some picture by a famous photographer and dissect it (in terms of artistic merit). is that the sort of thing you have in mind? (it's what got joe petrik in trouble at work once)

vuk.
 
omer.

i have been searching the bloody web for my favourite photo, but still cant find it. instead i am offering something not far behind and by the same photographer. this guy is one the the two greatest of all time (i'll reveal the identity of the other in a future posting). here is a snap of the picture from a book i own 9the contrast is deliberately high, not an artifact of my "copywork")...

hm_plane_girl.jpg


do you see why it is so good?


vuk.
 
Neither do I. I think much of the "high-art photography" is completely lost on me, as is almost all modern art and modern jazz.
 
kasper. i think you may be confusing rear wings with propeller.

omer. as you can see by the other (not kasper's) reactions above, art is not a popular thing.

vuk.
 
can anyone explain to mick why the picture is great? (and not with avi methods, please)


vuk.
 
ultra.

you've got the timeline the wrong way around ;-) the shot i've copied appeared in french vogue, 1969.

vuk.
 
vuk said:
can anyone explain to mick why the picture is great? (and not with avi methods, please)
Click to expand...
I'm afraid I'm only qualified to explain why I like it. And I'm just barely qualified for that. And my viewpoint would probably be the photography equivalent of the old "It's got a good beat and I can dance to it".

(Besides, explaining to Mick is like dancing about architecture while talking about hifi - the apogee of futility.)
 
Mick Parry said:
You are becoming more pretentious than the ever so superior Matthew.
Click to expand...

mick.

how am i being pretentious? i genuinely love this photo. i am not pretending to do so. people who are pretentious about art claim to like things, but only because "it is the thing to do," not genuine affection.

btw--the book was actually a gift from matthew ;-)

vuk.
 
ultrawomble said:
Thanks for the info vuk. Interesting that the image is derivative.
Click to expand...

well, if we assume that this was something other than an unconscious influence, it is merely derivative (i assume you mean that pejoratively) in the way the final movement of bruckner's 8th symphony is a bach derivative.


vuk.
 
how am i being pretentious?

Vuk

If you really need to ask, I am wasting my time answering


btw--the book was actually a gift from matthew ;-)

That figures


Regards

Mick
 
People who are not pretentious will simply explain the reason they like or value things to others. People who are pretentious will suppose that it somehow makes them a better person than others that they have some personal appreciation of something not appreciated by the other(s).

You certainly appear pretentious, because you give dismissive rather than informative responses.

In summary I agree with Mick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top