Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Famous photographers

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

55% OFF new PortraitPro 12 - use code EPHZROS414.
Andyphotography

Why does every seem to assume that every photograph taken by a famous photographer is an amazing work of art?

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
22 Jul 2013 - 6:21 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Umberto_Vanni
Umberto_Vanni e2 Member 9304 forum postsUmberto_Vanni vcard Scotland
22 Jul 2013 - 6:33 PM

Do you know that or are you assuming? Wink

You know what is said about assumption.....it makes an "ass" out of "u" and "me".

Last Modified By Umberto_Vanni at 22 Jul 2013 - 6:33 PM
SlowSong
SlowSong e2 Member 53989 forum postsSlowSong vcard England28 Constructive Critique Points
22 Jul 2013 - 6:34 PM

They don't. You've made a rather wide-sweeping statement there. What can you say to back it up?

Last Modified By SlowSong at 22 Jul 2013 - 6:34 PM
franken
franken e2 Member 112914 forum postsfranken vcard Wales4 Constructive Critique Points
22 Jul 2013 - 7:14 PM

[quote][Why does every seem to assume that every photograph taken by a famous photographer is an amazing work of art?/quote]

What a completely ridiculous statement to make!

Ken

peterjones
peterjones e2 Member 123785 forum postspeterjones vcard United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
22 Jul 2013 - 7:22 PM

I thought a statement ended with a . or sometimes a ! but not often a ?

I suspect the OP was asking a question for discussion rather than dare make a statement that transgresses traditional epz thought; funny that word traditional within what is supposed to be creativity.

My own answer is I try never to assume anything especially a so called amazing work of art whoever the photographer is be it a "rock star" or an ordinary jo.

Peter.

Last Modified By peterjones at 22 Jul 2013 - 7:24 PM
Andyphotography

I come across so many people who see a David Bailey image and they say "WOW what a wonderful photo" even though most are average, but they are considered great becasue David Bailey took it.
I know lot of photographers see a Cartier Bresson Image and will wax lyrical about the perfect timing and yet to me they look like snap shots, if your average person on the street saw a Cartier Bresson image they wouldnt look at it twice.
@Peterjones you seem to understand me.

It seems that a lot of Peter assume higher quality when a well known name o brand is attached to it, much the same way as designer clothes labels.

keithh
keithh  1022557 forum posts Wallis and Futuna29 Constructive Critique Points
22 Jul 2013 - 7:54 PM


Quote: I come across so many people who see a David Bailey image and they say "WOW what a wonderful photo" even though most are average, but they are considered great becasue David Bailey took it.

You don't though, do you and Cartier Bresson got where he is because his photos worked.

A discussion needs a less shallow starting point.

collywobles
22 Jul 2013 - 8:37 PM


Quote: I come across so many people who see a David Bailey image and they say "WOW what a wonderful photo" even though most are average, but they are considered great becasue David Bailey took it.

Not necessarily true, but some images as 'a collection' work well and if you look at for example Donald McCullins War images individually and technically they are not good but as a historical set and a statement they are remarkable.

Umberto_Vanni
Umberto_Vanni e2 Member 9304 forum postsUmberto_Vanni vcard Scotland
22 Jul 2013 - 8:48 PM


Quote: It seems that a lot of Peter assume higher quality when a well known name o brand is attached to it, much the same way as designer clothes labels.

There is the power of suggestion, whereby if "enough" people believe something then others may go with the flow. For example, Mercedes Benz.... many people assume higher quality but lots of people probably haven't even been in one. This could explain why some people think a David Bailey photo is wonderful because David Bailey took it, but again your initial question is asking why everyone (i assume Wink you meant every "one") seems to assume etc... the meaning behind it seems quite clear in that you are looking for an answer as to that specific question... at least by my understanding of the English language.

peterjones. I think the other posters genuinely thought the OP was making a sweeping statement rather than "transgressing traditional EPZ thinking". I know i did.

joolsb
joolsb e2 Member 927107 forum postsjoolsb vcard Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
22 Jul 2013 - 8:53 PM

I suggest you show us some examples of what you mean because there are a great number of famous photographers, working in a great number of different genres. Some are considered good because they broke the mould (Bailey, Donovan, Duffy), some because of their phenomenal sense of craft (Adams), some because of an approach to composition and timing that makes you look at the ordinary in a different light (Cartier-Bresson, Kertesz), etc., etc, the list goes on and on.

Going back to Bailey, he made his name in the 60's with a collection of strikingly unconventional portraits. Old hat in today's 'been there, seen that' jaded photographic world but daring and new in their day. Actually, quite a few of them hold up pretty well now. And that's the true mark of a great photographer - does that person's work stand the test of time?

Last Modified By joolsb at 22 Jul 2013 - 9:04 PM
keithh
keithh  1022557 forum posts Wallis and Futuna29 Constructive Critique Points
22 Jul 2013 - 9:30 PM

Who do you think you are...........?

"So, whose that photo by?"

"David Bailey. Icon. Helped invent the idea of Swinging London. Photographed most of the worlds beautiful models of two generations and created at least two of them from nothing. Inspired the film Blowout. Awarded CBE for services to Art. Developed a style of photography that would be copied to this day. "

"I heard he was ****"

Last Modified By keithh at 22 Jul 2013 - 9:31 PM
redsnappa
redsnappa  111878 forum posts United Kingdom
22 Jul 2013 - 9:47 PM


Quote: Cartier Bresson got where he is because his photos worked

Maybe Cartier Bresson got where he is because we are told that his photos worked.

keithh
keithh  1022557 forum posts Wallis and Futuna29 Constructive Critique Points
22 Jul 2013 - 9:49 PM

Who told you?
Wink

monstersnowman
22 Jul 2013 - 10:29 PM

I agree with the op that in many cases having a 'name ' certainly adds much credibility to even the most mundane images. I did challenge many images in my degree studies. I wondered why weston's cloud images were better than anyone else's snaps of clouds, at least the ones I'd seen anyway.

Coventryphotog
Coventryphotog Junior Member 1149 forum posts United Kingdom
22 Jul 2013 - 10:45 PM

Pretentions in "art" become problematic, to my mind, when viewers, who disagree with the arbiters of taste, whoever they may be, are informed that they simply do not understand.....

World most expensive photo - to date - a rather crap view of a river....or maybe I just don't get it.....

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.