50% Off Portrait Pro + An Extra 15% For EPZ Members With Code: EPZ421

Any Purists


Stan. L-B 19 222 United Kingdom
26 Nov 2002 2:29PM
Hello Alan.
Glad to hear you are an 'artist'. that being so, I am sure you will appreciate my preference to being called a 'photographer' rather than a 'graphic designer' or 'portrait painter' If I tell you that without photography over the past fifty or so years I would not have been able to
fulfill my artistic aims with any acceptable degree of acuracy. It is therefore, photography that is the primary requsite to my production in art work. If this means, to your artistic view, that I am less competant an artist, sobeit. Your comments however, are appreciated. Thankyou for your posting.
photoid5 18 154
26 Nov 2002 4:10PM
Hullo Stan.I personally prefer your photographs to their frames,but that's just me.Iwould not like to have to judge what I don't understand.Photography TO Me ,I have always considered it "performance art".hENCE my obsession on perfection in framing,lighting,exposure : all those things previously referred to as dodging,burning,and cropping. Too me after is too late : you either got the shot or you didn't. BUT of course there ARE as there MUST BE different schools of thought.
photoid5 18 154
26 Nov 2002 4:18PM
My views on the b/w printing remain as always this : whoever is capable of producing beautiful prints in a darkroom is an artist even if the negatives have been produced by someone else.But unless printed by the photographer b/w printing alone is not considered photography.
26 Nov 2002 5:13PM
I think that a photograph should tell a story, an ambiguous one perhaps, but a story nonetheless.
Once upon a time a person got out of bed at 3.00.a.m. and drove one hundred miles. Then there was a two hour hike in the sleet to the chosen spot. It proved to be a long wait until the light was right but our person had a vision and wanted to communicate that vision to others.
What was added at the printing stage was so subyle as to be undetected by the viewer.
The viewer does not only look but engages with the vision and can feel the cold and the wet and the discomfort.

Q. "Have you seen the Mona Lisa?"
A. "Of course, hasn't everyone?"
Well, no actually, only those who have been to The Louvre.
photoid5 18 154
26 Nov 2002 5:25PM
And so little time to tell it in.......The ability to communicate a story suggestively in the blink of an eye..........Alan don't get me started I never shut up as it is.We are talking about the universal language here......
anon 18 31
26 Nov 2002 6:48PM
Everything we see is a reflection or a source of light, so is in effect a drawing or an image created by light. We may look through the "objectiv" but I think the question is subjective, as (like most thing we look at) The bulk of the debate is (16%) grey. An image captured on film or digital camera starts as a photograph. Usually. The manipulation done on screen or in a darkroom (or even hand tinting) is artistic (usually). Some photos are technically perfect records, some capture the decisive moment, some stir emotion, some are aesthetically pleasing abstractions of colour. Can anyone draw a precise line splitting the Art from the Photographs? Should they be split at all.
Is Art an interpretation or representation of reality?
I am a true purist shooting slide only, usually on a manual 35mm slr with 1 lens, or on a 6x6 TLR. I do not consider my photos artistic as they record reality (in it's best or worst light hopefully), but I consider abstracts and manipulated pictures as art, (even when the original image was mine) as they have more input from the "artist". This is where I draw the line, that others draw it elsewhere doesn't mean anyone is wrong. Merely a different interpretation.
Some are skilled image finders, others skilled image makers. You should find where your talents lie, and use them to their fullest.
mb
centur 19 106
26 Nov 2002 8:29PM
LeanneSmileYou were saying ..."Some are skilled image finders and some are skilled image makers" Why differentiate between the two?
Is it NOT possible that an image is the result of BOTH these talents (as you called them)?
Shouldn't this (the 'marrying' of BOTH these skills be the objective of the 'creator'? [NB i use the term 'creator' in its NON religious context btwWink]imho Cheryl
P.S . I for one look forward to viewing your work ...where is this possible IF I may ..
centur 19 106
26 Nov 2002 8:39PM
OOPS !Smile it was 'mb'??? who posed the statement that I replied to above ..none the less ..Leanne I would enjoy to see your work if its possible ty...Cheryl

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.