Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
It's The Guardian what do you expect. Hack writing, thought admittedly better hack writing that the average US paper. On 2/4/2015 11:25 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote: Here is an article in The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/feb/03/instagram-generation-amateur-photographers-art-plagiarism While the article raises some interesting questions, I disagree with some of the statements the author makes. E.g. he suggests that you cannot take really great pictures on a cruise. And that's because more than one person can take similar pictures there. That's total nonsense! He also implies that ones there is a view, different photographers are bound to take similar photo (unlike artists, who are bound to paint different paintings). If I were to translate that to a different setting: people will not get really great pictures at GFM, because they all see the same wonderfully looking views. I wonder what other PDMLers think about this... Igor -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
Sturgeon was a wise man, who produced a number of Gem like stories, and quite a bit of crap himself, which he would probably readily admit. After all, he was paid per word, and a man's got to eat. On 2/4/2015 3:44 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Ken Waller wrote: In a world of pretentious and complacent amateur snapping, we are drowning those moments of truth in an ocean of the banal. Agreed! Well duh! Sturgeon's Law (90% of everything is crap). Why should it not apply to photography? -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGscoaUWW2M On 2/5/2015 1:08 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: It's The Guardian what do you expect. Hack writing, thought admittedly better hack writing that the average US paper. On 2/4/2015 11:25 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote: Here is an article in The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/feb/03/instagram-generation-amateur-photographers-art-plagiarism While the article raises some interesting questions, I disagree with some of the statements the author makes. E.g. he suggests that you cannot take really great pictures on a cruise. And that's because more than one person can take similar pictures there. That's total nonsense! He also implies that ones there is a view, different photographers are bound to take similar photo (unlike artists, who are bound to paint different paintings). If I were to translate that to a different setting: people will not get really great pictures at GFM, because they all see the same wonderfully looking views. I wonder what other PDMLers think about this... Igor -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
The writer of the article shows his own biases in the following statement: Photography can easily degenerate into a pseudo-art, with millions of people all taking pictures of the same things and all thinking we are special. This amateur delusion of photographic art is everywhere today – from Instagramto the streets and hills, where there is always someone taking their holiday snaps too damn seriously. This strange plagiarism row exposes the illusion on which today’s mass camera cult rests. Both these amateur photographers were convinced their creativity was special. The truth is that words like creativity, individuality, talent and originality don’t readily apply when you have a planet of people all taking photos. Anytime someone purports to know what anybody is thinking (let alone millions of people are thinking) you either have a serious God Complex or they are revealing more about their own motivations. Forget the argument regarding whether photography is an art or a craft. Even a single photographer can have different motivations for creating images. I doubt that many of us aspire to be thought of as the most special photographer on the planet. This guy's idea of special is rather extreme also. Switch the topic from photography to the culinary arts. Lots of people have made a souffle in the world. But one still feels a sense of accomplishment when one does it for themselves. It really doesn't matter how many other people have done it before, or even done it better. We are satisified to create a souffle that pleases our intended audience, whether that be ourselves alone or those invited to the dinner party. If there is an element of feeling special about that (otherwise known as taking a certain pride in one's accomplishments, who is anyone else to care?) Who is anyone else to take you to task or feel it is their job to knock you down a few pegs? The author uses loaded language like cult in describing photographers as well. He paints with not just a broad brush, but a very broad ROLLER. I would suggest that the author is probably a failed or frustrated photographer himself. Or maybe he simply has a personality disorder. At the very least he is not capable of very abstract thought to distill all photographers in the world down to a single cult entity as he has. He also uses a very specific situation that does not really illustrate the way most photographs are made. The iceberg photographers did not have the luxury of selecting a radically different perspective of the subject as you would in a normal situation (unless they wanted to show that they were on a ship and put something in the foreground). So of course their images were the same. They could not choose to move closer or farther away. Getting low to the ground or higher would not change the resulting image much. But most photographs do not have these limitations. They are not taken by multiple people from exactly the same perspective at the exact same time/date in exactly the same light (etc.) So he uses a very specific case in a misguided attempt to draw larger conclusions. In any event, EVEN if everyone on that ship took the exact same photo, they probably did so to record the memory, to share with their family friends back home. To possibly make a print for the wall. Is the writer suggesting that only ONE of those people had the right to create a special image? Even if we accepted that there was a component of feeling special to the act, does that make it wrong. They probably were privileged in some way to be on vacation, to be on that cruise, to be there to see that iceberg. They ARE probably special, in that regard, in their circle of friends, family, or associates. No not special in the UNIVERSE or in the WORLD, but they don't have the same scope of friends, relatives associates as the other people on that cruise. They all were special in a way. The writer has a job to do. He has a beast he needs to feed. That requires him to pound out articles on SOMETHING. He doesn't have to make sense or coherent arguments. He just needs to get eyeballs to read his stuff so that he can justify getting paid to write more in the future. In a sense, he probably tries to be incendiary. People getting mad and discussing his stuff proves that he's gotten those eyeballs. rant off On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Igor PDML-StR pdml...@komkon.org wrote: Here is an article in The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/feb/03/instagram-generation-amateur-photographers-art-plagiarism While the article raises some interesting questions, I disagree with some of the statements the author makes. E.g. he suggests that you cannot take really great pictures on a cruise. And that's because more than one person can take similar pictures there. That's total nonsense! He also implies that ones there is a view, different photographers are bound to take similar photo (unlike artists, who are bound to paint different
RE: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
Igor wrote: Here is an article in The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/feb/03/i nstagram-generation-amateur-photographers-art-plagiarism While the article raises some interesting questions, I disagree with some of the statements the author makes. E.g. he suggests that you cannot take really great pictures on a cruise. And that's because more than one person can take similar pictures there. That's total nonsense! He also implies that ones there is a view, different photographers are bound to take similar photo (unlike artists, who are bound to paint different paintings). If I were to translate that to a different setting: people will not get really great pictures at GFM, because they all see the same wonderfully looking views. I wonder what other PDMLers think about this... You could put three photographers in an empty garden shed, and they would come back with different images. The photograph in question, even using the same tripod and camera set up, could have had different filters and been cropped and processed a dozen different ways. As for the artist comment, I thought photographers were artists who painted with light? Cheek. Malcolm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
Malcolm, While starting reading this sentence below, I first thought it would be something like: You could put two photographers in an empty garden shed, and they would come back with three different images ... each! ;-) Cheers! Igor Malcolm Smith Wed, 04 Feb 2015 08:40:32 -0800 wrote: You could put three photographers in an empty garden shed, and they would come back with different images. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
he suggests that you cannot take really great pictures on a cruise. And that's because more than one person can take similar pictures there. Interestingly, I was on a Nat Geo 'expedition' cruise of the Inside Passage in Alaska 2 years ago - a small ship with only 62 passengers - not your usual cruise ship - there were probably 45 'photographers' on board - I phones, P+ Shooters and DSLR users. When we came to something interesting all but a few of us ran to the closest point of the ship nearest the action, while myself and 2 or 3 others went to other vantage points to capture the action. We reviewed our 'best' images in the evenings and you could tell the images of those who had a different vantage point, while alot of the images shown were from the popular vantage point. I've posted a number of my images from the trip and definitely consider the very good to great. He aso states 'Of course they looked identical - because we are not expressive artists when we take pictures' - and that just might describe the majority of camera phone and P+S users - recording scenes rather than trying to create their own take on the scene. I realize he was addressing the instagram crowd but I've seen some very well captured images from I phones and P+S camera users. In a world of pretentious and complacent amateur snapping, we are drowning those moments of truth in an ocean of the banal. Agreed! Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Igor PDML-StR pdml...@komkon.org Subject: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ... Here is an article in The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/feb/03/instagram-generation-amateur-photographers-art-plagiarism While the article raises some interesting questions, I disagree with some of the statements the author makes. E.g. he suggests that you cannot take really great pictures on a cruise. And that's because more than one person can take similar pictures there. That's total nonsense! He also implies that ones there is a view, different photographers are bound to take similar photo (unlike artists, who are bound to paint different paintings). If I were to translate that to a different setting: people will not get really great pictures at GFM, because they all see the same wonderfully looking views. I wonder what other PDMLers think about this... Igor -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
On 2015-02-04 9:25 , Igor PDML-StR wrote: While the article raises some interesting questions, I disagree with some of the statements the author makes. E.g. he suggests that you cannot take really great pictures on a cruise. And that's because more than one person can take similar pictures there. photographic greatness and/or art don't consist of just the image, but also the context; greater intelligences than ours (machines, that is) will someday be processing every photograph ever stored, and drawing conclusions, elevating some images to a higher, post-art status … perhaps the machines will even manufacture the context the fact that some scenes were snapped two or more times by different photographers will be a factor in that analysis, along with the life history of the photographers, perhaps most valuing the ways in which they are *not* unique i don't think we're seeing the death of art, but perhaps the end of artists; it will take a while so for now we can be content to sometimes be drawn enough into what we see to think about who might have created it -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
Check the byline: it's just Jonathan Jones finger painting in his mashed potatoes again. Two word substitutions work here: The truth is that words like creativity, individuality, talent and originality don’t readily apply when you have a planet of people all writing articles. For a good rebuttal of JJ's photography ain't art stance, see: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/dec/11/photography-is-art-sean-ohagan-jonathan-jones On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Igor PDML-StR pdml...@komkon.org wrote: Here is an article in The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/feb/03/instagram-generation-amateur-photographers-art-plagiarism While the article raises some interesting questions, I disagree with some of the statements the author makes. E.g. he suggests that you cannot take really great pictures on a cruise. And that's because more than one person can take similar pictures there. That's total nonsense! He also implies that ones there is a view, different photographers are bound to take similar photo (unlike artists, who are bound to paint different paintings). If I were to translate that to a different setting: people will not get really great pictures at GFM, because they all see the same wonderfully looking views. I wonder what other PDMLers think about this... Igor -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
On 2/4/2015 11:25 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote: Here is an article in The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/feb/03/instagram-generation-amateur-photographers-art-plagiarism While the article raises some interesting questions, I disagree with some of the statements the author makes. E.g. he suggests that you cannot take really great pictures on a cruise. And that's because more than one person can take similar pictures there. That's total nonsense! He also implies that ones there is a view, different photographers are bound to take similar photo (unlike artists, who are bound to paint different paintings). If I were to translate that to a different setting: people will not get really great pictures at GFM, because they all see the same wonderfully looking views. I wonder what other PDMLers think about this... Igor It's not plagiarism, unintentional or otherwise, if they didn't look at each other's photos before capturing their own. The rest of it seems to be the perennial whine that photography cannot be art. Yes it can, but ... The birds of a feather all the phonies and all of the fakes While the dealers they get together And they decide who gets the breaks And who's going to be in the gallery [1] He's full of stinky brown stuff. -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. [1] Dire Straits In the Gallery https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-v6JeolLzw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
Ken Waller wrote: In a world of pretentious and complacent amateur snapping, we are drowning those moments of truth in an ocean of the banal. Agreed! Well duh! Sturgeon's Law (90% of everything is crap). Why should it not apply to photography? -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
He's full of stinky brown stuff. MARK ! haven't seen many of these lately Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: John sesso...@earthlink.net Subject: Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ... On 2/4/2015 11:25 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote: Here is an article in The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/feb/03/instagram-generation-amateur-photographers-art-plagiarism While the article raises some interesting questions, I disagree with some of the statements the author makes. E.g. he suggests that you cannot take really great pictures on a cruise. And that's because more than one person can take similar pictures there. That's total nonsense! He also implies that ones there is a view, different photographers are bound to take similar photo (unlike artists, who are bound to paint different paintings). If I were to translate that to a different setting: people will not get really great pictures at GFM, because they all see the same wonderfully looking views. I wonder what other PDMLers think about this... Igor It's not plagiarism, unintentional or otherwise, if they didn't look at each other's photos before capturing their own. The rest of it seems to be the perennial whine that photography cannot be art. Yes it can, but ... The birds of a feather all the phonies and all of the fakes While the dealers they get together And they decide who gets the breaks And who's going to be in the gallery [1] He's full of stinky brown stuff. -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. [1] Dire Straits In the Gallery https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-v6JeolLzw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photography, art, unintentional plagiarism, ...
On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 01:44:02PM -0500, Bruce Walker wrote: Check the byline: it's just Jonathan Jones finger painting in his mashed potatoes again. Yep - Jonathan Jones is paid to stir up controversy, not to serve information. 45 years ago I used to trust the Guardian. Not today, though. (And I still miss Araucaria's crosswords, especially the Christmas doubles ...) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
