Hi, Lon,
>From a post of mine from last night, on another thread:
"I'm gradually learning
that taking photographs is only a small part of this endeavor. Choosing what
to show is just as important."
Ha!!
Seriously, you're right. When one shoots a coupla rolls a week, the photos add up.
It's re
Perspicacious, eh? Sweaty? grin.
No one's mentioned photography's magic dirty little
secret: What you choose to show is vital. What percentage
of your shots would you show on PUG, for example?
For me, right now, selecting shots to scan/keep is
the real magic. I mean, you should see some of the
I like to hear both pro and con of the pictures i send in.This helps me in deciding if
i
need to change a
framing or lightinng for that particular style of subject matter,or keep things the way
they are for the
time being.I have pretty thick skin.although Shel came close to breaking it on
ocassi
Hi,
I entirely agree.
Bob
Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 10:32:11 PM, you wrote:
> Well, Bob,
> This is at least the third post you've made on these threads. Maybe it is a
> waste of time, but I find it interesting and somewhat seductive.
> Watching Monday Night Football is a spectacular waste
Well, Bob,
This is at least the third post you've made on these threads. Maybe it is a
waste of time, but I find it interesting and somewhat seductive.
Watching Monday Night Football is a spectacular waste of time, too, but millions
do it anyway!
Yeah, we're arguing Angels on the Head of a Pi
Hi,
Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 4:31:55 PM, you wrote:
> Time to get into the fray.
> I have long disagreed with the concept that something is art simply because
> someone calls it art. The lady urinating in the bucket would be a good
> example of it. I'm slowly revising my position. People can
That's silly. There are no qualifications needed to comment on photographs.
All you have to do is write down how you felt or experienced looking at it,
and maybe why. This isn't judging a photo competition where you have to look
for all sorts of arcane details.
BR
> From: "Kathleen" <[EMAIL PR
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 1:55 AM
Subject: Re: Evaluating Photographs
> I doubt it was a claim Cash made himself. It was most likely something
> others knew about him.
Doug,
I am going to postscript myself to be very, very clear. Sometimes I am not
clear.
Despite the fact that I think art is very, very subjective -- in both the
creation and the response to it, I think people like feedback. And some
critiquing can be of real value. And the creator can always
<< However, one of the most successful musicians of our
time could not read a note of music. I'm sure you all know who that was. >>
Errr...Bob Dylan?
(A cultural imbecile writes)
Peter
I thought you meant Louis... Idea is the same.
:-)
Paul Delcour
> From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:30:22 +0300
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Evaluating Photographs
> Rese
The composer is always right, no matter how far of historically he may be.
:-)
Paul Delcour
> From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:13:41 -0400
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Evaluat
>Holy cats, you're pushing all my buttons tonight, Marnie. :-)
>TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
I think you possibly you may have missed the ironic tone in my post and
missed my other comments in other posts. Unless you are being ironic also. ;-) Or
very deliberately making a point.
Such as "IMHO, it is a
Well, as I said earlier, I wonder then if something can be art, regardless of the
intention of it's creator.
Conversely, I'd wonder about something that only it's creator considers art, and no
one else. That could end up being a very narrow definition of art.
I can't help but think that some sor
aftger having read a bunch of the followups, i have to say that i have done
something similar and the outcome was different. there is always someone who
thinks that they can improve anything someone else does by making their own
"additions". at worse, it is graffiti. at it's best, it's constructive
>Whatever the intention of the creator of a piece, the viewer must have a say
as to
whether a piece is art or not. If a piece is not art, how can its creator be
an
artist? And why can't art be produced by a non-artist?
>I'm really confused now...
>cheers,
frank
IMHO, it is art is if the crea
At 05:34 PM 9/22/2003 +0200, Feroze Kistan wrote:
With the recent thread about evaluating photgraphs, I thought I'd share this
with the list.
Regards,
Feroze
The Painter's Mistakes
-snip-
Great story that offers a lot of food for thought. I may be reading into
it too much, but I'd take the mess
At 08:11 PM 9/22/2003 +0300, you wrote:
True. I enjoy music but don't claim to understand it -- especially the
twelve tonal stuff. However, one of the most successful musicians of our
time could not read a note of music. I'm sure you all know who that was.
Those 4 guys from Liverpool, maybe?
- MC
Hi,
Monday, September 22, 2003, 10:24:34 PM, you wrote:
> Whether one is an artist or not is, I think, simply a matter of intent.
> If ones intent is to produce art than one is an artist. Now I am willing
> to admit that becoming a good artist, much less a great one, can take
> years or even d
But, seriously, Tom,
Geez, you know, I wish I could express myself as well in these sorts of discussions
as some. I'm just not articulate when it comes to things artistic. Unfortunately
for this list, that won't stop me from trying...
On the whole, your thesis makes sense. There are a couple
Hi,
Monday, September 22, 2003, 10:31:50 PM, you wrote:
> Now, in my local camera club here, there has been a lot of head-shaking and
> sighing over the low quality, and that is only a publicity stunt. But is it?
Excerpt from 'The Camera Club Guide to Photography'*:
"1. First, stick your head r
Come on, Tom,
It's never as simple as "that".
"That" is never a simple concept...
cheers,
frank
graywolf wrote:
> It is as
> simple as that.
>
--
"Hell is others"
-Jean Paul Sartre
Whether one is an artist or not is, I think, simply a matter of intent.
If ones intent is to produce art than one is an artist. Now I am willing
to admit that becoming a good artist, much less a great one, can take
years or even decades of hard work, but whether one is an artist is
simply a mat
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Delcour" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> O well, this brings up a lot.
Indeed.
The painter student's story ends where he will have to develop a style of
his own to be more than a clone of his master. Then to be taught confidence
in his own work despite criticism
he claimed he could not.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: Evaluating Photographs
> True. I enjoy music but don't claim to understand
Well, I now have a bit of time, so I can respond to the original post, with a
couple of more thoughts that I didn't mention when I answered Paul's post
directly. I'll try my best not to repeat anything (but no promises) .
First, I think one should remember that one doesn't simply "become" an arti
Hi,
Monday, September 22, 2003, 7:39:34 PM, you wrote:
>> Who would be correct, the critic, or us, who had the benefit of the composer's
>> desire for how it should sound? Seems to me the same would apply to a
>> photographer's interpretation of his image.
> Don't have time right now to go dig
I also enjoyed the original post and find it food for thought (and I am not
finished thinking about it yet.)Anyway I have kept it in my files.
Meanwhile, other comments --
frank mentioned comments-from-mother vs. comments-from-others and I just
thought I'd share: My own mother used to just say
Wow! This little parable raises so many issues, I don't know where to begin.
I'll likely think about this for a while before responding (if I do choose to
respond at all) directly to the initial post.
But, at first blush, I think I find Paul's response to be more meaningful to me
than the initia
Not quite keeping up, but spotting occasional messages here and
there. This jumped out at me:
> Now, what if there were a "professional"
> critic there who were to disagree with the way we played the music. Who
> would be correct, the critic, or us, who had the benefit of the composer's
> desire
30 matches
Mail list logo