Photographer
Jeff Cohn
Posts: 3850
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US
geodiego wrote:
Just out of curiosity would my port be considered art?
Personally I think most of my work is more on the illustrative or editorial side of things. Art to me must have some deeper meaning or content beyond the surface. If I look at something and think it makes a pretty picture and that's it, its not art. There are (technically) some fantastic photogs on this site BUT just creating an image to capitalize on beauty is just not enough to be art, I think. I'll admit I'm guilty as anyone of putting together some simple ideas just to make an attempt at creating something that "looks cool" or showcases beauty and talent. It took me many years to clarify the difference in my mind.
On the otherhand I DO see art all the time on this site. It actually has a story and concept, etc. However, just like when I was in college, some of it has HORRIBLE exection and the original idea is lost in translation.
The technical side is something that can be learned as a physical skill. The mental side is alot deeper. I think being an artist helps give me a better eye sometimes but the themes are usually pretty simple IMO. It's very visual but not conceptual (most of the time).
-George Diego LOVE your work
Photographer
oldguysrule
Posts: 6129
Jeff Cohn::X-Pose.net:: wrote:
Cmon people, i know so many of you are "professional photographers" so that means you have to be utterly boring people that have a good camera and expensive lights but THIS IS AN ARTISTIC MEDIUM TOO... To quote Helmut Newton: "Some people's photography is an art. Not mine. Art is a dirty word in photography. All this fine art crap is killing it already." (this is the unedited version of the quote rather than the published version)
Photographer
Jeff Cohn
Posts: 3850
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US
UdoR wrote:
You know Jeff, I think that your wording is pretty pretentious, don't know why? Maybe because you put the pressure on me to "impress you!" Why?
I will have two major gallery showings coming up with two projects I am currently working on...
I was just informed that another gallery is interested in showing my Firefighter series from my website, but that is not art as such but more photojournalism.
I try to CREATE every shot, even my boring model portfolios, trying to get something out of it, or trying to create an image that tells a story. When I am shooting, I usually look at the situation, the environment and have bursts of inspirations on what to do next... meaning... I create, out of inspiration.
If I shoot model portfolios, the most bland work for my taste is when I have to shoot studio, because that's not very inspirational to me. But outdoors/locations... that gets my imagination going...
You reference David LaChappelle, who is undoubtedly a very creative artist, but his build up of stages and props to that extend and use of agressive colors is nice, but is so not my style of photography.
Do I think that I am less creative than him? I don't think so and in one of the projects I am preparing for the big shows, (it's more than just showing) I use props and three models, special effect artists, stylists and MUA's, but it is still my own vision and not an imitation of Warhol or LaChappelle.
For me, the following image I shot of the up and coming singer Kelly Keelo, is artistic and I really love that image. It's artistic to me, because I had the idea and vision to incorporate the elements, that were just there...
However, I do believe, after reading your intro, it's probably too bland.
Yet, I will put more galleries on my website up that showcase similar shots... hope that I can continue working on my website, which I pretty much stopped last year in April (finish the redoing).
![https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v200/UdoRPhotoArchive/Kelly%20Keelo/KellyKeelo-Bronx-42wb.jpg]() Udo, had I said "impress me" you woulda been totally correct in the assumption that the post had any pretentious undertones, i said "inspire me" ... The wording was a tad ambiguous and a bit on the snotty/sarcastic/challengeing side no doubt, but it wasnt designed to insult anyone, more to just pull the talent out of the wood work and create a forum post dedicated to sharing and exploring, finding new incredible talent. Had i just said "hey if you're good post pix" it woulda died off in a heartbeat, but im glad while probably makeing a few enemies.. i also personally discovered soooooo many amazing photographers so quickly. So i'd have to say with that motive in mind, the goal was achieved.
Photographer
Jeff Cohn
Posts: 3850
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US
aguynamededdy wrote:
these camera's can also do a lot more than girl + overhead shot + tattoo + breast... Ouch. and touche'....
Photographer
George Diego Photo
Posts: 293
Leander, Texas, US
Jeff Cohn::X-Pose.net:: wrote:
LOVE your work Thanks!
Wardrobe Stylist
Dave the design student
Posts: 45198
Detroit, Michigan, US
Darya from the Ukraine is one of my favorite artistic models, though some of her older shots are long gone she has added some new photos. Please don't ask for the MM number since there are only five or six people listed under the entire country.
Photographer
B. Otis Link
Posts: 31
Costa Mesa, California, US
You're correct, in this current culture all forms of art are dying. It's all about immitation of past artist, musicians, artist' and so on. How bored can we get?
Photographer
Habenero Photography
Posts: 1444
Mesa, Arizona, US
raveneyes wrote:
I also find issue with much of what you're linking to...a photographic artist is not a graphic artist....they are two separate things. A photographic artist does his work in camera...relying on photoshop only for color correction and lighting balance. If you've spent more than a few hours on an image in photoshop then it's no longer a photo...it's a beautiful piece of graphic art, but not a photo. A graphic artist uses their hands to transfer an image to paper. A photo may be used by the graphic artist, but isn't necessary for the creation of the artwork.
Color shifting, solarizing, and tinting of photos doesn't make them a piece of graphic art. I don't consider myself a graphic artist. I use layers in photoshop the same way I used to use multiple exposures in camera and enlarger to achieve an image. What used to take hours and sometimes days in a darkroom is now done in minutes in photoshop. my tools have changed, but I still consider what I create as a photo and myself a photographic artist!
Photographer
kickfight
Posts: 35054
Portland, Oregon, US
Art is dead? Oh, no! Alas, poor Art. I knew him, Horatio... Aw, c'mon... *someone* had to do it!  Seriously, though... can we at least define what we mean by art? Isn't 'art' one of the more subjective things one can abide? I mean, like they say, "one man's junk is another man's..." (no, not "Ebay listing", although good guess...)
Photographer
Brian Diaz
Posts: 65617
Danbury, Connecticut, US
kickfight wrote:
Art is dead? Oh, no!
Alas, poor Art. I knew him, Horatio...
Aw, c'mon... *someone* had to do it! Thank you for not saying that you knew him well.
kickfight wrote:
Seriously, though... can we at least define what we mean by art? No. It doesn't work.
Model
Lapis
Posts: 8424
Chicago, Illinois, US
I like Art, but I like his brother better.
Photographer
kickfight
Posts: 35054
Portland, Oregon, US
Brian Diaz wrote:
Thank you for not saying that you knew him well. I'm still trying to figure out why the misquote is better known than the actual text. Who started that? Grrr...
Edit: maybe it's a cross-quote of Edgar's parting words to dying Oswald in King Lear:
"I know thee well... a serviceable villain, as duteous to the vices of thy mistress as badness would desire..."
Photographer
Jeff Fiore
Posts: 9225
Brooklyn, New York, US
Brian Diaz wrote:
kickfight wrote:
Art is dead? Oh, no!
Alas, poor Art. I knew him, Horatio...
Aw, c'mon... *someone* had to do it! Thank you for not saying that you knew him well.
No. It doesn't work. Art is kinda like porn, you know it when you see it.
Everyone has their own interpretation.
Photographer
Brian Diaz
Posts: 65617
Danbury, Connecticut, US
Jeff Fiore wrote:
Art is kinda like porn, you know it when you see it.
Everyone has their own interpretation. Porn and strike zones.
Photographer
Brian Diaz
Posts: 65617
Danbury, Connecticut, US
kickfight wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out why the misquote is better known than the actual text. Who started that? Grrr... Sam did. Play it again, Sam.
Model
theda
Posts: 21719
New York, New York, US
Brian Diaz wrote:
Sam did. Play it again, Sam. Kiss me, you fool!
Photographer
kickfight
Posts: 35054
Portland, Oregon, US
Brian Diaz wrote:
Sam did. Play it again, Sam. I should have known Woody Allen was behind it all.
Photographer
Valkyrur
Posts: 1187
Nelsonville, New York, US
Photographer
Valkyrur
Posts: 1187
Nelsonville, New York, US
some (nice) ass kissing going on above :-)
Photographer
Jeff Fiore
Posts: 9225
Brooklyn, New York, US
Brian Diaz wrote:
Porn and strike zones. Depends on whos pitching
Photographer
ChrisChris
Posts: 91
Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden
Jeff Cohn::X-Pose.net:: wrote:
...these camera's can do a lot more than "girl+ bikini + beach"... i agree, but please, let's not blame the instrument.
the camera does what it's told.
Photographer
ChrisChris
Posts: 91
Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden
Jeff Cohn::X-Pose.net:: wrote:
Udo, had I said "impress me" you woulda been totally correct in the assumption that the post had any pretentious undertones, i said "inspire me" ... The wording was a tad ambiguous and a bit on the snotty/sarcastic/challengeing side no doubt, but it wasnt designed to insult anyone, more to just pull the talent out of the wood work and create a forum post dedicated to sharing and exploring, finding new incredible talent. Had i just said "hey if you're good post pix" it woulda died off in a heartbeat, but im glad while probably makeing a few enemies.. i also personally discovered soooooo many amazing photographers so quickly. So i'd have to say with that motive in mind, the goal was achieved. eloquently put.
i like your style.
(and I apologize about the double post)
|
