Відео

ahhhh, that time a well known photographger sighed and said to me "Oh this is great but I wish you'd pay attention to your background ... you idiot [winks]."

So yep, was on UA-cam and thinking about my days as a neophyte photographer. I was drawn to nuevo avant garde slash experimental stuff back when everything was 35 mm, SLR. Documentary photography is a contrast to that. I mean photography, i.e., taking photographs it's all about perspectives right. People didn't interest me, but Diane, it looks like she was fascinated by that. In what you showed I saw a lot of people posed in immediate loneness. Really enjoyed the baby crying tho, as it wiped away the facade of cute and beautiful bambino's smiling cheerfully with eyes full of curiosity. Instead, as you put it, the wonder of reality - babies cry all the time. As I hit the search term, photog..." on UA-cam last night is when I discovered Diane. First up was a documentary starring her daughter - didn't know about the suicide, but the Doc was Dark. It gave me a bad impression. Then all her photo's were just stark - the WOW factor exiled on main street (Rolling Stones album cover; ~1970s). But now, thanks to you and an impulse to give Diane another chance: I want to explore her perspective more.

Fab vid Ed, I wasn't familiar with Homer Sykes. I love it though. And looking at his stuff, I'd love to see some more coverage on the members' section ;)

Good stuff.

In my opinion, background in an image is key. Unless the forground speaks for itself, as the gentleman mentioned. If the background is rubbish, i dont make the image. Id rather shoot less than have thousands of so-so images. And, does one need to photograph everyday to be a 'photographer' (of course there is keeping the skill alive)

Currently on my 4th year to get my bachelor's degree in photography in Greece. Generally what was said in the video also apply to Greece, except that universities are free and we don't have to pay anything. But still, the majority of people drop out sooner or later and those that keep studying end up doing other jobs that have no connection to photography. Best thing I can recommend is try to do side projects/find jobs relevant to photography while studying to build up some short of portfolio by the time you finish. It's better to have something rather than nothing on your resume.

Great video! I love Homer's work. Such a joy to see this short interview. Thank you.

Spot on Ed - MBPBA! Baseball Caps? Red ones? 😁

Let's make good art great again! I agree with what your saying here. It comes down to aesthetic values and one set of these values only being considered 'good'. Perhaps we need to form an alliance or group to start promoting technically good art. I think one commenter makes a valid point regarding Grenfell. For me it was a prime example of the aesthetic values of one social class over that of another. They wanted the building clad so it created a 'prettier' skyline for them but the building's resident weren't considered enough when they set out to do that!

Perhaps it’s even more serious than this, it’s an issue for university professional education as a whole. I have just read this in this morning’s Guardian about the architects on the Grenfell Tower “Anyone who has been to a degree show or a “crit”, where students present their work to a jury of critics, will know that architectural education is a five-year training in visual representation and rhetorical obfuscation, with precious little time spent on learning how to actually make a building. It is a course that produces countless cod philosophers, gonzo anthropologists and aspiring conceptual artists, but few technically capable designers who know their cavity barriers from their damp proof membranes.”

If you haven't read it already, see: Julian SPALDING, Con Art - Why You Should Sell Your Damien Hirsts While You Can. (2012)

The trend you’re pointing at is following the general arc of smaller/simpler/faster-to-digest information and entertainment of the “connected” world, whose participants are educated less in less in the ways of free and critical thinking, and on agenda-free material. We solve that and we will have changed the course of humanity and the future of this planet.

No one is buying the George-Next-Door's-AI pix, unless they are actually good. Just as no one is buying his snaps of the kids, his sweet Camaro, his last five lunches, etc., no matter how flawlessly executed. How might they be "good," in that they attract acclaim or sales? Probably NOT by just being a copy of something else or anime versions of Taylor Swift or a million other banal obvious things. Instead they'll have an angle that makes them a unique expression of something that those with money and/or influence value. Something they can own and/or show that they believe will increase their bank book and/or prestige. Raygun is bad, but uniquely so. She inspires remarks. There are so many was to be remarkable. Sometimes it is unique access and dedication: Salgado comes to mind, or Mark Peterson. They are not remotely bad. They are also widely celebrated and I hope rewarded. Good luck repeating their successes by direct emulation, though. You're not them, no one else has their history and access. So many ways to be special... Maybe it's the personal connection of an artist to a theme or a place or a medium. Maybe it's rarity because the place they documented is gone, or they are. Maybe they were in the right place at the right time. But it's rarely outright BAD -- one characteristic of BAD is that it stumbles around, it's not repeatable. A good artist knows what they make and can make it. What they make is clearly theirs, even if, sometimes, it can feel trivial to someone whose daily craft is professional well-polished and flexible. I think it was Doug Huebler (maybe quoting someone else?) whose response to "I could have done that" was: "but you didn't."

No photograph is worth tens-of-thousands of pounds... Aesthetic gatekeeping based on the fact that the art world is divorced from reality is absurd since most classical artists would see your work as un-aesthetic if not abhorrently focussed on the "wrong class of people". The art world is neither culture or a critique of quality or merit - it is simply what rich people do with their money. To preoccupy yourself with conceptual art you don't like because it makes money is like whining that punk/hip-hop/metal/house isn't music because you don't get it - shoot what you shoot - everything you want to photograph is a good subject people. For instance, I take picture of dumpsters - I don't whine that no one want to pay me for them - I just love the aesthetic qualities and I could write novels about each and everyone. That's because I love the subject. There is nothing about art that is not both conceptually and aesthetically arbitrary.

She yawns at 4min 43. Deeply disrespectful as well as unashamedly conceptual.

Wait a minute! You're the one who teaches photography at the art school! I'm very tired of photography without esthetics that is really popular here and there. But on the other end we have all these photos with too many effects at once. But what really matters? I'd say the story behind the image. Like in Avedon's "In the American West". There are no special esthetics in these photos (but really?) and everything in the subjects he photographed. But on the other hand there are Pierre et Gilles who take similar portraits but with too much of everything on purpose. BTW I've been in a local art school recently and young artists are awesome in technical terms. They simply don't know what to do.

Haha, wow this is so accurate. I left uni in 2012, my best work was made before uni. I learnt the art of giving the tutors what they wanted. A friend of mine successfully submitted a sound piece for a photography project. As much as we had fun challenging the concepts, my enjoyment of photography rapidly dropped off during and since uni. ):

4 min 44 seconds says it all!

Spot on

Good point, although for every Juergen Teller doing campaigns for Marc Jacobs, there are 100 "Lens based practitioners" attending every opening but mostly sitting at home angrily wondering why they can't pay the rent...

Great video. When I lived in Brighton I whent to two academic photography shows. The first was a foundation degree shows. The work there was excellent. It was technically great, creative and showed real skill. The second was a "fine art photography" show. It was some of the worst photography I have seen. I remember one person that got a very good grade for having other people take pictures of him drunk and partying. It was clear there was no effort or skill. He obviously wrote (or had someone else write) an essay that they liked. All I read was the first paragraph that looked like a random mixture of unrelated words. I thankfully I also when to many other non-academic exhibitions from local amateur photographers. Every one of them showed real thought and talent.

Interesting video, and I get your point but at the same time, to go back to 'good' photography, you would first have to determine what is good photography? and that is an issue, or the issue. Technical proficency? Composition? Content? All subjective issues,.as any of the parameters by which a photograph might be judged 'good' vary so much. Your good photograph is not my good photograph, etc.

1:38 in and i'm like, damn it, i'm going to subscribe to this yappy bloke. keep saying interesting stuff!

Heresy! You'll never get to arty 'demia heaven. But absolutely spot on and how refreshing to see it called out. Your comment about the "degree" system in recent decades is on point. Particularly when you consider that, for a certain demographic, degree level education has become economically extremely difficult over the past 30 or so years - particularly in the arts. It might have been you that said it, but I recall recently a statistic revealing that only 40% of individuals in the arts come from a working class background - I'll leave it at that.

I thought about the NFT craze, not that long ago. Most people knew it was bullsh*t, but played along because it was a trend. So to me AI art seems like the NFT craze. How long before the public gets tired of the AI look? It’s just recycling old ideas, especially the over-Photoshopped era of a dozen years ago.

So ... we will have to wait for the old academic guard to die off then be governed by the Instagram - TicTok'rs. Then it will be a free-for-all.

Only legends know that conceptual photography is king 😂

A brilliant film. As poignant to day as it was at its release.

Bam. Nailed it. Conceptual work, can be good. Look at Crewdson for example. I choose him to highlight, because he is a strong inspiration on my work. And he in turn was inspired by Ogle Winston Link. But he produces work that asks more questions than it answers. It is safe to say, it is great conceptual work. But by God, it's executed with such brilliant creative and technical craftsmanship. This is what I strive for in my personal work. And I do hope that photographic artists can again one day, celebrate good conceptual work that has been executed with exceptional creative and technical skill.

I think people are missing one point about Rachael Gunn…. Remember Eddie ‘The Eagle’ Edwards? There was a time when the Olympics was open to pretty much anyone, amateur or professional. Then Eddie entered, did badly, and then the Olympic body ruled out amateurs as a result. I think deep down, that breakdancing performance was a dig and comment on that.

Such an excellent point! Thanks for this video 🔥

Yeah, even many film photographers on UA-cam will deliver (not even glorified) snapshots and gush lyrically about the veracity of the artwork...now don't get me wrong, there can be fantastic images grabbed randomly, but a lot of it is just 'meh'....but presented as serious art. Again, it is subjective, my own work is probably 'meh' to many, but one cannot deny the rubbish out there. One needs to approach unconventional photography, deliberately, with purpose.

Brilliant! I have long had a hatred of the verbal diarrhea that seems to be a part of the photographic art world. You can easily detect this nonsense as soon as the "artist" uses the word "intersection". Be wary of those describing their work using long-winded sentences and terms such as juxtaposition, socioeconomic, gender identity, and lastly, colonialism.

I guess the moment art enters the business world, things start to deteriorate. And then there's the question: What is art? I don't think that "concept" is the problem, but when the concept is all there is. Well, that's not my field of expertise. I'm simple-minded when it comes to art (or rather photography) - does it speak to me? Yes? Then I'm fine with it, no matter what some art intellectuals try to tell me …

The BJP is full of this stuff too. Cover to cover identity politics. The only question I am left asking after seeing such work is "so what?"

Best video yet. It's Douglas Adam's B Ark all over again.

All very catch 22 absurdity, think it's a Major Major problem. Make some MBPBA caps.

This is a controversial video cause there are excellent conceptual works out there and Raygun didn't win a medal. By the way, Damien Hirst is a C word.

This article pretty much sums it up voicesofacademia.com/2024/04/05/its-not-your-fault-that-academic-life-is-getting-harder-by-glen-ohara/?fbclid=IwY2xjawFA_zpleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHVXT-eBitvlBVjEoMhR48roFJkZLGxTwNqOQp4FJ7UuyphNzPD4eJC34HQ_aem_tWyW-y9ghuDWw8T09NdA8Q

that is a fantastic set ...... thank you.

Really benefit from these kind of conversions to understand how best to print things.

Inspired by your shot? Yeah, maybe (or even likely, given your story). Plagiarised or ripped off? No. This woman in the ad isn't looking at the butt, and differences are already too many. Maybe this is what got you the dislikes. Still a "case" to be made, at least something for discussion.

Isn't the woman in the advert looking at the front of the statue?

I’ve had people take my photos and get them tattooed. No matter how I phrased ‘it would have been nice to have been asked to use this’ did it make any difference. The photo was of this guys son and in his eyes, had every right to use it! It highlights perfectly how taking things off online sources will never be considered theft in the eyes of some people. It’s not a physical item. I’m also pretty sure one of my photos was used on a low budget horror flick on Netflix’s….. but for the life of me can’t remember what it’s called. It’s a really little known ruined church wall near to where I live, and it’s not even worth snapping really.

check out photographer Chas Gerretsen's work, he went from being a vietnam war photographer to a film set photographer