watching this in my history of photography class in my local city college! I feel special that I already follow Ted, everyone was like "who is this guy? he's awesome"
I'm watching this video in 2022 and it's so great to see an informative photography related video that's not full of product placements or unnecessary content to stretch the video for higher ad-revenue.
You are, probably the only one who presents 'the Science' of Art of Photography. Thank you immensely for the volume of knowledge you impart in every video of this series.
I've far from followed your channel chronologically, which tends to make it more interesting. But what I get from being led in to your videos by the UA-cam logic with links, is the massive output you've had and how high the quality has been all the way through.
Someone told me once that painting and photography are one and the same. Their results are the same, or they can reach the same results. I say that these two expressions of art are twin sisters, so to speak. Actually, they complete each other for expressing quite the same message. There are those classical zen and chan buddhist paintings that differ from photography, or caligraphy (which is painting turned to writing, actually), but other than these there aren't any. These two, I think, complete each other when it comes to the methods used, the technical aspects of the works. Of course, in painting the artist adds something to the canvas, where in photography, the artist subtracts elements from the frame, from its canvas. This is how I see it. :)
The two diverge in one respect. Painting is an additive art - the painter starts off with a blank canvas and can add whatever elements they choose where they want. Photographers generally start off with an existing scene (leaving out pure studio work), that has elements in it that will either support or compete with the subject. Consequently the photography has to try to eliminate or suppress the elements that do not support the main subject. To quote Dorothea Lange: "Photography, after all, is a conscious act of selection."
This channel covers a ton of photo related subjects. I come here first when I'm looking for a photo clue with an older camera, or interesting techniques to try with my modern gear.
How the hell is this not the most popular photo channel on youtube? This guy is outstanding. After watching the HORRIBLE digitalrev videos, this is a breath of fresh air.
Hi Ted, you would want to say "demashee" not -shay and "Chant sacré" means "sacred song" basically. Anyway great episode as always. If you are interested in the relations between Painting and Photography in the 19th century I suggest you find that book that just went out, "Painting and Photography" by Dominique de Font-Réaulx, I just got it and it's really interesting, sharp and pertinent. Good day to you.
Why on earth did you wrongly suggest soft focus is simply missed or out of focus? This shows a foundational misunderstanding of what soft focus truly is and meant to this genre in particular. Many of the pictoralist masters favored specific glass for very good reasons.
Hello! First of all, I would like to thank you for the very interesting films about photography. Secondly, I have tried to find a picture that stuck in my memory when I saw it about 15 years ago, but which I do not know anything about. I'm taking a chance to getting some help here. Actually, I have been very fond of the genre of pictorialism for many years, but it was only recently that I realised that the image I'm looking for might belong to that genre. The picture represents a couple of boys standing in a lake or a stream. One holds a glass jar in his hands and they are likely to try to catch tadpoles or something like that. The image is in black and white, blurred and out of focus, but shimmering. If someone recognises the description and has any suggestion on what image it is and who may have taken it, I would be very grateful to get an answer.
It sounds like it might be Keith Carter's photo "fireflies". If that's correct you can thank Ted Forbes as he did a great episode on Keith's work and that image also stuck in my mind 😁
Interesting video, however, might I suggest you work on your audio? The static throughout the video was incredibly hard to listen to and would/is deter/detering me from further videos of yours.
watching this in my history of photography class in my local city college! I feel special that I already follow Ted, everyone was like "who is this guy? he's awesome"
Thanks Mark - so awesome to hear!!!
I'm watching this video in 2022 and it's so great to see an informative photography related video that's not full of product placements or unnecessary content to stretch the video for higher ad-revenue.
Real
This is a graduate class in photography!!! I think the best historical criticism of photography on youtube
You are, probably the only one who presents 'the Science' of Art of Photography. Thank you immensely for the volume of knowledge you impart in every video of this series.
I've far from followed your channel chronologically, which tends to make it more interesting. But what I get from being led in to your videos by the UA-cam logic with links, is the massive output you've had and how high the quality has been all the way through.
Not sure why this 7 year old video showed up in my suggestions, but I'm glad it did! I'm always impressed by your depth of knowledge.
Just what I needed to get my life started again. Thank you Ted, for the spark.
Such a great episode. You need to make a series of photographic history podcasts! I love that you're doing this! So great!
Thank you for offering such superb quality programming here on youtube.
Yeah I agree - his stuff is mind blowing - particularly for the time, but his later work is just as fantastic.
Someone told me once that painting and photography are one and the same. Their results are the same, or they can reach the same results. I say that these two expressions of art are twin sisters, so to speak. Actually, they complete each other for expressing quite the same message. There are those classical zen and chan buddhist paintings that differ from photography, or caligraphy (which is painting turned to writing, actually), but other than these there aren't any.
These two, I think, complete each other when it comes to the methods used, the technical aspects of the works. Of course, in painting the artist adds something to the canvas, where in photography, the artist subtracts elements from the frame, from its canvas.
This is how I see it. :)
The two diverge in one respect. Painting is an additive art - the painter starts off with a blank canvas and can add whatever elements they choose where they want. Photographers generally start off with an existing scene (leaving out pure studio work), that has elements in it that will either support or compete with the subject. Consequently the photography has to try to eliminate or suppress the elements that do not support the main subject. To quote Dorothea Lange: "Photography, after all, is a conscious act of selection."
Painting is also more 3 dimensional when you account for impasto and layering whereas photography is on a film
These history and photograph study videos are the best. Keep these up Ted! Thanks!
The Art of Photography Excellent stuff Ted. Liked the way you linked it all together.
This channel covers a ton of photo related subjects. I come here first when I'm looking for a photo clue with an older camera, or interesting techniques to try with my modern gear.
How the hell is this not the most popular photo channel on youtube? This guy is outstanding. After watching the HORRIBLE digitalrev videos, this is a breath of fresh air.
Loving your show, so glad I found it. What took me so long? Cheers
Old but Gold!
Thank you very much for your clear and smart explanation.
SrtaDonguridondon thanks!
Such a great resource! Thanks Ted Forbes. Robert Demachy was a great find for me!
Classic AoP. Great video Ted.
Hi Ted, you would want to say "demashee" not -shay and "Chant sacré" means "sacred song" basically. Anyway great episode as always. If you are interested in the relations between Painting and Photography in the 19th century I suggest you find that book that just went out, "Painting and Photography" by Dominique de Font-Réaulx, I just got it and it's really interesting, sharp and pertinent. Good day to you.
Great work. I am a daily visitor of your channel. Please keep doing what you are doing.
I was a photo teacher and still am a photo lover, I enjoy your videos very much, thank you!
Hey Ted is that green screen? behind you? if it is GOOD WORK is really real
I have some time and i'm just wathcing all your videos, they're great
Thanks.. a lot.. Greeting from Venezuela
Great video, amazing pics! Many thanks.
Why on earth did you wrongly suggest soft focus is simply missed or out of focus? This shows a foundational misunderstanding of what soft focus truly is and meant to this genre in particular. Many of the pictoralist masters favored specific glass for very good reasons.
Love THIS!
Thanks for making me an actually proud Belgian. Finally a photographer worth bringing up in a conversation :D
this video is wonderful! Thank you!
only 5000 views? even I am ashemed I found this chanel just now
So, I wonder. Would all staged photo shoots (fashion, product photography, etc.) be pictorialism, since there's manipulation of the subject matter?
Thank you
Wouldn't a more concise definition of Pictorialism is, "photography that aims to look like Romantic paintings"?
So my question is, how can I replicate this "effect"?
I thoroughly enjoyed this and my pinterest boards are growing too
Woah, neat! Would love to explore this in context of URBEX and Horror
Hello! First of all, I would like to thank you for the very interesting films about photography. Secondly, I have tried to find a picture that stuck in my memory when I saw it about 15 years ago, but which I do not know anything about. I'm taking a chance to getting some help here. Actually, I have been very fond of the genre of pictorialism for many years, but it was only recently that I realised that the image I'm looking for might belong to that genre. The picture represents a couple of boys standing in a lake or a stream. One holds a glass jar in his hands and they are likely to try to catch tadpoles or something like that. The image is in black and white, blurred and out of focus, but shimmering. If someone recognises the description and has any suggestion on what image it is and who may have taken it, I would be very grateful to get an answer.
It sounds like it might be Keith Carter's photo "fireflies". If that's correct you can thank Ted Forbes as he did a great episode on Keith's work and that image also stuck in my mind 😁
Thank you, another great video!
Good job
which city's skyline is that behind him?
Interesting video, however, might I suggest you work on your audio? The static throughout the video was incredibly hard to listen to and would/is deter/detering me from further videos of yours.
i dont hear it
Thanks, very interesting.
Excellent
It definitely has a ton to do with girly stuff / shopping. That's all anyone I know uses pintrerest for.
Robert Demachy CC or what ever makes a mess of his name. Photo Speed
Love you
Great vid
Amazing job (Y)
Damn...@chiefpimp...thumbs...!!
the nightmare artist......
@chiefpim
YAY! First View and like!