Re: [Leica] Snapshots vs 'art'

[tripspud <tripspud@transbay.net>]

Hi Clive,

     Photos are one of things people value most.  In a fire, it's what they
try to save first and miss most.  And it seems the further removed by
time, the greater the value.

Cheers,

Rich Lahrson
Berkeley, California
tripspud@transbay.net

Clive Moss wrote:

> So, tell us what you really think :-)
> Is this the kind of snapshot you mean?
> http://www.fotolog.net/chmoss/?photo_id=219449
> (beware -- Canon G3 picture -- purists need not look)
> --
> Clive
> http://clive.moss.net
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of
> > Dante Stella
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 9:56 PM
> > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Snapshots vs 'art'
> >
> >
> > Snapshots have a lot of potential to have meaning to the subject and
> > even to other viewers.  They are unposed, unarranged, poorly lit,
> > ragged, wrinkled, and sometimes even tired, but they capture
> > the moment.
> >
> > What does not capture the moment or have any affective potential is
> > 99.99% of what calls itself "fine-art" photography or "professional
> > photography."  I am always amazed at how people who photograph for a
> > living bill themselves.  It seems that the more mediocre the
> > photography, the worse the hyperbole (hope I'm not appropriating any
> > real trademarks, but you get the idea):
> >
> > "Captured beauty"
> >
> > "Intimate moments"
> >
> > "Stopped time."
> >
> > Blah blah blah bullsh*t.  It's like reading Robert Frost.
> >
> > What's worse, the worse the photographer, the more extravagant the
> > title.  Has anyone ever noticed that the world's most famous
> > paintings
> > carry titles which are simple, elegant, and descriptive?  Or has  the
> > world of professional photography gotten so bad that it believes that
> > Platonic nominalism can bail it out?
> >
> > What's the excuse?  People pay you (if you are good enough to sell
> > stuff), you write the equipment off your taxes, you charge the
> > materials to the customers, and if you have the cajones, you can make
> > them do any type of portrait YOU want.  So what explains the complete
> > lack of creativity?  Is it that you are not really an artist?
> >  Are you
> > a technician?
> >
> > If you want overproduced portraits that are technically perfect and
> > emotionally absent, check into some Baroque painting sometime.
> >
> > If you want to see people as they are, as they look and as they feel,
> > look in some amateur's photo album.  Sure, the pages are that sticky
> > kind, and there is that nasty cellophane that supposedly interferes
> > with viewing.  Maybe some of the little square 126 prints are already
> > turning red.  But it is much, much more genuine than the
> > Olan-Mills-style pablum coming out of most studios.  Housepainters,
> > mostly.
> >
> > NO ARCHIVE
> >
> > ____________
> > Dante Stella
> > http://www.dantestella.com
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, see
> > http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-> users/unsub.html
> >
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html