Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/12/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It seems to me that photography falls into the following genres: Documentary: Events News Sports Travel Landscapes Cityscapes Street life Portraiture (individuals and/or groups): Formal Studio Environmental Candid (generally also environmental) Fine Art: Conceptual Experimental Artsy: HDR, iPhonography, and other special effects Scientific: Astronomical Macro Micro (including electron microscopy) Heat, IR, UV, etc. Illustration: Opinion / Editorial Fictional narrative Advertising: Fashion Product Archival: Family Snapshots Museum Catalogs Archeological records Etc. I may be overlooking a genre or three; and invite suggestions. Within each genre the history of photography has high-water marks; examples of greatness. And each of these genres can of course overlap. An advertising concept, portrait, document or scientific image can reach for and achieve Art. A documentary image may reach for and achieve op-ed, humor, irony, etc. As we consider photographs within the various genres we can compare our, and other's, work with the high-water marks and evaluate on the basis of: Socially extremely important important neutral unimportant Historically extremely important important neutral unimportant Aesthetically gorgeous beautiful pleasing bland weak Emotionally extremely moving moving inert Conceptually profound outstanding fresh derivative weak Technically superb well done adequate weak So I may think of Howard's recently posted "Vancouver sunrise pano" as a travel, cityscape, document; historically important, aesthetically beautiful, conceptually derivative and technically superb. or Ric's body of work documenting local street life as socially and historically important, aesthetically beautiful, conceptually fresh and technically well done. or his musical performance archives as socially and historically extremely important aesthetically pleasing, conceptually derivative, and technically adequate. Regards, George Lottermoser george at imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist