airfrogusmc
Mentor
I said this earlier I posted my thoughts because I wanted to get the ball rolling and I have thick skin. About half the crit that has been posted has been much different from your crit but I must thank you if you had to go back to soak it all in. Thats what I was going for. And trust me the flicker tumbler crowd is not what I am playing to. I have no presence there and have no desire to. Immediate gratification is not what most of my work is about. I tend to like to show my work as prints in galleries. But thats me.
To topic this is why you need to be very careful whose crit you take to heart. I have seen, on forums, people tell others to crop out some of the most important visual elements. I am very lucky to first have a lot of confidence in my vision and second to have a circle of artists and photographers as friends to help me when I need help.
Right now we all have a WONDERFUL resource in Frank to critique our work and everyone should take advantage of that. I don't just say that because of his favorable review LoL...
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Great quote....
airfrogusmc
Mentor
He learned from Evans and Frank by his own words. He learned by looking at their work. But you do learn most from working...
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Yes, he learned quite a bit from them, especially Evans, who strongly influenced Frank. But as you said Allen, and I was pointing out, by looking at their work.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Yes absolutely.
nongfuspring
Well-known
Fair enough. I didn't mean to imply your work needs to supply immediate gratification, I just mean this particular picture feels dilute; but if that's what you're going for then by all means power to you. I guess if this was part of a larger series then I could potentially see it working in conjunction with other conceptually supportive images, but as an individual photo as I mentioned I think it could be stronger.
For sure, it's good you have a group of friends to work with, in the some 5 years since my MFA easily the most important thing I've done is find that group. Without my clique I doubt I would have been able to achieve what I have over the past years. Not to mention, the majority of people will give useless critique, just in the same sense that for every fan you make you'll make two enemies. 2014 was my most successful year yet; a major national award, 4 solo shows in 3 continents, 3 artist residencies etc., but I've been having to learn the hard way that haters gon' hate and at the end of the day for an artist uniform praise is far more of a concern than uniform disapproval.
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
Can you really critique just one shot? I'm not sure...it's a rare image that can stand on its own and not only stand the test of time but say something all by itself.
Most of the street photography I like that really resonates with me is a group or collection of images, over time, that explore a place or some theme...sum greater than its parts, kind of thing I suppose you'd say.
Just a musing, as I look over a book by one of my great street photography inspirations:
http://uofmpress.ca/books/detail/the-north-end
http://www.amazon.ca/The-North-End-Photographs-Paskievich/dp/0887557007
https://www.nfb.ca/film/ted_baryluks_grocery/
Most of the street photography I like that really resonates with me is a group or collection of images, over time, that explore a place or some theme...sum greater than its parts, kind of thing I suppose you'd say.
Just a musing, as I look over a book by one of my great street photography inspirations:
http://uofmpress.ca/books/detail/the-north-end
http://www.amazon.ca/The-North-End-Photographs-Paskievich/dp/0887557007
https://www.nfb.ca/film/ted_baryluks_grocery/
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Thanks and congrats on your recognition. If you go back some the group I am lucky enough to critique with includes 3 MFA's. One received a Guggenheim and is working on a book and teaches. One was the photography head at a college for over 25 years and is now retired and he received his MFA from RISD when Callahan and Siskind were there and Francesca Woodman was a classmate. and the other also teaches and a few other pretty amazing artists and photographers that are not afraid to give good with bad are all part of that group.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
I totally agree. It's always about the body of work. Three of my real strong influences.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Enough about me for gosh sakes. I mean you have Frank here that has asked folks to post work a page or two back you should all take advantage of that in my opinion. Someone that can give you some good insight into your work.
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
If I may respond to the original poster's question, I don't think it's so much a matter of "authority." There are people who have something valid to say about street photography and there are people who don't. The trick is to know the difference.
Constantine Manos is a man who has many valid things to say about street photography; being a long time member of Magnum and having made a few billion street photography images himself makes it so. You could say the same about Peter Turnley, Jay Maisel, Joel Meyerowitz and several others who teach street photography workshops and have spent their entire working lives making street and documentary photography.
Academic and gallery types? Proceed with great caution when it comes to giving their commentary on your street photography any weight.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
There have been some great photographers that have taught at universities and colleges.
Winogrand
Callahan
Siskind
Uelsmann
Swedlund
László Moholy-Nagy
to name just a few and Stieglitz was a gallery owner and actually gave many great artists a start like Picasso's first major US exhibit
Winogrand
Callahan
Siskind
Uelsmann
Swedlund
László Moholy-Nagy
to name just a few and Stieglitz was a gallery owner and actually gave many great artists a start like Picasso's first major US exhibit
OP, sure get some comments if you like.
Myself? I've been shooting for 46 years. I am not interested that much in comments.
Whenever I post things online I try to turn off the comments if I can. I am not looking for comments or ego stroking. I am only looking to display my work...nothing else.
My work is in 91 museums and public collections. Some critics tell me having one's work in 91 public collections means nothing. But if the choice is to have my work on Flickr to please the critics or have it in 91 museums...the critics can keep their pix in Flickr and I'll keep my prints in the museums.
Here are some of the critiques I've got over the last couple of years on the net. A simple Google of my name will show some of my work.
"Your pictures are lifeless."
"Sad"
"I don't like color."
"I don't like BW."
"I don't like HDR."
"I don't like selective color."
"I don't like diffusion."
"I don't like Hyper-Real HDR, it is too cartoonish."
"Your photos are too contrasty."
"Your photos are too grainy."
"Why don't you take pictures of something pretty like flowers or a sunset instead of those ugly things."
"Your trying to make something out of nothing."
"Your photos are too sensational."
"Don't photograph the homeless."
"Don't photograph kids without their parents' permission."
"I find photos of people boring."
"Your not a very good photographer."
'Your exploiting the homeless."
'Your photo doesn’t work for me."
"I don't like flower photographs they are boring."
"What were you trying to say?"
"Digital photography is not real photography."
"I find it disturbing you think your work is museum worthy."
"It is over processed."
"Don't take pictures of people in public without their permission."
"Don't photograph anorexics."
"Cover up her breasts."
"Your photos are staged."
"I don't like your photo because it leaves nothing for the imagination."
“Never crop your photos. If you have to crop a photo it wasn’t meant to be taken.”
"Your disgusting."
"Your photography is vernacular."
"You should trash that photo."
"I don't like fisheye photos."
“Don’t shoot digital, shoot film, digital is no good.”
"Don't send unsolicited photos to museums."
"She (the person in the photo) is a drunk…she is fat…she is an attention whore…she needs to go to the gym…she is trailer trash."
"Your self-centered"
'Your self-absorbed"
'Your inconsiderate"
"I don't like wide-angle distortion."
"Your a phony...your all talk...you don't know how to take photographs." (When I don’t send in any photos to the photo forums.)
"Your a troll...your looking for attention...your trying to boost your website traffic...your an egomaniac." (When I do send in photos to the photo forums.)
“I’d never shoot digital. If and when film becomes unavailable I will give up photography.”
"Your goofy"
"It is porno."
"I think somebody should tell you: your shots are very boring, nothing is happening there, just very normal snapshots, and you are trying to make them look interesting by shooting with a wide angle and HDR...they are all trash."
"It looks horrible."
"It's a hack composite, looks like it was done for some Sunday paper magazine."
"It looks like the view through the bottom of my shot glass after my fourth tequila at Cozumel."
"15 seconds of my life I will never get back. What a waste."
"Only commercially printed books count, your self-published books don't count." *
'Unless a museum solicits you for your work it does not count if you solicit them." *
"You have no one-man shows or critical reviews." *
"No one wants to look at that."
"You have low morals.'
"I'm not interested in that crap."
* Shortened and paraphrased comments.
Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. When it comes to art...you can never argue taste - there is no right or wrong. But whenever the topic of 'opinion' comes up I must recount what Clint Eastwood's 'Dirty Harry' character once said...
"Opinions are like assholes...everyone's got one."
As an artist, you first must master the basics. Once you are comfortable with your skill set, you have to become comfortable with your own style and learn to trust your own instincts. If you can't trust your own instincts, then you must follow the critics and do your art for the critics and not for yourself.
Now, a normal photog may be discouraged by the harsh criticism. But I've done many experiments over the years posting work from other famous photogs for discussion on forums. They were all great pix I put up for review. Pretty much all negative comments for the well known photogs as well. Either that or no one comments at all...I guess they couldn't figure out how to put the image down.
Here is a little known masterpiece from Cartier-Bresson's 1952 Decisive Moment book, plate #124 called 'Tehran 1950'.
http://blogsearchtest.tumblr.com/image/110263740956
Here are a few comments from a discussion on it...
"Looks pretty marginal to me. Do you want me to bow down to him?"
"I found it more obnoxious than anything else."
"What makes it so great? The crooked horizon? The poor composition? The distracting background? The blown out chandelier? The blown out black-blob of a curtain? The distracting bright triangle from the area beyond the curtain? The poor use of bokeh to make it hard to tell the wall is a mosaic of mirrors? The pushed-too-far contrast to remove any details."
When I looked at the work of these critics it was nothing, absolutely nothing. Lump all 3 of the photogs together and they could not shoot their way out of a paper bag even if their camera had razor blades glued to it. Yet, they all know how bad Cartier-Bresson is.
It is a common phenomena on online photos forums for the critics to offer comments as if they can shoot it better than everyone else. Many critics can only talk great photography...but they can't produce great photography.
I've learned to not get my self-worth for my photography from online reviews. When it comes to street and doc work if you come home with 70% of what you were after you can still have a great success.
Photogs can be a jealous bunch. Lots of hatred within many of them. Our work defines us and is an extension of ourselves. But deep down inside many know their work will never amount to anything. Photogs as well as artists are stressed out trying to get attention for their work. All the while the market is polluted with so many images no one person could possibly look through them even part of them in a lifetime.
Bottom line...all this stress can put the photog / artist in a bad mood. But if freezing time or art is in your blood, you must produce and keep producing...whether there have an outlet for ones art or not. Personally, I've learned to forget looking for approval online. Lots of cowards behind the keyboard that will try to tear you down. It can cause more harm than good.
“Never give up! Don’t listen to the haters. Don’t try to be an artist unless you can work and live in isolation, without any thanks....bleak, but needed until you get to the much lauded place."
Scape Martinez
Myself? I've been shooting for 46 years. I am not interested that much in comments.
Whenever I post things online I try to turn off the comments if I can. I am not looking for comments or ego stroking. I am only looking to display my work...nothing else.
My work is in 91 museums and public collections. Some critics tell me having one's work in 91 public collections means nothing. But if the choice is to have my work on Flickr to please the critics or have it in 91 museums...the critics can keep their pix in Flickr and I'll keep my prints in the museums.
Here are some of the critiques I've got over the last couple of years on the net. A simple Google of my name will show some of my work.
"Your pictures are lifeless."
"Sad"
"I don't like color."
"I don't like BW."
"I don't like HDR."
"I don't like selective color."
"I don't like diffusion."
"I don't like Hyper-Real HDR, it is too cartoonish."
"Your photos are too contrasty."
"Your photos are too grainy."
"Why don't you take pictures of something pretty like flowers or a sunset instead of those ugly things."
"Your trying to make something out of nothing."
"Your photos are too sensational."
"Don't photograph the homeless."
"Don't photograph kids without their parents' permission."
"I find photos of people boring."
"Your not a very good photographer."
'Your exploiting the homeless."
'Your photo doesn’t work for me."
"I don't like flower photographs they are boring."
"What were you trying to say?"
"Digital photography is not real photography."
"I find it disturbing you think your work is museum worthy."
"It is over processed."
"Don't take pictures of people in public without their permission."
"Don't photograph anorexics."
"Cover up her breasts."
"Your photos are staged."
"I don't like your photo because it leaves nothing for the imagination."
“Never crop your photos. If you have to crop a photo it wasn’t meant to be taken.”
"Your disgusting."
"Your photography is vernacular."
"You should trash that photo."
"I don't like fisheye photos."
“Don’t shoot digital, shoot film, digital is no good.”
"Don't send unsolicited photos to museums."
"She (the person in the photo) is a drunk…she is fat…she is an attention whore…she needs to go to the gym…she is trailer trash."
"Your self-centered"
'Your self-absorbed"
'Your inconsiderate"
"I don't like wide-angle distortion."
"Your a phony...your all talk...you don't know how to take photographs." (When I don’t send in any photos to the photo forums.)
"Your a troll...your looking for attention...your trying to boost your website traffic...your an egomaniac." (When I do send in photos to the photo forums.)
“I’d never shoot digital. If and when film becomes unavailable I will give up photography.”
"Your goofy"
"It is porno."
"I think somebody should tell you: your shots are very boring, nothing is happening there, just very normal snapshots, and you are trying to make them look interesting by shooting with a wide angle and HDR...they are all trash."
"It looks horrible."
"It's a hack composite, looks like it was done for some Sunday paper magazine."
"It looks like the view through the bottom of my shot glass after my fourth tequila at Cozumel."
"15 seconds of my life I will never get back. What a waste."
"Only commercially printed books count, your self-published books don't count." *
'Unless a museum solicits you for your work it does not count if you solicit them." *
"You have no one-man shows or critical reviews." *
"No one wants to look at that."
"You have low morals.'
"I'm not interested in that crap."
* Shortened and paraphrased comments.
Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. When it comes to art...you can never argue taste - there is no right or wrong. But whenever the topic of 'opinion' comes up I must recount what Clint Eastwood's 'Dirty Harry' character once said...
"Opinions are like assholes...everyone's got one."
As an artist, you first must master the basics. Once you are comfortable with your skill set, you have to become comfortable with your own style and learn to trust your own instincts. If you can't trust your own instincts, then you must follow the critics and do your art for the critics and not for yourself.
Now, a normal photog may be discouraged by the harsh criticism. But I've done many experiments over the years posting work from other famous photogs for discussion on forums. They were all great pix I put up for review. Pretty much all negative comments for the well known photogs as well. Either that or no one comments at all...I guess they couldn't figure out how to put the image down.
Here is a little known masterpiece from Cartier-Bresson's 1952 Decisive Moment book, plate #124 called 'Tehran 1950'.
http://blogsearchtest.tumblr.com/image/110263740956
Here are a few comments from a discussion on it...
"Looks pretty marginal to me. Do you want me to bow down to him?"
"I found it more obnoxious than anything else."
"What makes it so great? The crooked horizon? The poor composition? The distracting background? The blown out chandelier? The blown out black-blob of a curtain? The distracting bright triangle from the area beyond the curtain? The poor use of bokeh to make it hard to tell the wall is a mosaic of mirrors? The pushed-too-far contrast to remove any details."
When I looked at the work of these critics it was nothing, absolutely nothing. Lump all 3 of the photogs together and they could not shoot their way out of a paper bag even if their camera had razor blades glued to it. Yet, they all know how bad Cartier-Bresson is.
It is a common phenomena on online photos forums for the critics to offer comments as if they can shoot it better than everyone else. Many critics can only talk great photography...but they can't produce great photography.
I've learned to not get my self-worth for my photography from online reviews. When it comes to street and doc work if you come home with 70% of what you were after you can still have a great success.
Photogs can be a jealous bunch. Lots of hatred within many of them. Our work defines us and is an extension of ourselves. But deep down inside many know their work will never amount to anything. Photogs as well as artists are stressed out trying to get attention for their work. All the while the market is polluted with so many images no one person could possibly look through them even part of them in a lifetime.
Bottom line...all this stress can put the photog / artist in a bad mood. But if freezing time or art is in your blood, you must produce and keep producing...whether there have an outlet for ones art or not. Personally, I've learned to forget looking for approval online. Lots of cowards behind the keyboard that will try to tear you down. It can cause more harm than good.
“Never give up! Don’t listen to the haters. Don’t try to be an artist unless you can work and live in isolation, without any thanks....bleak, but needed until you get to the much lauded place."
Scape Martinez
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Frank went to your site and you have some terrific portraits there to. The guys in the sunflowers, the guy looking up with the coffee on the table, the guys with his head in his hands and the couple at Brighton Beach are a few that i really like.
OP, sure get some comments if you like.
Myself? I've been shooting for 46 years. I am not interested that much in comments.
Whenever I post things online I try to turn off the comments if I can. I am not looking for comments or ego stroking. I am only looking to display my work...nothing else.
My work is in 91 museums and public collections. Some critics tell me having one's work in 91 public collections means nothing. But if the choice is to have my work on Flickr to please the critics or have it in 91 museums...the critics can keep their pix in Flickr and I'll keep my prints in the museums.
Here are some of the critiques I've got over the last couple of years on the net. A simple Google of my name will show some of my work.
"Your pictures are lifeless."
"Sad"
"I don't like color."
"I don't like BW."
"I don't like HDR."
"I don't selective color."
"I don't like diffusion."
"I don't like Hyper-Real HDR, it is too cartoonish."
"Your photos are too contrasty."
"Your photos are too grainy."
"Why don't you take pictures of something pretty like flowers or a sunset instead of those ugly things."
"Your trying to make something out of nothing."
"Your photos are too sensational."
"Don't photograph the homeless."
"Don't photograph kids without their parents' permission."
"I find photos of people boring."
"Your not a very good photographer."
'Your exploiting the homeless."
'Your photo doesn’t work for me."
"I don't like flower photographs they are boring."
"What were you trying to say?"
"Digital photography is not real photography."
"I find it disturbing you think your work is museum worthy."
"It is over processed."
"Don't take pictures of people in public without their permission."
"Don't photograph anorexics."
"Cover up her breasts."
"Your photos are staged."
"I don't like your photo because it leaves nothing for the imagination."
“Never crop your photos. If you have to crop a photo it wasn’t meant to be taken.”
"Your disgusting."
"Your photography is vernacular."
"You should trash that photo."
"I don't like fisheye photos."
“Don’t shoot digital, shoot film, digital is no good.”
"Don't send unsolicited photos to museums."
"She (the person in the photo) is a drunk…she is fat…she is an attention whore…she needs to go to the gym…she is trailer trash."
"Your self-centered"
'Your self-absorbed"
'Your inconsiderate"
"I don't like wide-angle distortion."
"Your a phony...your all talk...you don't know how to take photographs." (When I don’t send in any photos to the photo forums.)
"Your a troll...your looking for attention...your trying to boost your website traffic...your an egomaniac." (When I do send in photos to the photo forums.)
“I’d never shoot digital. If and when film becomes unavailable I will give up photography.”
"Your goofy"
"I think somebody should tell you: your shots are very boring, nothing is happening there, just very normal snapshots, and you are trying to make them look interesting by shooting with a wide angle and HDR...they are all trash."
"It looks horrible."
"It's a hack composite, looks like it was done for some Sunday paper magazine."
"It looks like the view through the bottom of my shot glass after my fourth tequila at Cozumel."
"15 seconds of my life I will never get back. What a waste."
"Only commercial printed books count, your self published books don't count." *
'Unless a museum solicits you for your work it does not count if you solicit them." *
"You have no one-man shows or critical reviews." *
* Shortened and paraphrased comments.
Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. When it comes to art...you can never argue taste - there is no right or wrong. But whenever the topic of 'opinion' comes up I must recount what Clint Eastwood's 'Dirty Harry' character once said...
"Opinions are like assholes...everyone's got one."
As an artist, you first must master the basics. Once you are comfortable with your skill set, you have to become comfortable with your own style and learn to trust your own instincts. If you can't trust your own instincts, then you must follow the critics and do your art for the critics and not for yourself.
Now, a normal photog may be discouraged by the harsh criticism. But I've done many experiments over the years posting work from other famous photogs for discussion on forums. They were all great pix I put up for review. Pretty much all negative comments for the well known photogs as well. Either that or no one comments at all...I guess they couldn't figure out how to put the image down.
Here is a little known masterpiece from Cartier-Bresson's 1952 Decisive Moment boo, plate #124 called 'Tehran 1950'.
http://blogsearchtest.tumblr.com/image/110263740956
Here are a few comments from a discussion on it...
"Looks pretty marginal to me. Do you want me to bow down to him?"
"I found it more obnoxious than anything else."
"What makes it so great? The crooked horizon? The poor composition? The distracting background? The blown out chandelier? The blown out black-blob of a curtain? The distracting bright triangle from the area beyond the curtain? The poor use of bokeh to make it hard to tell the wall is a mosaic of mirrors? The pushed-too-far contrast to remove any details."
When I looked at the work of these critics it was nothing, absolutely nothing. Yet, they all know how bad Cartier-Bresson is. I've learned to not get my self-worth for my photography from online reviews.
Photogs can be a jealous bunch. Lots of hatred within many of them. Our work defines us and is an extension of ourselves. But deep down inside many know their work will never amount to anything. Photogs as well as artists are stressed out trying to get attention for their work. All the while the market is polluted with so many images no one person could possibly look through them even part of them in a lifetime.
Bottom line...all this stress can put the photog / artist in a bad mood. But if freezing time or art is in your blood, you must produce and keep producing...whether there have an outlet for ones art or not. Personally, I've learned to forget looking for approval online. Lots of cowards behind the keyboard that will try to tear you down. It can cause more harm than good.
“Never give up! Don’t listen to the haters. Don’t try to be an artist unless you can work and live in isolation, without any thanks....bleak, but needed until you get to the much lauded place."
Scape Martinez
Myself? I've been shooting for 46 years. I am not interested that much in comments.
Whenever I post things online I try to turn off the comments if I can. I am not looking for comments or ego stroking. I am only looking to display my work...nothing else.
My work is in 91 museums and public collections. Some critics tell me having one's work in 91 public collections means nothing. But if the choice is to have my work on Flickr to please the critics or have it in 91 museums...the critics can keep their pix in Flickr and I'll keep my prints in the museums.
Here are some of the critiques I've got over the last couple of years on the net. A simple Google of my name will show some of my work.
"Your pictures are lifeless."
"Sad"
"I don't like color."
"I don't like BW."
"I don't like HDR."
"I don't selective color."
"I don't like diffusion."
"I don't like Hyper-Real HDR, it is too cartoonish."
"Your photos are too contrasty."
"Your photos are too grainy."
"Why don't you take pictures of something pretty like flowers or a sunset instead of those ugly things."
"Your trying to make something out of nothing."
"Your photos are too sensational."
"Don't photograph the homeless."
"Don't photograph kids without their parents' permission."
"I find photos of people boring."
"Your not a very good photographer."
'Your exploiting the homeless."
'Your photo doesn’t work for me."
"I don't like flower photographs they are boring."
"What were you trying to say?"
"Digital photography is not real photography."
"I find it disturbing you think your work is museum worthy."
"It is over processed."
"Don't take pictures of people in public without their permission."
"Don't photograph anorexics."
"Cover up her breasts."
"Your photos are staged."
"I don't like your photo because it leaves nothing for the imagination."
“Never crop your photos. If you have to crop a photo it wasn’t meant to be taken.”
"Your disgusting."
"Your photography is vernacular."
"You should trash that photo."
"I don't like fisheye photos."
“Don’t shoot digital, shoot film, digital is no good.”
"Don't send unsolicited photos to museums."
"She (the person in the photo) is a drunk…she is fat…she is an attention whore…she needs to go to the gym…she is trailer trash."
"Your self-centered"
'Your self-absorbed"
'Your inconsiderate"
"I don't like wide-angle distortion."
"Your a phony...your all talk...you don't know how to take photographs." (When I don’t send in any photos to the photo forums.)
"Your a troll...your looking for attention...your trying to boost your website traffic...your an egomaniac." (When I do send in photos to the photo forums.)
“I’d never shoot digital. If and when film becomes unavailable I will give up photography.”
"Your goofy"
"I think somebody should tell you: your shots are very boring, nothing is happening there, just very normal snapshots, and you are trying to make them look interesting by shooting with a wide angle and HDR...they are all trash."
"It looks horrible."
"It's a hack composite, looks like it was done for some Sunday paper magazine."
"It looks like the view through the bottom of my shot glass after my fourth tequila at Cozumel."
"15 seconds of my life I will never get back. What a waste."
"Only commercial printed books count, your self published books don't count." *
'Unless a museum solicits you for your work it does not count if you solicit them." *
"You have no one-man shows or critical reviews." *
* Shortened and paraphrased comments.
Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. When it comes to art...you can never argue taste - there is no right or wrong. But whenever the topic of 'opinion' comes up I must recount what Clint Eastwood's 'Dirty Harry' character once said...
"Opinions are like assholes...everyone's got one."
As an artist, you first must master the basics. Once you are comfortable with your skill set, you have to become comfortable with your own style and learn to trust your own instincts. If you can't trust your own instincts, then you must follow the critics and do your art for the critics and not for yourself.
Now, a normal photog may be discouraged by the harsh criticism. But I've done many experiments over the years posting work from other famous photogs for discussion on forums. They were all great pix I put up for review. Pretty much all negative comments for the well known photogs as well. Either that or no one comments at all...I guess they couldn't figure out how to put the image down.
Here is a little known masterpiece from Cartier-Bresson's 1952 Decisive Moment boo, plate #124 called 'Tehran 1950'.
http://blogsearchtest.tumblr.com/image/110263740956
Here are a few comments from a discussion on it...
"Looks pretty marginal to me. Do you want me to bow down to him?"
"I found it more obnoxious than anything else."
"What makes it so great? The crooked horizon? The poor composition? The distracting background? The blown out chandelier? The blown out black-blob of a curtain? The distracting bright triangle from the area beyond the curtain? The poor use of bokeh to make it hard to tell the wall is a mosaic of mirrors? The pushed-too-far contrast to remove any details."
When I looked at the work of these critics it was nothing, absolutely nothing. Yet, they all know how bad Cartier-Bresson is. I've learned to not get my self-worth for my photography from online reviews.
Photogs can be a jealous bunch. Lots of hatred within many of them. Our work defines us and is an extension of ourselves. But deep down inside many know their work will never amount to anything. Photogs as well as artists are stressed out trying to get attention for their work. All the while the market is polluted with so many images no one person could possibly look through them even part of them in a lifetime.
Bottom line...all this stress can put the photog / artist in a bad mood. But if freezing time or art is in your blood, you must produce and keep producing...whether there have an outlet for ones art or not. Personally, I've learned to forget looking for approval online. Lots of cowards behind the keyboard that will try to tear you down. It can cause more harm than good.
“Never give up! Don’t listen to the haters. Don’t try to be an artist unless you can work and live in isolation, without any thanks....bleak, but needed until you get to the much lauded place."
Scape Martinez
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Actually it was Paul Strand who was discovering "modern" artists for Stieglitz to exhibit and reproduce in Camera Work, which did not always show photography. Stieglitz' s gallery introduced many European artists that were not known in America.
I had the unfortunate task of separating pages of full issues of camera work when I worked in a photo gallery many years ago. The individual images were worth more separately then the full issues!
I had the unfortunate task of separating pages of full issues of camera work when I worked in a photo gallery many years ago. The individual images were worth more separately then the full issues!
airfrogusmc
Mentor
That is sad about the issues of Camera Works...
kbg32
neo-romanticist
I was almost in tears Allen!
The good thing, I was able to get two pages. One was a photogravure of Steiglitz's "Icy Night", which was an ad for Goertz lenses. The other was a reproduction of a Picasso etching, "Nude Woman" or something to that effect.
icebear
Mentor
I am not a professional photographer who needs to care what others say about my "work".
If I post here on RFF and get some feedback that's good enough for me. Someone took a few minutes of their life to think about my shot and formulate a comment. Thanks a lot, much appreciated !
As far as professional critique goes I only have one Leica workshop experience and the saying " ask two different people and you'll get two different answers" was absolutely true also for this workshop. Apart from general rules of composition the perception why a photo works or is strong - or just the opposite can vary pretty much.
But then these kind of workshops are usually about going out with a certain task and come back 2 or 3 hrs later, do a quick run through editing and choose a couple of shots for critique in front of group. The comments should stimulate and make you think how to improve in certain formal aspects. To be at the right time at the right place and intuitively put some of the stuff you learned into the composition and press the shutter at the decisive moment, that take a lot of practice and a good portion of luck.
If I post here on RFF and get some feedback that's good enough for me. Someone took a few minutes of their life to think about my shot and formulate a comment. Thanks a lot, much appreciated !
As far as professional critique goes I only have one Leica workshop experience and the saying " ask two different people and you'll get two different answers" was absolutely true also for this workshop. Apart from general rules of composition the perception why a photo works or is strong - or just the opposite can vary pretty much.
But then these kind of workshops are usually about going out with a certain task and come back 2 or 3 hrs later, do a quick run through editing and choose a couple of shots for critique in front of group. The comments should stimulate and make you think how to improve in certain formal aspects. To be at the right time at the right place and intuitively put some of the stuff you learned into the composition and press the shutter at the decisive moment, that take a lot of practice and a good portion of luck.
FrankS
Registered User
Thank you !