Street photography and fine arts, I need to find some spot in between.

cop out

"people here take criticism of their work from the art world very bitterly,"

 

Eugene, a well known art/photography critic with "real world credentials" once visited

my site and loved everything he saw. He was nice enough to send me feedback stating

so. A year or so later the same guy liked two, and only two pics on my entire site. One

of them being the picnic shot above, it is kinda a private joke to me now. I took both

shots he loved within minutes of each other, because my wife to be was with me that

day and my intent was to make an "artsy" shot. The point of this story? The only critic I

trust is A/Z. He once spotted a shot of mine that went on to bigger and better things. :-

)

Your picnic shot is actually pretty good. Not like any of that Ray's stuff...

OK, so it sounds like you're feeling better now. Hope so.

>>> So, in your opinion, there are no second thoughts about exclusivity involved?

 

Don't understand what you're asking wrt exclusivity. Making it to the level of the photogs

you mentioned is extraordinarily rare - kind of like the high school kid dreaming of getting

into the NBA.

 

One level below the rarefied air and there are lots of people who have gallery representation.

Are they making a living off of it? No. Most do other things - commercial photography,

weddings, writing, retired from another field, trust funds, etc.

 

I'm with Barry, I just like getting out and shooting - for fun. No aspirations beyond that.

FWIW: if my first photography goal was met I would be doing Hallmark cards right

now! :-)

And then again there was that millionaire photographer I met with a Rolls-Royce and

mansion from doing postcards and menus. Vacationing six months a year in Florida!

Eugene is right! :-)

Eric does MTV...

 

http://www.terraform.tv/video/ericmilner.mov

Feb 09, 2008; 06:55 p.m. is one of my all time personal favorite photos, shot in

Canada.

Extra, read all about it! New York School is dead as a doornail. Forty years on people continue working in ways obviously influenced by the likes of Winogrand and others of the era. Zombie like photographers wander city streets capturing bygone motifs oblivious to time and change. More news at five.

Oh my god...!!!!he takes down Winograd and HCB in the same thread, how refreshingly iconoclastic

 

"Here is my final thought: this forum is called "Street and Documentary." I see too much

Street and too little Documentary here. And, I think, I just discovered why. Taking Street

pictures is easy. Just go out into the street and make sure there is at least one woman in

the viewfinder at all times. Don't listen to those who say it took years for Winogrand to

master his technique. It didn't. He was just a trigger-happy shooter. Making Documentary

pictures, however, is hard. This requires you to make a project, draw a budget, perhaps

even ask for grant money, go to a location, meet real people in-person, talk to them, and

finally take the picture. Not fun at all. Yet there is no doubt in my mind what type of

photography is more valuable..."

 

I think taking nite shots when you don't have to contend with anyone is the most

valuable. Todd Hido, the man. But I do think you are right, documentary is a more

ambitious undertaking, and I've been thinking of along those lines for a while, nice point

Eugene. There are very few if any real documentaries going here. Jeff has a great thing

going with the boxing. And the clubs as well. I recommend checking his website. Also

Brad has his alcatraz series. But when someone does have a project, they often don't like

to utilize the forum to show off all the pics and instead usually just link to another site so

people can view it there and comment here. But true documentaries, meaning long time

projects of place or theme are fairly rare here.

Your picnic shot is actually pretty good. Not like any of that Ray's stuff...

 

You are awful, Eugene, but i do like you. I've got a nice Picnic Photo, and i do like you...will you say something nice about it. His such a brave boy.

 

 

Jeez ,Eugene ,you really need to go out there and take some photos that's what it's all about.

 

Give the preaching a rest for a while and show the world what you can do. Lead us to the Promised Land.

 

Thanks for the entertainment, Eugene, you are a star.

http://www.last.fm/music/The+Police/_/Born+in+the+50's

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/robert_m_johnson/482831566/" title="Untitled by Robert_M_Johnson, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/173/482831566_8dc8840900_o.jpg" width="290" height="432" alt="Untitled" /></a>

jesus christ this is the shittiest thread ive ever read

John, your website is broken (trying to view http://johnasavoia.com/dump55.htm, for

example, brings up broken links only)...

Robert -- your last picture is really nice.

thanks for the heads up eugene, i dont really use my website any more to be quite honest, i tend to only post my work on http://john-savoia.livejournal.com/

<small><i><blockquote>

 

The only critic I trust is A/Z. He once spotted a shot of mine that went on to bigger and better things. :- )

 

</blockquote> </i> </small><p>

 

<b> ;-) </b> <p>

 

After being away from this site for a while I have to say that I'm a little perplexed by this discussion. Can anyone disagree that street photography is a niche aesthetic, or that it is insular? <p>

 

On the other hand, who on earth is going from happysnaps to Moriyamakleintomatsumajoli to professional disappointment and on to something else? And what photographic genre isn't spilling over with middle-aged white guys?<p>

 

Yes, goofy web designs and design elements predominate on the interwebs, but I'd rather look at good photos with crappy design elements than the reverse.<p>

 

I believe there is a very low threshold for what makes something art, whereupon it must be determined whether it is good art, bad art, dismal, abysmal or coruscating art. I'm very dubious when people deign to tell others what art is and isn't. It is silly, and reminds me of something John Brownlow wrote a few years ago:

 

<blockquote><small><i>

 

I can still remember the first time I showed my photographs to a

gallery. I had no idea what to expect. <br>

The guy opened up my box and flipped through the photos, frowned for a moment as if trying to place them, <br>

and then smiles and said "ah, yes! semi-abstract urban documentary". <p>

 

So now I knew.

 

</blockquote></i> </small><p>

 

Jia, whatever photography you do should be photography you love doing. You say you tried landscape and still lifes but say you aren't good at them, so you are trying street photography and are "missing something." Let me tell you what you're missing: <b>practice and love</b>. Of <u>course</u> your first tries at any given genre will suck -- who said good photography was easy? If you really, really like making photographs you'll obsessively experiment, fail, fail less, fail better, and with both focus and giddy abandon you'll learn. <p>

 

Basic Western rules of composition are not difficult to learn and apply, so you need to get past the "I'm not good at them" stage to the point where you do the kind of photography you <u>love,</u> not merely a genre you aren't bad at as a beginner. It doesn't matter what you are terrible at, it matters that you find something you love doing and work at being good at it. <p>

 

What do you enjoy? Do you love street photography? Or landscapes? Or still lifes? <u>Do</u> you enjoy making photographs? Think about that question. Some people love paintings but don't love painting, you know....

you do should be photography you love doing.

 

Holy Moses, Bailey Seals, you have just hit the proverbial nail, on its proverbial head. I always had faith.

 

And then go out and do it..

?:

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4603710-lg.jpg"></center>

 

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3616649-lg.jpg"></center>

 

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4603964-lg.jpg"></center>

 

 

 

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4437421-lg.jpg"></center>

I really really liked that second photo ,Saul. I felt i was being transposed into the image.

Thanks Allen!

Saul, that 2nd pic is a gem.

As well as the 3rd.

 

And the 1st.

 

And the 4th

 

But not necessarily in that order.