As you 'like' it

Discussion in 'Casual Photo Conversations' started by jordan2240, Feb 3, 2018.

  1. As a flat-out statement it isn't any more incorrect than saying that "art is subjective".

    The full statement of what I said consists of three sentences. You quoted one. The second sentence agrees with what you're saying above.
  2. It is what it is.......
    Though I seem to recall "is" having been up for considerable debate by some at one time....
    john_sevigny|2 likes this.
  3. It's sublime, but it's not my favorite either. I would start with the album Ten New Songs, for the text and poetry but the songs themselves also have a nice mellow groove to it with the backing vocals and which you can grow into if you allow yourself to. I'm Your Man is the album that introduced me to Cohen. My father used to play it a lot when I was around 12-13 years old. And even though I didn't really understand what it all could mean I secretly (secretly because it's not exactly cool to "like" your dad's music at that age) listened and played the songs First We Take Manhattan and Everybody Knows endlessly on repeat whenever my dad was not around. At a much later age I started to really listen to the lyrics (poems actually that hold up on the page without any music). Songs like Sisters of Mercy, Suzanne, So Long Marianne, Famous Blue Raincoat, Hey That's No Way To Say Goodbye, Who By Fire,...

    But regardless of being emotionally attached to either one because of an early exposure to their music, Leonard Cohen was born a poet while Bob Dylan has always been better at pretending to be and write like one.

    Last edited: Feb 16, 2018
  4. Phil, you have to be Canadian! I am from Minnesota and am naturally biased in Dylan's favor plus his body of work dwarfs Cohen's by many kilometers (not even counting Dylan's Nobel Prize). I like Cohen but most of his work is just not edgy enough for my likes. All of the posters so far have not mentioned the wonderful and prolific melodies Dylan composed. My wife has a PHD in Creative Writing with an emphasis on poetry and she doesn't think Dylan is a good poet either. I think he is a great song writer with a few of his songs possibley moving in to the poetry category but not many.
  5. While neither one would win a singing contest, I think Cohen has a far better grasp for melody, also in the structure of his songs and choice of words. Dylan's lyrics read like high school poetry compared to Cohen. And quantity doesn't equal quality.
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2018
  6. To be honest I also had this cassette tape (waiting for hours and days to tape that one song from the radio) that had...Cliff Richards and Toto on it : /

    I used to know a girl named Sara (my first muse perhaps) and put the Dylan song on replay for some time. It's still a great song that resonates something visual. In that sense, music is more photographic than photographs can ever be.
    tholte likes this.
  7. Sandy Vongries

    Sandy Vongries Administrator Staff Member

  8. Don't get why it's so black/white, either/or. Just because you believe Cohen's a better writer doesn't mean Dylan is chop liver. But I do think in some instances Cohen is deeper. In Dylan's Hiway 66 and Blond on Blonde days he was very clever at using literary references to create a surreal effect, but when Cohen does it, it seems to have a more subtle and deeper use of the imagery. But Highway 66 Revisted is IMO one of the best albums of its time.
  9. You may be over thinking this, although there's probably a little truth to what you say. For me liking a comment merely means I appreciate your perspective, or that I agree, either of which seem harmless, if perhaps pointless. Laying your lack of interest in photography at the feet of "likes" might be a bit of a stretch. To me the difference between sucking at golf, and photography, is that with photography you're engaged in a creative pursuit with a final product. It's the reason I switched from being an audiophile to photographer many years ago. There's very little creative input in Audio beyond selecting components for a system.
  10. A couple of points . . . Jordan was talking more specifically about liking photos, not comments. Notice the beginning of his second paragraph: "I do not like the 'like' feature for picture-focused forums." He's mostly talking about how likes are used in No Words forums. I don't agree wholeheartedly with Jordan, but do think there's a difference between liking a comment and liking a photo.
    I agree it would be a stretch if that's what he were doing, but I don't think it is. If you read carefully what he wrote, he talked about his waning interest in photography and his dislike of likes, but he DID NOT connect them in the way you're suggesting. What he's saying is that his disinterest in photography recently caused him not to be active on the site much. When he's come back to PN on occasion, he's noticed the 'likes" situation and doesn't like it. Two separate issues, the disinterest in photography and not liking the likes.
    All I can say is, from my vantage point and reading many of the conversations here on PN and on other photography sites, for many people photography is more like audiophilia than it is a creative pursuit. Judging by much of the talk, one might think cameras, gear, lenses, format, and medium were much more important than any sort of creative input or output! :)
    jordan2240 likes this.
  11. I got to this discussion late, and admit that I haven't read all of it. The "Like" button covers a huge semantic area, everything from "that's a great photograph" through "it's clever" to "there's something good about it but I can't tell what it is" and possibly ending with, "If I like this person's photo, maybe they'll like mine." Nevertheless, I think "likes" are good for PN at the present time. Many members have stopped being active. Several of the photographers from whom I received an education in photography, in answers to my questions and the questions of others, haven't posted since some time last year. In that context, I believe it helps that there's a group of people who like each other's photos. If that's cliquish, so be it. If they are hitting the button in the hope of reciprocity, I don't care. If some are addicted to a stranger's validation, fine.
    Moving On likes this.

  12. You're probably right, I gave it the once over lightly.
  13. I've noticed that over on IG I have a pretty good idea of which photographs will get a lot of likes. It's an uncomfortable feeling because out of vanity or neediness or whatever human defect I have, it gives me a tendency to think "liked" photographs are better photographs, which is not true. The "like" deal is really a dumbing down of everyone's visual literacy. You flip through 20, 50, or 100 photos in some brief period of time and click "like" on the ones you like. It doesn't allow for much in the way of informed observation. And as the OP said, it is totally devoid of meaningful interaction. That said, I think these kinds of conversations can be very meaningful.
  14. Thanks to 'foto,' 'Hector,' 'Fred,' and 'john' for getting this back on track. This thread certainly took an unexpected diversion. 'Fred' did a good job of explaining to 'foto' what I was trying to say, so no need for me to go beyond that. John has provided a nice summary of what I've also felt. While I have used the 'like' function both here and in another forum I participate in (unrelated to photography (or golf)), I don't think anything is lost by not having it, and in its absence, encourages more meaningful conversation and lessens the opportunity for feel-good reciprocity, particular when discussing photos. Does it hurt anything, 'no,' but I think it 'dumbs down' a site like, which, for me anyway, I'd always held in somewhat hire regard than, say, 'facebook' and 'flickr.'
  15. Reciprocity, “feel-good” or otherwise, can be a darn good thing. There’s a sharing aspect to photography and other arts that energizes it. A like can be as superficial as a pat on the back, but a pat on the back involves human touch, and nothing is more simple yet more important to quality of life. I like can mean no more than “I looked” and that can be important to someone reaching out with a photographic vision. Likes aren’t substitutes for critiques and can be viewed in their own right instead of against critiques. Critiques on PN were down long before likes were instituted. So I don’t think likes operate instead of critiques, which were fading already.
  16. True Fred. I've gotten 'likes' on comments in the other forum I referenced, and they do generate positive feelings, and most people who 'like' photos are, more likely than not, not looking for 'likes' in return. But I continue to think that the format makes it easier to breed 'you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours' thinking than not having such does, and a simple 'Nice job' or 'I agree' response provides the same feedback.
  17. No words means no words. So there are no simple “Nice jobs” or “I agrees” allowed in that forum where, instead, likes are offered.
    A whole lot better than the “get off my lawn” mentality often encountered in various societal situations. The Internet is continually blamed for its isolating effects. A little scratching of backs may act as a bit of an antidote to that. I don’t accept that scratching each other’s back is necessarily bad by default or in all contexts. It’s just a saying.
  18. When I look at your photo, can you see me smile?
  19. Vincent Peri

    Vincent Peri Metairie, LA

    That suits me fine. I'm strictly film, and I don't want to digitize my photos so I never post any here. I give out a good number of likes.

    Hmm... I'll take all the "likes"
    I can get...
    Norma Desmond likes this.

Share This Page