lex_jenkins Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Feeling desperate for validation from strangers? This may help put things in perspective.<p> <i>"CHICAGO - Music, a mode of creative expression consisting of sound and silence expressed through time, was given a 6.8 out of 10 rating in an review published Monday on Pitchfork Media, a well-known music-criticism website..."</i><p> <a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/news/pitchfork_gives_music_6_8" >Pitchfork Gives Music 6.8</a><p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wisniewski Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 You are aware that the Onion is a famous satire publication? People who mistake it for something serious can end up with all sorts of egg on the face. http://www.snopes.com/humor/iftrue/potter.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Laur Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Wait a minute... you mean The Onion is not real news? Oh, man, I've got to call my broker. Next you're going to say that the Colbert Report isn't hard news. Heh! Wouldn't that be funny! Um... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted April 14, 2008 Author Share Posted April 14, 2008 Joseph, I know I seem pretty clueless at times, but I'm not totally hopeless. ;> I just thought it was a pretty funny ironic observation on the influence of reducing taste to numbers by pop culture pundits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wisniewski Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 I much prefer the incidents where someone puts a Weston or Cartier-Bressan up for ratings, and someone falls for it and rates it low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 yeah I just it when some puts up a Cartier-Bresson photo up for review and it gets low ratings. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 You just "what" it Ellis? Seems to be something missing from your sentence there. But of course nobody giving someone crap for their spelling would ever mistype anything. So I can only conclude that I am too dense to grasp the meaning of your sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jautey Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 We, the highly qualified thread reviewers, rate this thread at 4.9, with points for being a post from Lex (which we reviewers alway look forward too), and points being deducted because he is referencing 'The Onion'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jautey Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Or to put it in Photo.net terms: Aesthetics: 6 Originality: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucecahn Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Let us praise "The Onion", but not cook it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted April 14, 2008 Author Share Posted April 14, 2008 I useta think The Onion was hilarious. But the Colbert Report is funnier now. Once in awhile The Onion still hits the mark tho'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 If you read to the end, you'll see that the article itself only got a rating of 2.4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neild Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 <i>"I much prefer the incidents where someone puts a Weston or Cartier-Bressan up for ratings, and someone falls for it and rates it low."</i> -- Joseph Wisniewski <p> What? So now we must rate images according to the way others have (or are) rating them; and if we don't, we are clueless hacks who 'fell for it' I suppose. Why rate at all if we can only rate the way we are 'supposed to'? Or were you making a joke perhaps..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted April 14, 2008 Author Share Posted April 14, 2008 Neil, I think you're taking this way too seriously. Did you read that link on The Onion site? It's just intended to be a humorous observation about relying on "expert" opinions before making up one's own mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neild Posted April 15, 2008 Share Posted April 15, 2008 No worries, I know my last comment came over too strong. Even so, I was thinking back to the numerous times the old masters' images are reposted for critique without mention of who created it, each time the person is fishing for people to "fall for it" once again. It is just this process which p*sses me off - struck a nerve, I guess - sorry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iancoxleigh Posted April 15, 2008 Share Posted April 15, 2008 I agree with you Neil. If someone posts a Cartier-Bresson and asks for critiques, and thinks that the poor ratings it will receive somehow undermine the validity of such ratings, they are mistaken. It is perfectly reasonable for people to rate a Cartier-Bresson image poorly if they feel that way. It is not wrong to think it isn't good. There is not, and should not be, any 'objective arbiter' of my own personal tastes! That the art community has decided to value any work highly does not mean you should have to. Moreover, the same sort of images taken anew today would probably receive very different receptions in the current art world. The value given to art is, in large measure, about its role in the ongoing 'dialogue' of art history. The current 'conversations' are different than they were when Cartier-Bresson was being productive.I agree with you Neil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted April 15, 2008 Author Share Posted April 15, 2008 I tend to view those games not so much as a ploy by elitists trying to show the unwashed how ignorant they are as a sort of informal laboratory for social experimentation. Naturally, some elitists won't be able to resist ridiculing those who don't recognize the "genius" behind supposedly familiar classics. But in doing so they also reveal themselves in ways the may not even recognize. So one can imagine yet another level of elitism, smirking at the hubris of pseudo-intellectuals. And on and on and on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfrey43 Posted April 18, 2008 Share Posted April 18, 2008 The underlying path of this thread it seems is that we should be able to rate a submission how we feel about it or react to it. That I agree to. There are those of us out in Photo.net world that are true amateurs and post our photos here because we enjoy photography and would love to get better. A lot of us may not follow the "masters" to know who Weston or Cartier-Bresson is but every photo may evoke some sort of reaction that we can expound on with a critique or rating here at Photo net. As previously stated, just because it's a "master" does not mean it HAS to be rated high. Art is like beauty, in the eye of the beholder. I enjoy the ratings as quick "praises" of how my photo pleases the viewer. Of course everyone would love a critique, but not everyone has the time to fully explain themselves, so a rating may suffice. I also think that Josh and the admins of Photo net do a pretty good job of eliminating the fly by night ratings of those who abuse the site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardenpress Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I haven't scrutinized every one of Lex's photos, but I do see that they are superb, even if not congruent to my developing style and modest technique. Not to recognize his excellence as a photographer would be akin to not recognizing Cartier-Bresson or Beethoven as aesthetically superior, even if your thing is hip hop, funk, or heavy metal. You might not like Beethoven, but as a musician you would be have to be deaf not recognize the genius of his art. Maybe as a pseudo-intellectual I am demonstrating the hubris Lex complains about. I wish I had his skills, even if his finished product might not make my toes tingle. I don't necessarily like Schoenberg, but the skill and power of his music is, in my opinion, undeniable. I prefer Alban Berg and good bourbon by a long shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now