Simplicity

Nobody told me you're only supposed to talk about lighting and equipment around here. What's so bad about asking questions about "conceptual ingredients"?

 

Apparently there is some background here that I wasn't aware of. I'm sorry if I offended anyone.

I don't want to attack Beau. This is not about him. There were really many negative reactions recently and yesterday I decided that I don't want to take it anymore. I already have a job were I have to take what I have to take cause I am earning my bread. In my free time I just want to do things that make me happy.

 

I am gratefull for all your support.

 

It s just the way I feel now and maybe one day I would feel differently. When you see my face again you would know that the day has come

No Tamara, dont stop your talent and creativity, slight the stupidity and disregard the envy.

 

Please, post again your greats portraits!!!

Just noticed reading the thread that after a question I had whether Tamara used a self timer or a remote cord that she mentioned later that some people question whether she takes her own shots. In case that response was in regards to my question, let it be known that I did not intend in any way to question whether she takes her own shot. It was more a question of process and admiration as anyone who had either tried or studied self portraiture knows the added degree of difficulty involved in doing it well - framing and visualization being quite difficult when you are on the other side. Being that she does it well I just wanted some insight into her process. No slight or question intended.

Paul this was not about your question (I use remote control (by the way)). There was absolutly nothing wrong with your question. Some time ago one person openly said that she doubts I take this photos.

 

This is all so wrong. If I knew this would create this kind of caos I would not spoke at all.

Thanks for the note, I was just making sure. Keep on shooting, you are great. Don't worry about the comments, this is not chaos it is discussion. It was the internet is famous for. To paraphrase public relations executives in regards to being an artist, it often times better to have people talking about you than to be not be talking about you at all.

I would just like to say that I very much like this and many of your other self portraits. I have a new appreciation for self portaits having had to do some myself for a photography class that I'm taking. It can be very difficult setting up lighting, running back and forth to each side of the camera. I have yet to see somebody do it better than you.

Great portrait Tamara. I love the slight softness, I think it compliments the feel of this picture. Please, carry on with your great work and remember you are the one in control of your art and you decide who to listen to and who to ignore.

Its sunday morning, the sun is shinning, I've just enjoyed a nice breakfast with my family. And now I am angry. Furious. And I probably should get a life and not photo.net do that to me but...

Beau. Your psycho-clap trap is irrelavent. Lets assume you're right for a moment and Tamara is some kind of raving ego maniac. Who cares ? when this comes up I quote something Ansel Adams said in the introduction to "Examples: the making of 40 photographs" I cannot, and will not,attempt to descibe, analyze or define the creative-emotional motivations of my work or the work of others. Decription of the inspiration or the meaning of a work of photography, or of any other medium of art, lies in the work itself. The endless disussions of creativity appear to me to be pointless intellectual carousels; ... ...Only the print contains the artists meaning and message

I'm going into the studio with a Model for 2 hours on Thursday, and if I will be delighted if I get one picture this good by the time I've mucked about in the darkroom and on the computer for 10 hours after that.

So what if they are self portraits ? As a model ... well I haven't labelled a woman as beautiful since I was 16, so instead I'll say Tamara is extraordinarily photogenic. As a photographer, I'd put her work in the top 1% of all the photographers I've seen in 25 years of being interested in photgraphy.

Beau, terms like "the self-glamorizing self-portrait" and "completing the fantasy requires publication "might be all very well in a paper of pyschology, but when you put them in a critique of someone's work that becomes really personal. Might there be a simpler explanation, here is a talented photographer (look at the pictures of her daughter too), who could easily make her living at it, but does it for love instead. She has drawn a winning ticket in the lottery of looks, and uses herself as the subject. She shares her pictures with a (mostly appeciative) audience in the hope of getting some helpful feedback. Its a rather dull theory, but more likely to be true.

Tamara It would be wrong of me to make assumptions about your state of mind. I know the feeling of one reversal making me want to give up - actually it was part of something that needed treament, and when I got that I came back to photography. Your recently posted work is still first class. If you feel the need to stop doing it for a while, then stop. My life (and a few others) will be a little poorer if you stop for a long time, but you don't owe anything to those of us who like your work - so don't feel forced into doing more if you don't want to.

I'm not sucha verbal ego-maniac...

 

little present from a fellow-picturemaking-ego-maniac!

Some of you are attacking a post I didn't write. Yes, I used analytical, even judgmental words when describing a genre of photography. However, I didn't personally attack this person or even directly criticize her photograph. I asked just the kind of questions I would expect others to ask me if I were to put up these kinds of images of myself.

 

Some of you guys are falling over yourselves to be the knight in shining armor for poor Tamara here.

i like the lighting here.

Beau. Two things. You used terms like"the self-glamorizing self-portrait" and "completing the fantasy requires publication " not in any kind of abstract sense but in the context of one person's work. (Maybe you'd like to write a little treatise on the ego-mania of Rembradt - since he painted a fair few self portraits.)

If someone called me a fantasist and said my motive for doing something self-glamourization I'd think that was an attack (but hey maybe that would be fanasty too).

Maybe there is a valid idea to discuss here, but it also extends to all of us who post pictures, or model for them. But to start that discussion in the context of one person's work is a pretty crass thing to do, don't you think ? You think work like this is motivated by as you put it "a sort of self-conscious mass-media fantasy, a desire to join celebrities in the private lives of countless people they do not know." you may have read on or two books on psychology, but your evidence is flimsy in the extreme. But so what ? If that's so, then I say lets have a few more people with self-consious mass-media fantasies, because their "wish fulfillment" produces great art.

And the second thing. "Some of you guys are falling over yourselves to be the knight in shining armor for poor Tamara here." was that meant to be both snide and sexist or are you just having a bad day saying what you mean.

I love her eyes

I think my post was far more respectful to the photographer than almost all the posts that follow. Addressing the personal motivation underlying an artist's work and that work's larger context is a central part of the contemporary art experience. At the highest level, that's what artists do. To suggest that such a discussion is out-of-bounds is to imply that the photographer belongs at the lower level.

 

Leanne, I acknowledge your view that the time and place for such discussion may not be here.

 

James, I'm not ignoring your repeated calls for an arm-wrestling contest. I just don't share your view that it will impress the ladies ;)

Beau. Smiley noted. Tamara is posting again so that's that. Since her work is my favorite here it's not surprising I got pretty annoyed with people posting stuff that makes here want to pack it all in. I know that feeling very well, and its horrible when people provoke it in you. I don't have any fantasy of being a "white knight", with Tamara as "Damsel in Distress" - if you'd upset Owen (who's further up the thread) you would have got the same reaction.

There may be an interesting academic discussion to had (although I'm with Ansel Adams and reallly only care about is it a good picture or not), but to do it in the context of a single persons work is bound to be destructive. Especially if it comes over as "this work stems from a borderline personality disorder".People with artistic tempraments are not always thick skinned, and to say, as others have 'if you can't take the comments don't post' is a bit silly, because most of us would rather see the work.

To all,

 

I read all of the comments regarding Tamara's recent motive challenge. I see a lot of people taking up for her and that's very noble. The discussions are evidence that her art is worthy of discussion and that it is more than egotistical exhibitionism. Tamara, your work stands for itself. You do not need us to come to your defense. However, if you did I'm sure you find the cards stacked heavily in your favor.

 

You're a grown woman, but you still have feelings that can be hurt. Those feelings come through in your work and this sets your work apart from the miriad of other works.

 

Personally, I'm moved by your style and I find a truer beauty in it that most. I'm drawn to the mood you capture in your family. You seem happy. Stay that way!

 

Best Wishes,

 

Terry Wells

 

Hi Tamara,

 

Bottom line is you are an extremely talented artist who intentionally or not is pushing the frontiers of photographic art. There seems a trend on PN to down-rate and challenge others work by those who do not like that particular style. You are not alone as on the journalism critique there is an award winning journalistic photographer being down-rated by those who can spend time in a safe environment composing their photographs (no offense to studio photographers intended - all art requires it's own techniques and I also love the odd chance I get in a studio). I know that James has also had similar problems from those that either don't like seeing the human body or don't understand the outstanding artwork that he posts.

 

Everyone looking at a piece of art forms a mental image of the work and possibly the artist, but no one has the right to question an artists personal reasons behind the work. Maybe it's something to do with the Internet, in the real world I see art I like & can afford - I buy it. If I don't like it I move on and look at something else.

 

Being able to transfer your idea from your minds eye to the photograph is difficult enough and using yourself as the model requires additional skills which you perform exceptionally well.

 

By the way I'm also not a "white knight" as I would have posted this no matter what your sex, age, looks or artistic category.

 

I am sure that you will do what you feel is the right thing, hopefully you will let that feeling come from within and not from a minority on PN.

 

King regards ... Tony

Hi Tamara! I want to put down my initial thoughts about your photograph - I did read all of the to-ing and fro-ing commentry, but I'll just stick to my critique...

What caught my attention was the thoughtful look you are giving us here... whilst I cannot prove that you either did or did not take this shot yourself, I would like to say that I can believe that you did! Why can I beleive it? Because this looks to me like a reflection in a mirror (I do not mean that you used a mirror, only that it is a view I can imagine seeing looking back at me when I pose myself in front of a mirror!). This aspect gives the portrait a definite sense of the "self-portrait", in my opinion!!

I agree that there is a slight blurriness on one of the eyes, but this doesn't take away from the sense of "self" that this photo projects - I think it's really good overall, and would suggest that you continue to do things that please you (don't worry about us at all!) - but I for one would be happy to see more of your self-portraits, if you decide that you still want to do them.

Nice pose, use of light, expression.

 

I admire your work. It's unfortunate the people you mentioned have caused trouble.

 

You have done some beautiful work, and I hope we can see more, including self-portraits, when you feel comfortable.