brian_teufel

"Shoot the tourists. Make them look grotesque for messing up your home."

Excellent.

 

Find something that pisses you off and make 20 images about that.

since you're shooting digital, shoot everything with out cost! You will find it. Go out and shoot and shoot and shoot. Drive to another city and do a photo essay on the trip. Look up artists on the internet and in art history books. think about it all the time. Go to galleries that show photography. stare at things. Did I mention go out and shoot more?

Ellis,

 

Thanks very much for the info. If I'm going to keep them 16bit, would it be preferred to shoot in the Adobe RGB (this and sRGB are the only options) in the camera and then when I open the raw file in ps to switch to the ProPhoto space?

Hello,

 

I'm shooting with a d70 in raw format. Once my files are converted to .tif, 8

bit files are 17 mb, and 16 bit are 35mb. I can't see any visual difference on

the screen, but that can often be deceiving when it comes to the print. The

pixel dimensions stay the same so what is the main difference, and how does it

affect print quality?

 

Thanks,

BT

For shooting with a meterless medium format camera, I thought of carrying my slr

and using the reflected meter in the camera. In theory I think this would work

as long as the ISO is set the same, and the appropriate focal length was used

(ie 80mm on the 6x6 and 50mm lens on the 35mm slr) Anyone use this method? What

kind of results did you get? Any issues to be careful of?

 

Any feedback is appreciated.

Ivan G, are you Ivan Greene, notorious gunks bouldering legend?

"digital kitsch, especially black backgrounds"

 

Carl, I'm not familiar with this term. please explain if you would.

 

Thx, Brian

I had the same problem. Call 1800-nikonus, and navigate your way to the digital product line ( you may have to hang up and call another number provided) They will have you uninstall nikon capture, take and upload a photo of your cd-rom w/ product key. Once it is verified, they will have you download the latest version and email you a new product key that will unlock the software. It took about a half hour to get it all worked out, but it doesn't crash anymore.

 

-Brian

I apologize if my answers seemed rude, but you came with a very strong statement against the square format without any specific examples. Although I agree that some are better square and some rectangular, without a specific image, you've eliminated a compositional possibility way too early. Also, I don't understand why you cropped mine to a vertical when before you were talking about a wide point of view. I don't prefer realism or recreating the scene to show someone exactly how it looked. I like my stuff graininy, rough, odd angles, etc, and that's just me. My composition is different than your version, and that is fine. The differences in opinions, ideas, etc are what make us all individual. Think of how boring it would be if we all thought the same way.

"Let's also mention that the human's vision is in wide-view.. we do have 2 eyes"

 

great, if your purpose is making art is to show me something I can see already. Why don't I just go walk around with my eyes and look instead of looking at art.

Your post makes no sense. Who says that a square composition places everything in the center? The person who makes the composition decides where something is placed. Square, rectangle, triangle, etc, who cares what the shape of the frame is? Do what you as an "artistical" person deems the most appropriate for the most effective image. It almost seems rediculous to discuss this because there is no image on the table. You bring up only "artistical photography" which is very generic. What about vertical format? You have to use the format you think is most effective for the specific composition.<div></div>

I am not familiar with many issues of aperture, but the few I have looked through have been good. That's not to say that I liked all the art I saw, but I felt that the magazine is a fairly good representation of the many different styles that are out there.

 

The thing about the essays...sometimes reading what others have said or what the artist has said about the work in too much detail can take away from the experience of the viewer. As viewers of art, we all see different things and react differently. When the words are right there, it is no longer an objective reaction.

 

There are many artists I don't care for, but the ones I like I really like a lot and some how connect to the work. That is the wonderful thing about being allowed to have an opinion. If everybody liked the same things and disliked the same things, think about how boring the world would be.

 

If I were the founder of an arts magazine, why would I limit it to my style or my preferences in art? That would be silly, and I think people would be bored with it real quick.

 

And also, it is all about marketing.

 

-B

Big prints have much more visual impact.

 

Look up Andreas Gursky.

Just wondering if anyone knew of artists who had brought video into

street photography. I would be interested in seeing their work if

anybody has some links. I'm interested since video and installation

have become a significant part of contemporary art, and how artists

have brought video to different genres of still photography.

 

Thanks, Brian

When I said "has it all gone digital?" I was referring to movie shooting whether film or video tape.

I recently acquired an 8mm kodak brownie movie camera. I was just

curious if anyone still uses these things, or 8mm film in general.

Has it all gone digital? Where could I get the film processed? Any

info, links, about this would be appreciated.

 

Thanks, Brian

Daniel-

 

"Technically perfect image is an image that perfectly suits what photographer want."

 

What if the photographer does not strive for technical perfection? The image wouldn't be technically perfect by many's standards, but it would perfectly suit what the photographer wants.

 

"but is should be one among other goals for every photographer"

 

In my opinion it is important to achieve a level of proficiency to be successful in making photographs, however, why do you think it is something that everyone should strive for? What if I make photographs for other reasons than to strive for a technically perfect image?

 

"It is photography and it never should be mixed with other media"

 

Why not? are you saying photography should not be mixed with mediums such as painting, sculpture, video, etc. ? Please clarify.

 

"it will just lower its value"

 

So a grainy print from iso 3200 has a lower value than something else? by whose standards?

"but ultimately, it's the photographer's eye that is the most important tool, and a superb image does not always need to technically perfect"

 

I could not agree more. well said. I think many suffer from the desire to have the best equipment thinking that it will help them make better images. In some ways, maybe it will. I think this mentality plagues our culture. One who always wants more and better and bigger and faster will inevitably be disappointed. We have become a culture where everything is disposable, always throwing out the "old" for something newer. Personally, I try to think very carefully whether or not spending $$$$ on equipment will truely impact my work. I suppose it has a lot to do with what one wants to achieve through photography for we all have different goals.

"You think he is"

 

How did you know? :)

 

I think that you shouldn't assume everyone but you thinks his work is great. I do enjoy his work, but I understand how others don't get it or like it. There are many who share your opinion on Eggleston.

 

Anyway, my not necessarily guilty pleasures include:

 

Robert Frank,Stephen Shore,William Eggleston,Joel Meyerowitz, Andreas Gursky, Andy Warhol,Basquiat,Nan Goldin, David Carson, good street photography

 

Flavors of the month include Richard Prince, Thomas Ruff, Charles Traub, David Hilliard,

 

Who leaves me cold: people who's ultimate goal is to sell their photographs and make photos based on what others will think of their work, people who work in vacuums, people who still want to imitate f64, bad street photography

 

note: what I believe is good vs bad street photography is strictly based on my opinion.

In response to the link about the Richard Prince piece, yes it's hard to understand why someone would pay that much for a piece of art. However, Prince's mentality in his image making has to do with the idea that there are too many photographs in the world already, and instead of making more, why not use from the pile? Kind of interesting in that he is pulling from the pile of existing photographs as subject matter and still making photographs, even though he says there are already too many. I know it doesn't make sense to everyone, but the reuse of existing images from pop culture is very common in contemporary art.

 

An aside, If you are interested in this type of work, his site is http://www.richardprinceart.com

 

Thomas Ruff is also famous for this type of work, among others.

Rick-Interesting and funny idea about the t-shirt.

 

To the OP, I think the bottom line is that we are free to photograph anything in public, so don't be timid, but if you get sketched, decide how much you want the shot. If you're intentions are harmless, then there won't be a problem, although if you are carrying a camera these days, people look at you like you're waving a rifle around. If you are on someone elses property, it's a different story. It really is a different world that photographers live in post 9/11.

Don't ask for permission, ask for forgiveness. At least that way you already have the shot if you ruffle someone's feathers.

"hmmm...wanna look at my photos? i try to be original. :)"

 

Perhaps you misunderstood, I'm not looking for help on how to be creative. I may look at your photos and copy your idea, and then I wouldn't be "creative", I would have only taken your idea.

"I know this is terribly post-modern, but there is no hope of creating something that does not draw on ideas from somewhere else."

 

Yes, I believe this is true. Just looking for an idea of where people stand w/ creativity, originality, appropriation, recycled imagery, etc.

With so many images in the world, how does one create something

original without drawing on ideas that one has already seen

somewhere else?